Forum Home
Press F1
Thread ID: 46440	2004-06-23 22:52:00	Life of LCD vs CRT Screens	Steve_L (763)	Press F1

Post ID	Timestamp	Content	User
247192	2004-06-25 13:06:00	Hmmmm, interesting. I must say I was on the lookout for pixel problems when the monitor arrived, it's one thing I didn't want to see. I'm glad to say I haven't seen any yet and hopefully they won't appear later. Overall I am very pleased with this LCD, makes the six week backorder not seem so bad now. As monitor manufacturers move to migrate people from CRT to LCD they will have to offer better guarantees and "no-pixel defect" guarantees will become more and more common.	Sb0h (3744)
247193	2004-06-25 20:35:00	LCDs are easy on the eyes because of the lack of refresh rate, ie no flicker. This makes them great for working and such, but only, in my experience, if they are set to their highest resolution. Because they can't change their screen size, they to shift their pixels around to make it look as if it was at a lower resolution, which compromises clarity. So the first thing you should do is set it to its highest capable resolution. This can actually be harmful if you have bad eyesight - oh dear. But it really depends on what you pay, as others have said; two of my friends use LCDs, one is just great for gaming because the refresh rate for each pixel is low, and the other's is horrible - the response time of those pixels give me headaches. They do, as others have mentioned, take less space, and often that is the deciding factor. Personally, I have a "flat" CRT, which is just dandy. The laptop I am using now's TFT is too bright for my liking ( I am a creature of the night ..... ) As for dead pixels, I think that the warranty is a must. And I think the easiest way to do that is to make your screen completely white. (Easiest way to do that in windows is to make a white picture and set it as the screensaver). To protect from scratches, why not leave the protective plastic that comes with the thing on it?	Growly (6)
247194	2004-06-26 03:37:00	LCD and TFT screens all are built between two sheets of glass , with a very good seal around the edges. It's "glass" glass. It breaks when hit hard enough. There must be many millions of broken screens around these days (lots of cellphones get dropped. :D) It's reasonably scratch resistant. But it's not idiot proof.	Graham L (2)
247195	2004-06-26 04:25:00	But what you touch is not the actual glass "sandwich", but the polarising filter. Exaxctly what its made of is not readily disclosed. Cross sectional view is here: sharp-world.com	godfather (25)
247196	2004-06-26 07:04:00	Hello Guys . . . as the one B-) who started this thread, here are replies to your posts (bold = your's; regular text = my comments) . By the way, I drove down to Wgtn yesterday and placed an order for a new PC (besides the usual, it will be for video and photo editing but not for gaming) . The hardest decision was choosing the monitor and in the end I went for a 19in Philips CRT but now realise that there will be no decent place to put the two speakers on my computer desk - therefore I may ?:| change the order to a 17in flat CRT unless I can find a decent LCD guarantee - but see my comments below . To make them cheaper , a number of manufacturers are integrating the backlights into the unit . This makes them "throw=away" items . Now it seems to me that this is important - to know if the backlight can be replaced . If the backlight burns out after the guarantee period and before the expected 60k hour lifetime, then this would be a hell of a situation . X-( The best thing about an LCD . . . . . the great expanse of workspace left on your desk . I'll have to pull my computer desk away from the wall another 5 cm if I get the 19in CRT . No problem but I am in the living room and the further away from the wall, the more the mess of wires is exposed . My old 17in CRT is heavy enough but the 19in would have to be an anchor . Add a point for getting an LCD . a Samsung Syncmaster 172x and it is used for video, gaming, commercial web design and a bit of photo editing . I have no problem with the colours or the response of the display . THIS is very useful info . Thanks . I'll check to see if they are still available; failing this, I guess what I would have to do before deciding on an LCD is to watch a movie on it, or something else that demands a good refresh rate . I wonder if SYNMASTER means that it has a great refresh rate or ??? 90 percent of lcd's on the market do not come with a zero stuck pixel warranty and none (to my knowledge) come with a zero tolerance dead pixel warranty (dead and stuck are 2 different issues) . . A dead pixel is far easier to live with then a stuck one . What is the difference between a dead and a stuck pixel? Is one black and the other white? Whatever . . . getting a decent warranty (zero problems with pixels) seems to be a MUST . Yesterday in Wgtn the sales/tech guy who served me (he was super - knew heaps and was very helpful) said that with most LCDs, if you buy it, take it out of the box, plug it in and find a few dead/stuck pixels, then it is tough luck cuz there is no warranty that will cover it . Jeeesh! So I pay 700 bucks for a bum screen and I cannot return/exchange it??!!! X-( X-( The "glass" referred to as being at risk from scratching is the polarising layer bonded on the front of the screen . Directly under this is a hard glass layer . . . . I have never seen a badly (or even slightly) scratched LCD monitor, so have the logical assumption that it is reasonably durable . . . . but then another person says LCD and TFT screens all are built between two sheets of glass , with a very good seal around the edges . It's "glass" glass . Well, actual glass or not, I too have never seen a scratched LCD screen . The Sony SDMX series offer a zero dead pixel guarantee and the Viewsonic VE series offer a 12 month zero pixel fault guarantee . I would take the Viewsonic wording to mean ANY pixel fault, stuck, dead or otherwise . Another EXCELLENT bit of info . Thanks . If movies look good on a Viewsonic VE, then this would be a good choice . From the link that was given: . futuremark . com/forum . . . . . " target="_blank">discuss . futuremark . com I see this: <<Re: Just got the Samsung 172X! - I'm extremly pleased with mine . . . though I had to go through 3 of them before I got one without any dead pixels . // Samsung says its 10 dead pixels in order for a replacemnet or a fix . >> Other comments on this thread referred to the fact that the shop (Best Buy, I guess in USA) has a no problem refund policy for a period of 14 days or maybe it was 30 days - sounds good to me . LCDs are easy on the eyes because of the lack of refresh rate, ie no flicker . This makes them great for working and such, but only, in my experience, if they are set to their highest resolution . Because they can't change their screen size, they to shift their pixels around to make it look as if it was at a lower resolution, which compromises clarity . . . So the first thing you should do is set it to its highest capable resolution . This can actually be harmful if you have bad eyesight - oh dear . Sorry but this does not make sense to me . You first say LCDs are easy on the eyes at the highest resolution but then you say it could be harmful with bad eyesight . ?? And what is meant by "bad" eyesight? But it really depends on what you pay, as others have said; two of my friends use LCDs, one is just great for gaming because the refresh rate for each pixel is low, and the other's is horrible . From what I have picked up, I believe the best refresh rate is 20 milliseconds (or whatever the unit) which is still far from a CRT . But if it looks good while gaming and when viewing a movie, then that is all that matters . >>>THANKS for all of the feedback . The way I feel now is to go for a 17in flat CRT instead of the 19in which will max out the space for a screen in my computer desk, meaning that the two small speakers would have no decent place to sit . But an LCD screen would look VERY cool so if I can find a decent warranty against dead/stuck/junk pixels, and can live with the pain of spending an extra 6-700 bucks, then I'll get an LCD .	Steve_L (763)
247197	2004-06-26 08:50:00	I'm not quite sure what Megaman meant too, but there is something you should know about resolutions on LCDs. If you get an LCD, you'll want to watch for it's native resolution. This is the ideal resolution that you should run it at - larger resolutions mean it is trying to fit more into one real pixel than it normally does, and so things will start to look blurry (though this shouldn't be very noticeable if you stick close to the native resolution). Similarly, you wouldn't want to go under the native resolution too much, because again, the quality of the images displayed will deteriorate. The lowest response time for LCDs at the moment is 12ms, I believe. The Samsung SyncMaster 172x sports this response time. 16ms appears to be the standard for the moment though. The April issue of PC Authority did a round up of 23 17" LCDs. The top one was the Acer AL1751W (which is a widescreen LCD monitor) - going for $930 at the moment, according to PriceSpy (http://www.pricespy.co.nz).	agent (30)
247198	2004-06-26 09:54:00	> I'm not quite sure what Megaman meant too, but there > is something you should know about resolutions on > LCDs. ???	Megaman (344)
247199	2004-06-26 09:55:00	I saw LCDs were down to 10ms on Anandtech less than a month ago, but can't find the article now.	kiki (762)
247200	2004-06-26 11:36:00	Sorry, I should have made myself clear.. ( I was on the hills in the back seat of the car while being driven home, with a latop while posting) LCD screens have no refresh rate like CRT screens do. This makes it easier to look at, because your eyes are not being hit light 60 times a second, rather they are hit more and so you don't notice it. For this reason, they are nice for the eyes. Ironically, the bad part is that LCDs, being LCDs (as someone else has also said), cannot change the size of their display. The are constantly displaying with every single pixel they have. A CRT screen can use as many pixels as it wants (in theory). For this reason, when at lower resolutions, CRT screens just display fewer but bigger pixels, meaning the picture still looks the same, just zoomed in. An LCD has a fixed pixel size, so when you want to make the the resolution (how many pixels it displays) smaller, it has to combine a few pixels into one, while leaving other pixels on their own. This gives a very uneven and messy look. The counter-act this, LCD screens are best when they are displaying at their highest resolution, because then every pixel they have is being used as an individual pixel, and not as a part of an uneven clump. Because the highest resolutions are large (1240 x 1024 ish), it makes everything small, which is bad for people with vision that struggles to read small things at shot distances. I apologise for saying "bad" eyesight, I'm afraid that I am a victim of common generalisation and colloquial attitude :D:D:D:p I know i can't explain very well, but there you go, I tried...	Growly (6)
247201	2004-06-26 12:01:00	for people with vision that struggles to read > small things at shot distances Well I can certainly understand that Growly! I'd have great difficulty on reading anything at a shot distance. I imagine I'd have other concerns. ;)	Winston001 (3612)
1 2 3 4 5