Slightly OT: Old CRT displays vs. new LCD

[Tony Duell]

> You're not imagining it - I have noticed the same
> thing. The picture of a good CRT beats an LCD any day
> for me. And, for whatever reason, LCD's seem to give

My experience is that the sharpest picture of all is produced by a 
properly-set up (and with proper exernal circuitry) delta gun CRT. Mabybe 
becuase the 3 phophor areas associated with a given pixel are closer 
together in that sort of CRT than in an in-line gun type (including the 
Trinitron).

However, the problem with the delta gun CRT is that it has to be set up 
in the position it is going to be used. Stray magnetic fields really 
cause nasty convergence errors. That, I suspect, is why it fell out of 
fashion, it was not suitable for portable TVs/monitors, and it was not 
suitable for sets sold by 'box-shifters'

I find this is another example of a very common trend. With 
consumer-grade stuff (I am not talking about top-end things), it seems 
that 'progress' means increased convenience and often lower quality. The 
flat-panel monitors/TVs might well be more convenient that the older CRT 
ones, but they dont' give such good results. There are plenty more really 
off-topic examples of this, which I won;t mention.

I stick with CRTs for another (obvious if you know me) reason. I 
understand how they work, I can get most spares down to component level. 
WIth the LCD and plasma displays, the cmallest part the manufacturers 
supply to anytone is a complete PCB, and often they're only avaialble to 
service agents. No thanks!.  I'll stick to  BU208s, TDA1170s and the like ;-)

-tony