TV Opinion

[Jerry G.]

Here are some interesting questions:

I would like to have an opinion about what someone would think is the best
choice of technologies, considering if one was to make the purchase of an
HDTV. After this year, CRT technology type TV sets will no longer be made
by the main stream of the higher end manufactures. Once these sets run out,
they will be offering LCD and Plasma type TV sets. Some will also offer the
DLP type TV sets for the consumer market. I am hearing a lot of discussions
to what would be the most ideal. Each type of display has its pros and cons.



Would your preference be a Plasma TV set?



Would your preference be an direct view LCD TV set?



Would your preference be a rear screen type LCD TV set?



Would your preference be a frontal projection type DLP TV set?



Would your preference be a rear screen type DLP TV set?



I would like to know a few opinions here, with some comments. I will
respond back, as best possible to all comments that I receive.


--

Greetings,

Jerry Greenberg GLG Technologies GLG
=========================================
WebPage http://www.zoom-one.com
Electronics http://www.zoom-one.com/electron.htm
=========================================

 

[techforce]

I have a general question. Compared to traditional CRT type Displays, are
not these more delicate / Fragile than the former? So say you have Kids, and
they bounce around after School, and break / crack the Screen on a plasma
/LCD set. Is it not time to shell out for a brand new set, since a
replacement screen meets or exceeds the cost of a NEW? These days, if they
break the Outer Shield or the Lenticular Screen on a Projection Set, theres
usually a decent chance you can get a shield or a Lense if the sets not too
old, and still stay within economics of repair, much less pay a disposal fee
if the set is BER. Which also poses another question about disposal of these
new types of TV you mention. Are there at least the same disposal problems
facing us with these as well?




| Here are some interesting questions:
|
| I would like to have an opinion about what someone would think is the best
| choice of technologies, considering if one was to make the purchase of an
| HDTV. After this year, CRT technology type TV sets will no longer be made
| by the main stream of the higher end manufactures. Once these sets run
out,
| they will be offering LCD and Plasma type TV sets. Some will also offer
the
| DLP type TV sets for the consumer market. I am hearing a lot of
discussions
| to what would be the most ideal. Each type of display has its pros and
cons.
|
|
|
| Would your preference be a Plasma TV set?
|
|
|
| Would your preference be an direct view LCD TV set?
|
|
|
| Would your preference be a rear screen type LCD TV set?
|
|
|
| Would your preference be a frontal projection type DLP TV set?
|
|
|
| Would your preference be a rear screen type DLP TV set?
|
|
|
| I would like to know a few opinions here, with some comments. I will
| respond back, as best possible to all comments that I receive.
|
|
| --
|
| Greetings,
|
| Jerry Greenberg GLG Technologies GLG
| =========================================
| WebPage http://www.zoom-one.com
| Electronics http://www.zoom-one.com/electron.htm
| =========================================
|
|
|

 

[Roderick Stewart]

Would your preference be a Plasma TV set?

Plasma screens look very smart, but they are heavy, expensive and power
hungry. Power consumption wouldn't be so much of a problem, for me as
for some, because I'm one of these strange people that only switches
the thing on when I want to watch something, and then I switch it off
again. If you want to leave your TV on all the time, as many do, then
several hundred watts burning all day will make a difference. They're
also reputed to be "sticky", in that any static picture information
(such as corner logos) that is displayed for any length of time can be
burned permanently into the display.

Would your preference be an direct view LCD TV set?

No. Picture quality varies too much with viewing angle.

Would your preference be a rear screen type LCD TV set?

Not enough space in my living room for rear projection. Not really
enough for the large screen CRT I have now, so I wouldn't want anything
bigger. Your living room may be different, of course.

Would your preference be a frontal projection type DLP TV set?

The shape of my living room would suit front projection quite well, so
I'm considering this, but as above, yours will probably be different.
Also, viewing would require at least subdued lighting, if not complete
darkness, and you may not always want to close the curtains.

Would your preference be a rear screen type DLP TV set?

Same as above for any kind of back projection.

In other words, you need something that suits your living room, your
viewing habits, your budget, your electricity bill, and your opinions
about what aspect of TV watching is most important.

Rod.

 

[Doug McDonald]

Not enough space in my living room for rear projection. Not really
enough for the large screen CRT I have now, so I wouldn't want anything
bigger. Your living room may be different, of course.

Rear projection LED and DLP sets are smaller and slimmer ....
much slimmer ... than any form of CRT set. You imply they
are bigger than large screen CRT sets, and this is false.

Doug McDonald

 

[Jerry G.]

Hi,

These displays are very fragile, and so are the CRT ones. It is just that
the CRT sets are too heavy to move, or be knocked over easily. The flat
screens are also very fragile. If your child throws a ball and hits the
front screen, or knocks it over, you may be buying a new one the next day!
It is true that the cost of a new display panel (when it fails), can easily
exceed or be close to the purchase cost of a new set.

Normally the Plasma type should last about 30,000 hours, and the LCD type
should last over 40,000 hours. Most LCD screens of this type have
replaceable lamps inside (not user replaceable, but feasible to replace by a
tech). The Plasma displays have no internal lamp. When the display unit goes
bad, the unit will usually not be feasible to service.

If a still image is left up on a Plasma screen, it can burn in very quickly.
An LCD screen will not burn in.

With all of these sets, there can be disposal problems, depending on where
you live. In some places you have to pay a disposal cost when getting rid of
old things such as a TV set.

When a display panel is rated at 30,000 hours, this is the time factor where
the illumination output will be at 50% of its normal specification. If you
use the set for 10 hours a day average (standard household usage with a
family), the screen should last about 8 years. At 1/2 output, it will
however look a bit dim, but is considered acceptable. Some people say to cut
this in 1/2 again, and say it will last about 4 to 5 years maximum.

I personally found rear screen sets to look softer, and also they are more
critical to the angle of viewing when close up to them. The new ones are
improved a bit, but I was not impressed.

I also had some feedback about the LCD sets having some black shading
problems which annoyed some people. This would be an uneven illumination in
the blacks, or dark areas of the screen. The LCD sets also have some viewing
angle problems as well. But, overall they are very sharp and perform well.
In some cases the prices of the some of the Plasma screen models have
dropped to be less than some of the LCD screens in the same size category.
This was the opposite just a number of months ago.


--

Greetings,

Jerry Greenberg GLG Technologies GLG
=========================================
WebPage http://www.zoom-one.com
Electronics http://www.zoom-one.com/electron.htm
=========================================


I have a general question. Compared to traditional CRT type Displays, are
not these more delicate / Fragile than the former? So say you have Kids, and
they bounce around after School, and break / crack the Screen on a plasma
/LCD set. Is it not time to shell out for a brand new set, since a
replacement screen meets or exceeds the cost of a NEW? These days, if they
break the Outer Shield or the Lenticular Screen on a Projection Set, theres
usually a decent chance you can get a shield or a Lense if the sets not too
old, and still stay within economics of repair, much less pay a disposal fee
if the set is BER. Which also poses another question about disposal of these
new types of TV you mention. Are there at least the same disposal problems
facing us with these as well?




| Here are some interesting questions:
|
| I would like to have an opinion about what someone would think is the best
| choice of technologies, considering if one was to make the purchase of an
| HDTV. After this year, CRT technology type TV sets will no longer be made
| by the main stream of the higher end manufactures. Once these sets run
out,
| they will be offering LCD and Plasma type TV sets. Some will also offer
the
| DLP type TV sets for the consumer market. I am hearing a lot of
discussions
| to what would be the most ideal. Each type of display has its pros and
cons.
|
|
|
| Would your preference be a Plasma TV set?
|
|
|
| Would your preference be an direct view LCD TV set?
|
|
|
| Would your preference be a rear screen type LCD TV set?
|
|
|
| Would your preference be a frontal projection type DLP TV set?
|
|
|
| Would your preference be a rear screen type DLP TV set?
|
|
|
| I would like to know a few opinions here, with some comments. I will
| respond back, as best possible to all comments that I receive.
|
|
| --
|
| Greetings,
|
| Jerry Greenberg GLG Technologies GLG
| =========================================
| WebPage http://www.zoom-one.com
| Electronics http://www.zoom-one.com/electron.htm
| =========================================
|
|
|

 

[Jerry G.]

Plasma screens do burn more power than the equivalent CRT type screen. But,
the large rear screen CRT type sets are also very power hungry. They are
also more sensitive to have picture burn in.

Some people I speak to, also have the opinion that nothing beats a
conventional CRT type set. But, in about a year or two, these will no
longer be available in the major type models. In about 5 years, CRT sets may
not be available at all. But, from the consensus that I am seeing, makes it
more difficult to choose a descent type of TV set without some compromise.
The question now is, to find the best compromise.

--

Greetings,

Jerry Greenberg GLG Technologies GLG
=========================================
WebPage http://www.zoom-one.com
Electronics http://www.zoom-one.com/electron.htm
=========================================

Would your preference be a Plasma TV set?

Plasma screens look very smart, but they are heavy, expensive and power
hungry. Power consumption wouldn't be so much of a problem, for me as
for some, because I'm one of these strange people that only switches
the thing on when I want to watch something, and then I switch it off
again. If you want to leave your TV on all the time, as many do, then
several hundred watts burning all day will make a difference. They're
also reputed to be "sticky", in that any static picture information
(such as corner logos) that is displayed for any length of time can be
burned permanently into the display.

Would your preference be an direct view LCD TV set?

No. Picture quality varies too much with viewing angle.

Would your preference be a rear screen type LCD TV set?

Not enough space in my living room for rear projection. Not really
enough for the large screen CRT I have now, so I wouldn't want anything
bigger. Your living room may be different, of course.

Would your preference be a frontal projection type DLP TV set?

The shape of my living room would suit front projection quite well, so
I'm considering this, but as above, yours will probably be different.
Also, viewing would require at least subdued lighting, if not complete
darkness, and you may not always want to close the curtains.

Would your preference be a rear screen type DLP TV set?

Same as above for any kind of back projection.

In other words, you need something that suits your living room, your
viewing habits, your budget, your electricity bill, and your opinions
about what aspect of TV watching is most important.

Rod.

 

[Jerry G.]

In weight and debt, the CRT sets are larger. The CRT type rear projector
type set, which is going obsolete, is very large compared to the new LCD and
DLP types. But, I personally found that these rear screen type sets have
softer pictures. They do have their advantages.

--

Greetings,

Jerry Greenberg GLG Technologies GLG
=========================================
WebPage http://www.zoom-one.com
Electronics http://www.zoom-one.com/electron.htm
=========================================

Not enough space in my living room for rear projection. Not really
enough for the large screen CRT I have now, so I wouldn't want anything
bigger. Your living room may be different, of course.

Rear projection LED and DLP sets are smaller and slimmer ....
much slimmer ... than any form of CRT set. You imply they
are bigger than large screen CRT sets, and this is false.

Doug McDonald

 

[Bob Myers]

Some people I speak to, also have the opinion that nothing beats a
conventional CRT type set. But, in about a year or two, these will no
longer be available in the major type models. In about 5 years, CRT sets may
not be available at all.

This simply isn't so, unless you're looking SOLELY at the
large-screen (over 40" diagonal) HDTV market. For TVs
under 40", both HD and SD, CRT technology is expected to
remain in the market for the foreseeable future. You did
qualify your statement with "major type models," and if by
that you mean the Japanese brands we've known over the
past 20 years, there's some truth to this. However, CRT
sets will still be available, and new makers (Korean, Taiwanese,
and more and more from mainland China) will be coming to
the U.S. market. In many cases, these are only "new" here.

In fact, I just returned from a display industry conference at
which the TV market was forecast to still be at least 80%
CRT-based by 2008. CRT PROJECTION sets will be
declining in favor of other projection types (esp. the various
microdisplay technologies), but direct view up to 40" diag.
remains very much the domain of the CRT.

Bob M.

 

[Roderick Stewart]

I just returned from a display industry conference at
which the TV market was forecast to still be at least 80%
CRT-based by 2008.

There are some TV sets still in use that are 20 or more years old, so
unless some alternative technology not only offers an overwhelming
advantage, but is also cheap enough to justify discarding existing
technology that is still in working order, there will be CRTs in use
for a very long time indeed.

Rod.

 

[Roderick Stewart]

Rear projection LED and DLP sets are smaller and slimmer ....
much slimmer ... than any form of CRT set. You imply they
are bigger than large screen CRT sets, and this is false.

I'm just basing my opinion on what I've seen. Rear-projection displays
must either have a large box to the rear, or be a floor-standing device
with a 45deg mirror and the projector accommodated in the base. I can't
think of any other practical arrangement that would enable the overall
assembly to be described as anything other than "large", or "bulky",
and I haven't seen any.

Rod.

 

[Bob Myers]

I'm just basing my opinion on what I've seen. Rear-projection displays
must either have a large box to the rear, or be a floor-standing device
with a 45deg mirror and the projector accommodated in the base. I can't
think of any other practical arrangement that would enable the overall
assembly to be described as anything other than "large", or "bulky",
and I haven't seen any.

The latest designs for rear-projection displays use
much more sophisticated optical paths. InFocus recently
introduced their first RPTV product, a 61" (diagonal)
unit with a total depth under 7 inches! It's called the
"ScreenPlay" - you can see it at the InFocus web site,

www.infocus.com


Bob M.

 

[Roderick Stewart]

The latest designs for rear-projection displays use
much more sophisticated optical paths. InFocus recently
introduced their first RPTV product, a 61" (diagonal)
unit with a total depth under 7 inches! It's called the
"ScreenPlay" - you can see it at the InFocus web site,

www.infocus.com

Very interesting, but only available in America, apparently, and it
still looks like a box that is bigger than the screen. I'm sure it will
appeal to many people, but for me, putting a front projector on a
little shelf on the wall behind me and painting the opposite wall white
looks like a more practical arrangement, and when the time comes it's
probably what I will do.

rod.

 

[LASERandDVDfan]

I would like to have an opinion about what someone would think is the best

choice of technologies, considering if one was to make the purchase of an
HDTV.
Okay.

After this year, CRT technology type TV sets will no longer be made
by the main stream of the higher end manufactures.

And where did you get this information from?

Once these sets run out,

they will be offering LCD and Plasma type TV sets. Some will also offer the
DLP type TV sets for the consumer market. I am hearing a lot of discussions
to what would be the most ideal. Each type of display has its pros and cons.

There is also a pending technology in the works which could end up replacing
LCD panel displays: LEP.

Would your preference be a Plasma TV set?

No.

While the technology is impressive, it is likened to a hybrid automobile.

In the long run, it's just not worth it. With a hybrid cars, the battery cells
must be replaced every three years (recommendation from Honda and Toyota for
the Civic hybrid, Insight, and Prius). This can cost over $5000 for new cells
alone. What money that was saved from using less gas will be eaten up by
maintenance costs every three years.

Plasma displays, when they require service, can be very expensive to repair.
If the repair requires replacement of the display panel itself, you may as well
buy a new plasma TV.

While there have been improvements, such as a different combination of gasses
to help reduce burn-in incidents on Pioneer plasma displays, the technology
hasn't matured enough quite yet to be economical in the long run.

Would your preference be an direct view LCD TV set?

No.

A direct view LCD still suffers from refresh lag and contrast problems.

Would your preference be a rear screen type LCD TV set?

More than likely, yes. Rear projection LCD displays are relatively simple and
deliver surprisingly good image quality with a respectable viewing angle. The
drawback would be the projection lamp. Eventually, the lamp will require
replacement, and replacement lamps could be expensive.

Would your preference be a frontal projection type DLP TV set?

If money were no object.

Would your preference be a rear screen type DLP TV set?

If money were no object.

Depending on screen size, I would either go with a rear projection LCD display
or a direct view CRT display.

As for why my preference for a direct-view CRT display. It's a simple,
relatively cheap, and a proven technology. It works and works very well. It
still has advantages that the other technologies do not offer at this time such
as simplicity, overall longevity, and overall image quality. About the only
things a CRT display is bad about is getting consistently accurate geometry
rendition, shape and size of the TV, and weight. - Reinhart

 

[Jerry Greenberg]

The following is what we were told at our meetings with some of the
manufacture reps that we deal with.

It is true that there will be a number of low cost models in the
market using CRT technology to fill the market place. But, the major
manufactures, such as Sony, Panasonic, Toshiba, NEC, and Hitachi, plan
to discontinue CRT Monitors and TV sets by this fall coming. Infact,
we were told that many of these companies are no longer producing the
tubes at this time, and when they run out, there will no longer be any
assembly of these CRT sets. This includes all sizes from 3/4 inches
(used in small viewfinders) up to the large 36 inch ones.

There are many news releases that ALL major CRT production will not
exist in about 2 years time. The production runs will be stopping this
year. We had notice from three major companies that they will not be
doing any CRT manufacturing after this year. For the time being, there
will be a few models of very high end broadcast and CAD type CRT
monitors being made. These are going to be very expensive models, that
will not be on sale at the consumer level.

There will be some low end CRT sets coming out of the Orient for a
while. This is to fill the market place, and attempt to make some
profits until there will no longer be any demand for CRT sets. You
will see a number of models priced below $150 US for the 17 to 19 inch
range. They will be taking on much of the old manufacturing equipment
that the main manufactures will be doing away with.


I very strongly suggest you visit the links below.

http://quickstart.clari.net/qs_se/webnews/wed/cm/Qjapan-technology.RkEn_DN8.html

http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/biz/archives/2003/11/09/2003075266

http://www.creativepro.com/story/feature/20549.html?origin=story

http://www.hardwarecentral.com/hardwarecentral/news/3651/1/


Jerry G.

 

[Doug McDonald]

I'm just basing my opinion on what I've seen. Rear-projection displays
must either have a large box to the rear, or be a floor-standing device
with a 45deg mirror and the projector accommodated in the base. I can't
think of any other practical arrangement that would enable the overall
assembly to be described as anything other than "large", or "bulky",
and I haven't seen any.

I;m referring to LCD or DLP rear projection.

The mirror is nowhere near 45 degrees. A typical 50 inch
set is 35 inches high, 55 inches wide, 15 inches deep,
and weighs 83 pounds. There are some now that are only 13 inches
deep.

They are of course "large", as 50 inches simply makes a large
screen, and 60 or 65 inches is biggere still. But they are
not what you would call "bulky" and most certainly
don't sit on the floor.

There are now arrangements that get the thickness down to about 8
inches,
but they are still very expensive.

Doug McDonald

 

[Jerry Greenberg]

The sets that are even more than about 10 years old will soon wear
out, and also including the wearing out of their CRT's. Replacement
tubes for any TV that is more than about 5 years old is hard to find
these days. And, if you do find a replacement tube (CRT), it will
generaly cost more than the equivelent new set to replace.

There are a few sets around that are 20 years and more, but it is
impossible to have many of the parts, except for the standard generic
type parts. You will not be able to find replacement CRT's, flyback
transformers, tuner modules, or especialy any of the dedicated IC's.

In a number of years the broadcast system will be changing to digital
only. Then it will go on to HDTV type broadcasting. A converter box
will be required to see the pictures on the older sets. There will be
a point where the older sets will soon die off, and then the users
will be forced to replace them with newer sets, if they want to be
able to watch TV.

(My mother would say... "Read A Book!").


Jerry G.

--

 

[David]

I just want to correct you on one point. LCD screens WILL have an effect
identical to burn in. I have seen it lots of times on computer lcd screens
that are used in business applications and left on the same image for hours
on end. It is just much harder to cause this effect than typical phosphor
burn in on an RPTV or Plasma screem.

In addition, I have seen a very odd failure mode of lcd screens that looks
like spider web failure of the lcd panel. This was NOT due to impact on the
screen. The cause of the failure was someone touching/cleaning the screen
and having a large static discharge into the face of the lcd screen. Thus
damaging many of the lcd cells that are right into the screen.

David

 

[Alan N]

Hi,

These displays are very fragile, and so are the CRT ones. It is just that
the CRT sets are too heavy to move, or be knocked over easily. The flat
screens are also very fragile. If your child throws a ball and hits the
front screen, or knocks it over, you may be buying a new one the next day!
It is true that the cost of a new display panel (when it fails), can easily
exceed or be close to the purchase cost of a new set.

Normally the Plasma type should last about 30,000 hours, and the LCD type
should last over 40,000 hours. Most LCD screens of this type have
replaceable lamps inside (not user replaceable, but feasible to replace by a
tech). The Plasma displays have no internal lamp. When the display unit goes
bad, the unit will usually not be feasible to service.

If a still image is left up on a Plasma screen, it can burn in very quickly.
An LCD screen will not burn in.

I disagree 100%.. LCD's WILL burn, time tested with now on the 3rd set
of Samsung LCD monitors (SyncMaster 400T ) used in our Master Control
room. One is fed by a Miranda Kaliedo, the other a Evertz quad split.
The Samsungs once burn not only burn but develop very ugly vertical
squiggily lines up the LCD display. We still have the Samsungs, they
keep replacing them under warranty. I'm not impressed at all with these
LCD's..

That's the hype we were fed also, LCD's won't burn. Not true, the
Samsungs and a bunch of 17 NEC flatscreen computer monitors that sit on
graphics systems ( still stores ) day in and day out 24/7, they DO burn.

So in my life, there is no holy grail of "unburnable" monitors..

 

[Alan]

The sets that are even more than about 10 years old will soon wear
out, and also including the wearing out of their CRT's. Replacement
tubes for any TV that is more than about 5 years old is hard to find
these days. And, if you do find a replacement tube (CRT), it will
generaly cost more than the equivelent new set to replace.

However, the equivalent new set won't exist if CRT sets are not being
built.

Also, the goal of the makers is to get the entry level TV up around $1000,
so there will continue to be lots of demand for the more reasonably priced sets.
If the replacement sets (of new technology) cost this much, re-tubing old sets
will begin to look a lot more attractive.

I predict some hard times for the folks who give up making affordable sets
in the hope that consumers will be happy to pay several times as much for new
technology.

In a number of years the broadcast system will be changing to digital
only. Then it will go on to HDTV type broadcasting. A converter box
will be required to see the pictures on the older sets. There will be
a point where the older sets will soon die off, and then the users
will be forced to replace them with newer sets, if they want to be
able to watch TV.

As has been pointed out, the mandate is only for over the air broadcasting.
Since many use cable and cable boxes, or satellite, they are familiar with
external tuners and equipment. There is no mandated change for these services,
and no reason for the satellite/cable channels to change for a long time.



I have removed sci.engr.television.advanced from the groups list, since
this really isn't about the advanced television standards system (even though
I brought it up), so is off-topic to the group.


Alan

 

[Roderick Stewart]

The sets that are even more than about 10 years old will soon wear
out, and also including the wearing out of their CRT's. Replacement
tubes for any TV that is more than about 5 years old is hard to find
these days. And, if you do find a replacement tube (CRT), it will
generaly cost more than the equivelent new set to replace.

Indeed. It's hardly worth repairing anything these days, only the
biggest and most expensive items like cars and washing machines.
Anything electronic will almost certainly be out of date and superceded
by something better many years before it wears out. With nobody getting
things repaired, there's no financial incentive for anybody to learn how
to repair things, or even take an interest in how they work, so I wonder
where we are going to find the next generation of engineers to design
new stuff.

There will be
a point where the older sets will soon die off, and then the users
will be forced to replace them with newer sets, if they want to be
able to watch TV.

(My mother would say... "Read A Book!").

So did mine.

Rod.