pros:1- drastically less power consumption compared to crt monitors. 2- very lightweight

pros:1- drastically less power consumption compared to crt monitors
2- very lightweight
3- will always get the same clear signal no matter what due to its digital nature
cons: non native resolution content will look like shit regardless cuz uneven pixels
have we regressed in the monitor manufacturing technology?

Mike Stoklasa's Worst Fan Shirt $21.68

Yakub: World's Greatest Dad Shirt $21.68

Mike Stoklasa's Worst Fan Shirt $21.68

  1. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    >have we regressed in the monitor manufacturing technology?
    no

  2. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    While the tubes technically don't care about the resolution, PC monitors had tons of electronics and would refuse to display some resolutions.

  3. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    >will always get the same clear signal no matter what due to its digital nature
    lmfao

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      Disprove it.

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        Not my job zoom zoom. It's your job to prove your claim. Which you can't because it's just random words you mashed together.

        • 1 week ago
          Anonymous

          Digital means it can't be anything but perfect. It's already been proven.
          Sorry kid, you just don't understand what you're talking about.

          • 1 week ago
            Anonymous

            You will immediately cease and not continue to access the site if you are under the age of 18.

            • 1 week ago
              Anonymous

              you'd have lost less dignity by not responding tbdesu

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      Not my job zoom zoom. It's your job to prove your claim. Which you can't because it's just random words you mashed together.

      The fact it's discrete rather than continuous allows you to isolate each individual pixel with 100% accuracy, this was known to be true even before the dawn of digital signals because it's mathematically predictable, and is why they were an exciting innovation when they hit the market.

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        Your troll-fu is not strong, samegay

  4. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    Old LCDs like that draw an ass-ton of power for their fluorescent backlights. That said, modern OLEDs are b***hin and with only a simple line doubler are eminently playable.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      >OLED
      Hope you enjoy burn-in

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        What year is it?

        • 1 week ago
          Anonymous

          2024, it says the date right next to every post anon

  5. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    none of the factors you wrote are relevant at all, is that the joke?

  6. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    > drastically less power
    This only recently became significant, electric prices used to be relativly cheap
    > very lightweight
    Does not matter, the desk holds the weight.
    > will always get the same clear signal no matter what due to its digital nature
    Only when nothing moves, as soon as anything moves it drops to below 480p resolution.

  7. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    It’s like you people still live in 2008. We are 3 years away from 120” screens becoming common place, CRT capped out at 40” top.

  8. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    >will always get the same clear signal no matter what due to its digital nature
    Analog signals on VGA out or over DVI-A weren't generally varied enough to be a legitimate problem. They were generally shielded. Also, digital doesn't stop unclear signals and noise - see fricking digital OTA broadcast TV for that... that shit is goofy as frick, and the signals can be worse than analog - though because they're digital and compressed and shit they have higher bandwidth and thus resolution too boot. So it's a tradeoff. High quality - but no squiggly shit if it's low/bad, it's just nothing.
    Also, digital signals can be corrupted with under/over voltage as well (usually you'd have error correction for that though depending on the necessity).

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      Also

      > drastically less power
      This only recently became significant, electric prices used to be relativly cheap
      > very lightweight
      Does not matter, the desk holds the weight.
      > will always get the same clear signal no matter what due to its digital nature
      Only when nothing moves, as soon as anything moves it drops to below 480p resolution.

      has a point on temporal resolutions. While analog CRTs do also have things like geometry distortion etc... usually good systems had more or less sharp as frick imagery in motion because phosphors were fast as frick to light up and depending on era - fast to drop (albeit early on not so much true and later on they started using midshit phosphor too for consumer grade.
      But LCDs even with "clear signal" to work with, have historically had ghosting because crystal switching was slow as frick - and also historically had basically full screen bloom because lighting up the whole screen with a signal unblockable light source - bad idea actually. So, for the longest time, CRTs were far better in most areas.

  9. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    >Symphonic WF20L6
    >Proper 480p LCD
    >Perfect for sixth gen consoles and the Wii
    It's nice

  10. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    >3- will always get the same clear signal no matter what due to its digital nature
    no.
    analog signals will look alot worse

  11. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    Nice color profile and contrast.

  12. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    >pros:1- drastically less power consumption compared to crt monitors
    literally who cares
    >2- very lightweight
    it's a stationary appliance
    >3- will always get the same clear signal no matter what due to its digital nature
    ??? are you storing magnets on top of your crt???

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      >>pros:1- drastically less power consumption compared to crt monitors
      >literally who cares
      Adults who pay their own bills care.

      • 1 week ago
        Anonymous

        ????????????

  13. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    >3- will always get the same clear signal no matter what due to its digital nature
    Hey. Mind if I sit right here in the center of your screen?

  14. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    >3- will always get the same clear signal no matter what due to its digital nature

    except when the HDMI cable moves in its socket because the bass on the TV speaker is enough to slightly resonate the amplifiers case, or because you had the window slightly open and the wind blew in the connectors general direction or because you slammed your desk or whatever. Then it cuts out for 3-5 seconds.
    and this shit happens repeatedly.

    DVI-D, okay, that was a great connector.

    it's a shame that you can't do 5.1+ channel audio only transfer either, you either use optical (stereo or dts compressed 5.1), or HDMI, and HDMI has to transfer a video channel too. So to drive a 7.1 setup via digital audio, you have to set up a duplicate screen with all of the problems this gives you.

    monitor technology is truly progressing backwards.

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      What kind of dogshit receiver, television and cable are you using that bass can shake the hdmi socket? I have 16” woofer that shakes the whole room and never had this happened .

    • 1 week ago
      Anonymous

      >and this shit happens repeatedly.
      Stop buying the cheapest made-on-a-cargo-vessel-tier cables. While $200 cables are an absolute fricking scam, those $10 dollar ones are genuine garbage.

  15. 1 week ago
    Anonymous

    pros: literally everything
    cons: no lightgun

    When will we ever get our own affordable and accurate light gun, LCDbros?

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *