Ordinary television set versus new liquid display screen
THE long lasting debate on traditional TVs vs LCD (Liquid Crystal Display) TVs still rages on. Still many people prefer the traditional to the LCD in spite of its drawbacks.<br>
By Mustafa Ziraba
THE long lasting debate on traditional TVs vs LCD (Liquid Crystal Display) TVs still rages on. Still many people prefer the traditional to the LCD in spite of its drawbacks.
Flat-panel displays are the future of television. Whether consumers like them or not is another matter. High Definition TV, digital convergence, and high-resolution DVD, HD DVD and Blu Ray will all have contributed to making conventional TVs obsolete within the near future.
And if you are tempted to acquire a flat-panel TV, you will need to deal with another issue: the choice between two technologies that are complementary yet different from one another: Plasma and LCD.
For computer monitors, the choice is easy, with LCDs having won the market, but for TV, the two technologies are still competing.
These two seem similar although the technologies employed in the Plasma and LCD differ. But of course we will start with the old TV that s prominent in many homes.
CRT stands for “cathode ray tube†and is the type of TV we are all most familiar with. Chances are, if you have a TV that is 5 or more years old, you have a CRT TV.
Some of the main advantages of CRTs include having a flat screen, which provides wide viewing angles, outstanding picture quality, relatively inexpensive in all sizes, no danger of burn-in which simply put, is a damaged pixel, whose phosphors have prematurely aged and therefore glow less intensely than those of surrounding pixels on the TV screen and finally CRT’s are very capable of producing true blacks.
Well, all this sounds great, so why are CRT displays losing market to new display technology? Most obvious is bulky size and heavy weight, maximum screen size is limited to approximately 36†for it would be uneconomical to go larger.
Also most importantly why should I choose a flat screen CRT over a curved screen CRT? Justin Whitaker of searchwarp.com says the answer is two-fold.
Having a flat-screen will allow for wider viewing angles, so that people sitting on the left and right sides of the TV can also have a good view of the images.
Secondly having a flat screen will allow the viewer to see the picture as it “was meant to be seenâ€, without any of the stretching in images that is associated with a curved tube. A curved tube has inherent flaws that cause the image to be “stretched†as it reaches the edges of the screen.
While this may not be an important feature for you, you should first look at a flat screen and a curved screen side-by-side. The difference in image quality will be more apparent.
LCD is the type of TV you will be familiar with if you have seen the flat-panel LCD monitors used with many new computers. The same technology is also used in LCD TV’s.
Some of the advantages of LCDs include, the definite flat “screenessâ€, thinness, lightweight and stylish looking, high resolution, excellent picture quality and no danger of burn-in.
The disadvantages of flat panel LCDs include the relatively narrow viewing angles (though this is changing with the newer ones), expensive in sizes over 30 inches and incapable of producing true blacks.
While plasma displays used to be very expensive for the average buyer, they have come down in price and are an attractive choice for many shoppers.
However, you will more than likely still pay more for a big-screen plasma TV than a similarly sized LCD.
What makes plasma TVs so attractive are its flat screen with wide viewing angles.
They are also thin and lightweight. They have a high resolution with deep, saturated colours and excellent picture quality especially for home theatre.
However, their main disadvantage are the high price, slight potential for burn-in and limited lifespan with an expectancy of 20,000 hours of viewing.
However, plasma seems to have the upper hand in terms of absolute quality. Still, the future seems to be looking better and better for LCD. Confirmation of this trend is in the number of manufacturers from the computer industry who have gotten on the LCD TV bandwagon.
But a TV set is not a computer monitor, and that is something manufacturers will have to contend with.
Which technology will win out? That choice may not be up to us.
Manufacturers clearly prefer LCD because of the similarity to semiconductor fabrication techniques, which most of them already have well under control.
THE long lasting debate on traditional TVs vs LCD (Liquid Crystal Display) TVs still rages on. Still many people prefer the traditional to the LCD in spite of its drawbacks.
Flat-panel displays are the future of television. Whether consumers like them or not is another matter. High Definition TV, digital convergence, and high-resolution DVD, HD DVD and Blu Ray will all have contributed to making conventional TVs obsolete within the near future.
And if you are tempted to acquire a flat-panel TV, you will need to deal with another issue: the choice between two technologies that are complementary yet different from one another: Plasma and LCD.
For computer monitors, the choice is easy, with LCDs having won the market, but for TV, the two technologies are still competing.
These two seem similar although the technologies employed in the Plasma and LCD differ. But of course we will start with the old TV that s prominent in many homes.
CRT stands for “cathode ray tube†and is the type of TV we are all most familiar with. Chances are, if you have a TV that is 5 or more years old, you have a CRT TV.
Some of the main advantages of CRTs include having a flat screen, which provides wide viewing angles, outstanding picture quality, relatively inexpensive in all sizes, no danger of burn-in which simply put, is a damaged pixel, whose phosphors have prematurely aged and therefore glow less intensely than those of surrounding pixels on the TV screen and finally CRT’s are very capable of producing true blacks.
Well, all this sounds great, so why are CRT displays losing market to new display technology? Most obvious is bulky size and heavy weight, maximum screen size is limited to approximately 36†for it would be uneconomical to go larger.
Also most importantly why should I choose a flat screen CRT over a curved screen CRT? Justin Whitaker of searchwarp.com says the answer is two-fold.
Having a flat-screen will allow for wider viewing angles, so that people sitting on the left and right sides of the TV can also have a good view of the images.
Secondly having a flat screen will allow the viewer to see the picture as it “was meant to be seenâ€, without any of the stretching in images that is associated with a curved tube. A curved tube has inherent flaws that cause the image to be “stretched†as it reaches the edges of the screen.
While this may not be an important feature for you, you should first look at a flat screen and a curved screen side-by-side. The difference in image quality will be more apparent.
LCD is the type of TV you will be familiar with if you have seen the flat-panel LCD monitors used with many new computers. The same technology is also used in LCD TV’s.
Some of the advantages of LCDs include, the definite flat “screenessâ€, thinness, lightweight and stylish looking, high resolution, excellent picture quality and no danger of burn-in.
The disadvantages of flat panel LCDs include the relatively narrow viewing angles (though this is changing with the newer ones), expensive in sizes over 30 inches and incapable of producing true blacks.
While plasma displays used to be very expensive for the average buyer, they have come down in price and are an attractive choice for many shoppers.
However, you will more than likely still pay more for a big-screen plasma TV than a similarly sized LCD.
What makes plasma TVs so attractive are its flat screen with wide viewing angles.
They are also thin and lightweight. They have a high resolution with deep, saturated colours and excellent picture quality especially for home theatre.
However, their main disadvantage are the high price, slight potential for burn-in and limited lifespan with an expectancy of 20,000 hours of viewing.
However, plasma seems to have the upper hand in terms of absolute quality. Still, the future seems to be looking better and better for LCD. Confirmation of this trend is in the number of manufacturers from the computer industry who have gotten on the LCD TV bandwagon.
But a TV set is not a computer monitor, and that is something manufacturers will have to contend with.
Which technology will win out? That choice may not be up to us.
Manufacturers clearly prefer LCD because of the similarity to semiconductor fabrication techniques, which most of them already have well under control.