You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments
35 points

Hell, modern displays are just now starting to catch up to CRTs in the input lag and motion blur department.

It was brutal putting up with these shitty LCDs for two whole decades, especially the fact that we had to put up with 60Hz and sub-1080p resolutions, when my CRT was displaying a 1600x1200 picture at 85Hz in the 90s! It wasn’t until I got a 4K 120Hz OLED with VRR and HDR couple years ago that I finally stopped missing CRTs, cause I finally felt like I had something superior.

Twenty fucking years of waiting for something to surpass the good old CRT. Unbelievable.

permalink
report
reply
15 points

If input lag is the only measure for you, ok. But LCDs have surpassed CRTs in pretty much every other metric at least a decade ago.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Not just input lag (I mean I literally mentioned other things too but you obviously didn’t read my entire comment) but also contrast ratio, brightness in LUX, color volume and accuracy, response time, viewing angle, displaying non-native resolutions clearly, flicker, stutter… Should I go on?

All things that LCDs struggled on and still struggle on. OLED fixes most of these issues, and is the only display tech that I’d consider superior to a CRT.

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

Most people didn’t own a CRT capable of 1600x1200@85Hz, most were barely if any better in resolution department than your average “cube” LCDs (one which I’m currently using besides my main 32" QHD display). I have owned a gargantuan beast like that with a Trinitron tube, I could run it at 120Hz at 1024x768 and at higher resolutions without much flicker, but it had issues with the PCBs cracking, so it was replaced to a much more mediocre and smaller CRT with much lower refresh rates.

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points
*

You know we had 1080p 120hz displays 10 years ago, right?

permalink
report
parent
reply
-5 points
*

In an OLED? They weren’t affordable 10 years ago.

A 10 year old LCD is not good. The resolution and refresh rate is irrelevant if it’s not an OLED, which as I said, is the only display tech good enough to replace a CRT.

permalink
report
parent
reply
13 points

Not an OLED, in an IPS LCD. You’re asserting that OLED is the only tech good enough (which is not true, QLED displays are also starting to get good enough to surpass OLED, they’re just more expensive), but the response time of IPS displays frequently got under 10ms as long ago as 2014, and that’s fast enough to be imperceptible by humans. Any other drawbacks of IPS compared to OLED were far worse with CRTs.

And they don’t make that annoying high-pitched shriek.

permalink
report
parent
reply
23 points

LCDs came in just in time for me to be attending LAN parties in uni. Got sick of lugging my CRT up the stairs once a week pretty quickly and was glad when I managed to get my hands on an LCD. I can’t even remember if I noticed the downgrade, I was so thrilled with the portability.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Greentext

!greentext@sh.itjust.works

Create post

This is a place to share greentexts and witness the confounding life of Anon. If you’re new to the Greentext community, think of it as a sort of zoo with Anon as the main attraction.

Be warned:

  • Anon is often crazy.
  • Anon is often depressed.
  • Anon frequently shares thoughts that are immature, offensive, or incomprehensible.

If you find yourself getting angry (or god forbid, agreeing) with something Anon has said, you might be doing it wrong.

Community stats

  • 6.6K

    Monthly active users

  • 992

    Posts

  • 39K

    Comments