Buying a new computer

[evilhomer]

I just wanted to second HideoHo’s suggestion about using dual monitors. I have my computer at work set up that way and I’m addicted. It’s amazing how much easier things are. If the type of work you’ll be doing on the computer requires you to work with several documents together (for example, referencing a spreadsheet while typing a document), it saves alot of time spent switching between documents. The cost of a video card that supports dual monitors isn’t outrageous, so any additional cost will come mostly from purchasing a second monitor. If you’re planning on retiring your existing computer, the monitor you have now may be fine, so you’ll save some cash that way.

[yosemite]

Kinthalis wrote:
And CRT vs plasma tv’s: CRT is the clear winner for the time being.

It’s not quite so cut-and-dried as you paint it to be.

Regarding refresh rates (from this site:

Does refresh rate matter for LCD monitors?

LCD monitors are very different creatures from conventional CRT monitors. They are digital devices whereas CRT monitors are analog. Refresh rates are really only relevant for CRT monitors. The higher the refresh rate, the better the display quality on the CRT.

LCD monitors will support a specified range of refresh rates. As long as the refresh rate is set within this range, the monitor will display properly. Otherwise, the display may flicker. With LCD monitors,a higher refresh rate does not mean a better display.

Regarding energy consumption, this site says:

Do LCD monitors consume less energy than conventional monitors?

Yes. In fact, they typically consume 70% less energy than a CRT. The amount of electricity required to animate the liquid crystal in LCDs is simply less than the amount needed to power a CRT.

Some general advantages and saving described on this site

Basic Advantages

Some of the advantages that LCD monitors boast over their CRT counterparts include the following:

* Smaller volume size
* Less eyestrain
* Less power consumption than comparably-sized CRT counterparts
* Less heat generation
* Lighter weight
* Negligible emission of harmful radiation
* Improved contrast

Savings

As mentioned earlier, LCD monitors can offer the consumer considerable savings over the product’s total lifetime. For instance, significant electricity savings are possible through the improved energy efficiency of the LCD technology. It can even be found that, in some cases, the energy-consumption of an average LCD display can be half to two-thirds of that for an average CRT!

…

Some ENERGY STAR partner companies have helpful web-based calculators that can compute the possible savings of buying an LCD monitor in a matter of moments. One such calculator is listed below. Visit the URL provided for a sample calculation.

I don’t have time to look up cites, but I read in one of my design magazines that LCDs have a longer “shelf life” (they stay brighter longer) than CRTs.

However, as noted in the last cite, some LCDs are not as good for gaming. However, antecdotal evidence on these boards report several people using newer LCDs that have been satisfied with their gaming experience with LCDs. Also, while color is not as exact with LCD, this is also rapidly changing, and high-end LCDs like Apple’s Cinema Display are entirely suitable for color-sensitive professional print work. (Or so says a recent issue of Mac Design magazine–once again, no time to find a cite.)

CRTs are not the clear “winner” anymore. Things are changing all the time. LCDs are getting better and cheaper all the time. The savings in energy, no worries about eevvvvviiillllll radiation (though the risk of the CRT’s radation has not been proven) and no worry about flicker are some good reasons to consider LCD. I’m not the only one that’s pleased with my choice and never intend to go back to the heavy, clunky, energy-sucking CRTs.

[Kinthalis]

About CRT’s:

Definately their size and weight is a problem. If the room where you are seting up the comp is small, or you are concerned with the space it’ll take up, LCD would be the way to go.

BUT:

1. Refresh rates are important for gamers. Low refresh rates means smearing images when playign games.

2. As pointed out, Color is not as precise as in a CRT.

3. You can buy a bigger screen (easier on the eyes, higher resolutions, cooler looking ) for the same price of buying a MUCH smaller LCD screen (which means sorer eyes, and lower resolutions). btw, higher resolutions = more desktop space, and the higher the better the graphic quality in games.

LCD screen techonology IS improving. Which is why I’d recommend waiting a while before investing in one.

LCD screens also look cool Although not as cool IMHO as a large 22 inch flat-screen CRT monitor

[neutron_star]

It’s also worth mentioning that a CRT is far more durable than an LCD. You’d pretty much have to smack your CRT with a hammer to break it, but a pricey LCD screen can be ruined by a curious five-year-old and a pair of scissors.

[yosemite]

*Originally posted by Kinthalis *
BUT:

1. Refresh rates are important for gamers. Low refresh rates means smearing images when playign games.

I’ve heard that LCDs are not as good for games, but I’ve also heard that this assessment of LCDs vs. games is a bit old, and that in fact newer LCDs are better with games. I can’t personally attest to this, because as you know, I don’t give a shit about games!

What do you think of my cite which indicates that refresh rates are not the same with LCDs as they are with CRTs? It’s a “different animal”, so they say. How does this relate to gaming?

2. As pointed out, Color is not as precise as in a CRT.

For color-intensive professional print work, yes. For ordinary web design, it’s fine. For word processing, surfing the web, it’s fine. And the high-end LCDs are already where it’s at for print work, according to someone I know who designs his own “coffee table” color books. (Antectdotal evidence, I know, but then again, Mac Design also recommends the latest Apple LCD monitor.) CRTs are very susceptible to temperature change (so this guy told me) and can be a bitch to calibrate. This particular fellow is itching to switch to LCD. But, I doubt that Ender25 is going to produce coffee table books or do professional print graphcs.

3. You can buy a bigger screen (easier on the eyes, higher resolutions, cooler looking

Well, “size” is deceptive. A 17" LCD monitor has actually 17" viewable. A 17" CRT has, what? 16" viewable?

A large (really large) CRT monitor is still rather expensive, heavy, clunky, and emits a lot of heat (and radiation, apparently). A slightly smaller LCD will have a good “viewable” measurement, and will be lighter (literally), cooler (literally), less energy sucking, and will have no eeeevvvvvillllll radiation, and it’s easier on the eyes. This is not to say that LCDs are for everyone, but it’s not a “slam dunk” that CRTs are either. Those days are over. Sorry.

btw, higher resolutions = more desktop space, and the higher the better the graphic quality in games.

And for your Photoshop workspace, yes, I know. Believe it or not, a lot of us are aware of resolutions and deskspace!

LCD screen techonology IS improving. Which is why I’d recommend waiting a while before investing in one.

Hell, why not wait a year or two before getting a new computer? Their technology is improving too!

If a few hundred more for an LCD is a big deal, go with a heavy, energy sucking, eeeevvillllll radiation-producing CRT. Or, if the game of choice is not looking good enough on the LCD, CRT is the way to go. But there are a lot of people who are already playing their games on LCDs and are not complaining.

LCD screens also look cool Although not as cool IMHO as a large 22 inch flat-screen CRT monitor

To each his own. I think an Apple Cinema Display has any heavy, heat-emitting CRT looking pretty, well, clunky in comparison.

[rjung]

*Originally posted by yosemitebabe *
And the high-end LCDs are already where it’s at for print work, according to someone I know who designs his own “coffee table” color books. (Antectdotal evidence, I know, but then again, Mac Design also recommends the latest Apple LCD monitor.)

Sure, but Apple’s LCD screens are consistently high-quality pieces – they know that professional artists are a big part of their market, after all. Even the LCDs on their consumer gear (like the iBook and the iMac) beat the pants off the LCDs you get from Dell or Compaq.