Is it my impression that nobody will be usung CRT displays anymore? I don’t see any wide screen TV sets with CRTs-they are too bulky and heavy. Now that the Koreans have mastered the art of turning out large area LCDs (at high yields), it would seem that the CRT is completely outclassed!
It had a good run-born ca. 1900-dead 2008? 
Oooh, cathode-ray tube. Well, I have a little old computer monitor with one still, & I imagine they’ll be in use for a while, but in an economy where we’re phasing out incandescent lights in favor of fluorescents, I don’t think manufacturers will be selling too many c.r.t.'s. Those things run pretty hot, & they’re bulky. I imagine there’s much less energy used & much less heat overall with an LCD screen.
It would seem they are going away for consumer applications – they may continue to be used for instrumentation purposes, though, in a limited scale. As mentioned, the CRT is large, heavy, high-energy-consuming, and has safe disposal issues (loads of lovely toxic heavy metals).
CRTs tend to have better color, so some professionals will probably use them.
Right now you can get really good deals on CRTs. You can go on Craigslist and get a spare CRT computer monitor for well under $100, and CRT TVs are cheap even new.
I’m behind the times and I don’t have any LCDs yet.
My CRT HDTV looks fantastic compared to the LCDs and plasmas I’ve seen.
The tradeoff is that the thing is the heaviest object in my house.
I have a 22" CRT acquired from Duponts graphics or CAD people. Can’t remember the brand. But this thing has by far the clearest picture I’ve ever seen on any type of monitor. So I assume professionals will still use the best equiptment.
Oh and it weighs as much as a city bus.
I recently replaced my 19" standard CRT with a 19" widescreen LCD panel. The only reason I am not switching them back is because of the amount of money I paid for the LCD. I mean, it’s OK but the colors on the CRT were way sharper and brighter. If I didn’t have the CRT to compare the two side by side I would probably a lot more happier with the LCD.
Mere technological superiority won’t win the day for LCD. I am, at this moment, using a CRT. This may not make much difference for a general chatroom type thing, but I’ll bet gamers ARE sticklers about picture quality.
And yes, it’s a pain in the ass to move.
At my company, they were giving them away. Flat screen, 19 inch CRT monitors supporting at least 1600X1200, in good working condition. I picked one up (literally, too, and they’re heavy!). There were still a couple left after mine, and no takers. The clock is ticking, The Them. Might want to start practicing your Old-Man rant about how they don’t make good monitors anymore. 
Almost everyone will have one eventually because Dell doesn’t ship CRTs and includes LCDs for almost nothing. CRTs are fine, but I work as a graphics professional and most places I’ve encountered are exclusively LCD. A properly calibrated LCD isn’t appreciably worse than a CRT in my experience.
Also, they’re more compact, look cooler and are new. Those three selling points work for pretty much everything.
LCDs eliminated the annoying flicker that CRTs have, even when set at the highest refresh rates. Plus, it’s relatively easy to get very large screen sizes for LCD, without taking up any depth on your desktop. I think the advent of laptops really pushed LCD technology forward.
ZenBeam, I rant as an Old Man about anything and everything already. This is just one more thing for me to be crotchety about. 
We still need to use CRTs at work when running experiments if the color or luminance settings are important. LCDs aren’t always considered accurate enough.
I am not a huge gamer, but I do insist on using a CRT for when I do play games. You still get better picture quality and refresh rates (though LCDs have gotten a lot better in the last decade). That, along with the lack of a native resolution on a CRT (so you can use any resolution for a game–depending on the game, of course) makes them more flexible and still a better choice. The colors are generally more true as well.
I am running dual-monitor, a 17" and a 19" CRT. I might go to one CRT and one LCD one day, but I plan on using a CRT for a while yet.
Many older cheaper flat panel display didn’t have 24-bit colour so you’d sometimes see banding. Also, the backlights on some were more visible than others. I’ve got a 22" CRT but it’s so massive and takes up so much room that I’ve given it to my mother and switched to twin 19" LCDs
CRTs suck! I say this as someone whose job used to require her to move them when people changed offices.
The fixed resolution of LCDs has deterred me from switching over on my computer - there are far too many situations, including but not limited to games, where I need to change the screen resolution - and LCDs are absolutely terrible at displaying in anything other than their native res.
(This is less important for TV, so I don’t mind that my projector uses a fixed res - though I do wish it were higher.)
After lugging a 32" Sony Trinitron (130 lbs.) through 3 moves in 10 years I was more than happy to rid myself of it on Craigslist for $50.
It was a beast even for 2 people to carry.
Much more space in the living room after mounting a 40" Sony LCD to the wall.
I think retailers are loving the shift also. Shipping and stocking inventory that weighs less and takes up less space is always a plus.
Don’t be too sure, if this abstract is accurate:
Source: Long Link Here
Hardcore PC gamers are a dying breed and the ones that prefer CRTs over LCDs to the point of refusing to even purchase an LCD is a practically invisible number.
The word “gamer” nowadays refers to console gamers, and we moved on to LCD TVs as our display of choice years ago.