Question:
I wanna know when production of CRT TV's will cease. I have a feeling it could be soon - the prices are tumbling which is generally a sign that something is going on. These monster boxes may be going the way of the Do-Do.
Answers:
production will cont until people stop buying them
people buy plasma/lcd cos they're thin then they put them where their old telly was taking up the same room
If you want the best pic quality buy CRT
Answers:
Almost certainly be around for probably the best part of the next 50 years
Answers:
I think 50 years may be a bit high - although I'd say at least 20-30 years.
Currently, plasma and LCD TVs are much more expensive. However, technology is advancing so quickly that these prices will drop. Eventually, I think production costs for at least LCDs and probably plasma will be less than CRTs for a variety of reasons - CRTs are bulky and heavy, so are more costly to store and transport. They also require inert gasses etc in the manufacture, and are expensive to dispose of. Add this to the fact that plasma and LCDs are much more desirable than CRTs - looks, size, emissions, power consumption - once the cost achieves parity, I can't see CRTs lasting for very long.
CDs have been around for 25 years or so now, and cassette decks are starting to slowly decline - the main reason they're still here is because they can record (although recordable CDs are starting to push them out, now, too). Similarly, VCRs are now more expensive than DVD players, and are only still around, in my opinion, because DVD and Hard Disk recorders are more expensive (although these prices are coming down, too). Also, people have huge libraries of cassettes and videos that they want to keep. CRTs don't have this lifeline - if an LCD is as cheap as a CRT, there's no reason not to have one.
Just my two penneth...
Shaun
Answers:
There will be a new kid on the block soon.
I can't remember what they are called but basically the tv is a piece of thin plastic which can be rolled up when not in use,and made to varying sizes. The production costs are supposed to be a fraction of plasma/lcd.The first versions are already available in Japan built in to the sleeve of a coat!
Answers:
....... They also require inert gasses etc in the manufacture, and are expensive to dispose of.......
........if an LCD is as cheap as a CRT, there's no reason not to have one....
Just my two penneth...
Shaun
Re your first point, CRT's are 99.9% glass, a tiny bit of metal and an iota of phosphor. My understanding is that they can be recycled almost as easy as a glass bottle.
Plasma screens also use the same phosphor and the dielectric layer is surrounded by a mixture of inert gases - such as argon, neon or xenon - so not much difference there then.
The plastic casing, power supply, circuit board and other components etc are comparable in both.
On the second point, I agree with one exception that you failed to mention.
RESOLUTION !
As sablade said "If you want the best pic quality buy CRT "
When similar prices for similar size displays have been reached you still have to take in consideration how good it is at producing a clear, sharp, bright picture.
The ultimate limitation of the plasma screen has proved to be pixel size. At present manufacturers can't see how to get pixels sizes below 0.3mm, even in the long term they do not believe it will be possible. (Ever wondered why Plasma screens start at 28 inch and only get bigger?)
This is at least 20% worse than the cheapest CRTs in PC monitors and upto 50% worse than the higher quality ones.
For those in the business of CAD (Computer Aided Design) the very big very high resolution CRT's (pixels even smaller than above) are very expensive and cost significantly more than the equivalent plasma size screens but the information they can display (4 or 5 times greater detail) makes them invaluable to the user.
I can't see them being replaced with any technology that we are currently aware of.
It is possible to make CRTs for High Definition TVs with the phosphor dots under 5 thousandths of an inch in size. About 3 times smaller than a plasma pixel.
This would produce an image about 10 times sharper, with 10 times more detail.
I know which one I would prefer!