two screens vs. one big widescreen

[admedia]

Wouldn't that completely depend on dot pitch?

Dot pitch refers to the space between the pixels that make up the images on your screen, and is measured in millimeters. The less space between pixels, the better the image quality. On either type of monitor, smaller dot pitch is better and you're going to want to look at something in the 0.26 mm dot pitch or smaller range.

So an LCD with a smaller dot pitch would be sharper than a CRT with a higher dot pitch... right? LCD's have come a long ways in the last few years. They are easier on your eyes as well.

[whispers]

thats something I would like to know.. I was told that LCD's dont measure by dot pitch. (some BestBuy clown I think)

[Ask The Geezer]

LCD's have come a long ways in the last few years

And they have a long way yet to go, IMO.

Yes, I'd love to have a coolrunning and thin monitor that gave the same quality as a CRT, but they aren't there yet, and even if they were, I would not pay the price for them. If all things were equal, picture quality, refresh speed and price, sure, I'd prefer them.

Here's a nice generic read about LCD's.

[Off Top]

Because light emitting diodes aren't so small you can get 96 of them in an inch. I don't have to be a rocket scientist to know when a certain monitor shows a better picture. I'm just saying that I've never seen an LCD show the sharpness of a CRT, even when they are both sitting side by side and showing the same images.

lol @ "I've never seen it, therefore it doesn't exist"

As a person who owns both, which you proudly admit you don't, I can tell you first hand that a flat panel 19" is larger and sharper than a 19" CRT... for the 3rd time, once you set the resolution properly. If you compare the same size flat panel and CRT side by side, and they're the same resolution, the flat panel will look a LOT worse, because the flat panel can handle a much higher resolution. I'm tired of repeating myself to a person determined to not accept the truth, but I feel the need to clarify for any unsuspecting consumers here who might otherwise take your word for it.

[Ask The Geezer]

For the third time, I don't give a damn about your experiences. You know how much junk I got sitting around cause I took someones word for it? When I go shopping for a monitor and I see them both set up side by side, I like the CRT better. Maybe it's the square pixels of an LCD, maybe they aren't set up right. It's what I see in front of me, and on the price tag, that dictates what I buy.

[Off Top]

Nobody's trying to convince you to buy anything. I don't sell flat panels, and I don't even know you. This is about fact and fiction.

As a person who owns both.... I feel the need to clarify for any unsuspecting consumers here who might otherwise take your word for it.

[Ask The Geezer]

This is about what I like and don't like. Nothing you would know about. I'm not recommending anything, either way, just saying what I like.

[Off Top]

The only nonsense going round here is someone telling me that a LCD screen can have the sharpness of a CRT. It's physically impossible at this point in time.

This is about what I like and don't like. Nothing you would know about. I'm not recommending anything, either way, just saying what I like.

lol whatever you say man

[admedia]

pwned.

[Loyal Rogue]

Since I use both I guess I'll throw my experiences into the mix for anyone who is interested.
I have two 19" CRTs and one 19" LCD setup on my desk.
The CRTs have a much better color range and are better for watching videos and working with photos or anything that is color intensive.
The LCD is much sharper and has zero distortion as well as being much easier on the eyes so I've started using it as my main display even tho the color saturation can't compare to a CRT.
My experience falls directly along the same lines as the typical conclusions of every LCD versus CRT article I've ever read.

The basic comparisions are as follows:

Resolution: LCDs have a set native resolution and don't display good image quality when viewed at anything but their native resolution. CRTs have multisync capabilities and are able to display nearly the same quality at different resolutions and refresh rates. This is an important feature for gamers, especially gamers who adjust resolution settings to maximize game performance.
Winner: CRT

Image sharpness: LCD when set at native resolution is much sharper than a CRT.
Winner: LCD

Image brightness: LCD is brighter and uniform. CRT is less bright overall but has variable peak brightness in areas making videos and photos seem to have more depth.
Winner: Different strengths. Winner based on application.

Image geometry: The electron gun in a CRT sweeps the screen area causing it to strike at a 90 degree angle in the center of the screen and at a greater angle as it reaches the edge of the screen causing distortion. This distortion can be further amplified by using a non-flatscreen CRT. An LCD has no distortion.
Winner: LCD

Refresh rate and image flicker: CRTs are constantly refreshing the screen area which causes eye strain due to flickering. LCDs have no flicker.
However CRTs display motion (scrolling text and images, video, game graphics, etc.) smoother than an LCD and without "lag", "jaggies" or artifacts due to their constant refresh rate. This is most noticable on LCDs with a response time of 25ms or greater.
Winner: LCDs with a response time of 16ms or less.

Image color range: LCDs are limited in color range by the individual pixels and the fluorescent backlighting. CRTs have a greater range of colors and a deeper color saturation making them better suited for graphic tasks such as print art where color match is essential.
Winner: CRT

Power consumption: The average LCD consumes less than half the watts of an average CRT.
Winner: LCD

There are several other catagories of comparison such as price, screen efficiency, footprint, weight, heat emmissions, electromagnetic emmissions, screen glare, viewing angle, etc. but I just compared the main ones above that concern me.
The bottom line is that LCDs and CRTs have different strengths and weaknesses so they are better suited to different tasks.

Personally I prefer the sharpness and uniformity of my LCD and since moving it from the secondary position to being my main monitor I've noticed a huge reduction in the amount of eye strain when working late into the night.
As soon as there's another sale on the black 19" Acer LCD I'm buying a twin for my main monitor and only keeping one 19" CRT as a secondary monitor for enjoying movies/TV and to check the colors in my projects.

Here's a couple of comparisions from a quick google of CRT versus LCD:

http://ergo.human.cornell.edu/Pub/LCD_vs_CRT_AH.pdf

http://www.techmind.org/lcd/

http://pcworld.about.com/magazine/2102p109id107852.htm

http://compreviews.about.com/od/mult...a/CRTvsLCD.htm

[Sybersnake]

thats something I would like to know.. I was told that LCD's dont measure by dot pitch. (some BestBuy clown I think)

lcds will all have dot pitch cept its called pixel pitch measurements in their specs and lcds are very close to the dot pitch as crts.. apple lcds are .258mm and the most expensive crt at BB is .20mm

Edit *when i was typing this i revised one statment i was making but didn't remove the line, lol.

[AxiomFlash]

loyal rogue, that is the most comprehensive reply-post i have ever seen. do you write for cnet or something? lol. don't forget to file that tps report.


very informative, thank you.

[Loyal Rogue]

do you write for cnet or something?

No, but I did stay at a Holiday Inn last night.

[creativeinsomnia]

No, but I did stay at a Holiday Inn last night.

priceless.