Prev: Is there an backup external drive for restoration?
Next: Heat and chips
From: chrisv on 29 Mar 2008 09:46
kony wrote:

>Having the option for the user to display this area is
>better than not, and allows a manufacturer to create any
>given screen size for lower cost than haiving to use a
>bigger tube then not allow using the more distorted region
>around the edge at all.

Yes, as I noted in me "I suppose it's sensible to allow the choice"
statement a few posts back...

I suppose this thread has run it's course, but I still thinking that
it's "normal" to use that area. I know I max-out my monitors - I'm
not paying for area that I'm not using. 8)

Unfortunately, this is almost like discussing buggy-whips. Even CRT
diehards like myself are considering changing-over. My home monitor
is a beautiful 21" Sony F500R that still performs almost flawlessly.
I recently bought my daughter a 22" widescreen LCD, and it's pretty
darn nice, and only $300. I don't think it's clearly "better" than my
Sony, but I also do not think that I would be suffering if I had to
use one...

From: Bob Myers on 29 Mar 2008 18:58

"chrisv" <chrisv(a)nospam.invalid> wrote in message
news:behsu3107u1tcqr3hr446dda3311ojsv2g(a)4ax.com...
>
> I suppose this thread has run it's course, but I still thinking that
> it's "normal" to use that area. I know I max-out my monitors - I'm
> not paying for area that I'm not using. 8)
>

The thread probably has run its course, but I did think of
one more item to note - if you don't want to "pay for area
you're not using," you should take a look at the televisions
of the very earliest days of broadcast TV, the late 1940s and
early 1950s. Raster-scan CRTs were still in their infancy
as consumer products, and the only way you could make
a set with acceptable image quality over a reasonable area
was to use this tube with a *round* faceplate (and
a very long funnel - a low deflection angle) and then just
show the viewer a part of that area through the opening
in the TV cabinet. Rectangular-faceplate tubes in which
the entire screen could be used acceptably and shown to the
viewer had yet to be developed.

Take a look at this:

http://www.tvhistory.tv/1946-RCA-621TS-7in.JPG

....a 1946 RCA TV - black and white, of course - with
a SEVEN INCH (typical size in those days!) round CRT
behind that roughly-rectangular bezel opening.

The development of color television using "tricolor"
tubes (in the 1950s) didn't help matters any, as it was incredibly
difficult at that time to maintain convergence, purity, etc.
over the area needed for an acceptable picture. Take a
look at the insides of this 1954 Westinghouse 15" model,
one of the very first color TVs offered for sale:

http://www.tvhistory.tv/We54chs33.jpg

(This set cost $1295.00, by the way, at a time when a
new Cadillac Eldorado convertible was under $5k!)

www.tvhistory.tv is a fantastic site, by the way - lots of
fun just browsing through the classic TV, esp. from this
era and earlier. Tom Genova, the webmaster there, has
done an incredible job assembling photos of old TVs,
service manuals, news items, etc., spanning the 75+ year
history of television.

The CRT has had a great run as the electronic display
of choice for most of the past 100 years, and I think
pretty much everyone in the industry feels a bit of a twinge
at its inevitable passing. But it has come to be time to move
on...

Bob M.


 | 
Pages: 1
Prev: Is there an backup external drive for restoration?
Next: Heat and chips