While the claims are a bit exaggerated, this is exactly why I didn't bother upgrading my Core2 iMac to the aluminum model. Mine still has a true 8bit panel in it. The new ones are 6bit with dithering. Sadly, all manufacturers seem to be slipping into this pattern. It's becoming increasingly harder to find true 8bit panels. I can't stand these Tn-Film panels that are saturating the market. They are horribly sub-par compared to MVA, PVA, or S-IPS panels.

thats all good and well, but give me a sedtv over an lcd panel anyday :nutkick:

qwerty_leshthats all good and well, but give me a scdtv over an lcd panel anyday :nutkick:

If that's what I think it is, I'd rather have a high-quality LCD. I hate Projection screens. They wash out easier in light.

Actually, I think SCDs are the latest advancement in tech, after LCDs, but I'm not quite sue.

I don't even like the aluminium iMacs. I say leave the lower end of the market in that white plasticcy looking form (or add black to the iMac, to match with the MacBook), and leave the aluminium for the high-end. The new iMacs look like crap, especially that black strip, urgh...

Everyone's selling TN panels now, they're a cheaper alternative, they have faster response times, and regular people don't notice the difference. I myself have never used a panel other than a TN panel, knowingly, and have yet to notice the difference. Then again, I only ever think to research my monitors after I have them already (yeah, silly me)

Ripper3Actually, I think SCDs are the latest advancement in tech, after LCDs, but I'm not quite sue.

I don't even like the aluminium iMacs. I say leave the lower end of the market in that white plasticcy looking form (or add black to the iMac, to match with the MacBook), and leave the aluminium for the high-end. The new iMacs look like crap, especially that black strip, urgh...

Everyone's selling TN panels now, they're a cheaper alternative, they have faster response times, and regular people don't notice the difference. I myself have never used a panel other than a TN panel, knowingly, and have yet to notice the difference. Then again, I only ever think to research my monitors after I have them already (yeah, silly me)

If you've seen a good quality LCD HDTV, then you've seen the difference between Tn-Film and MVA/IPS panels.

Any links on this SCD stuff?

Okay, I was wrong about it being SCD, but on Wikipedia, there are alternative types of screens, one that was similar to SCD was SED: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surface-conduction_electron-emitter_display
And here are some more alternatives: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lcd#Other_display_technologies

I like the looks of SED actually, combining the advantages of LCD and CRT technologies.

Ripper3Okay, I was wrong about it being SCD, but on Wikipedia, there are alternative types of screens, one that was similar to SCD was SED: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surface-conduction_electron-emitter_display
And here are some more alternatives: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lcd#Other_display_technologies

I like the looks of SED actually, combining the advantages of LCD and CRT technologies.

SED does look good. SO long as it doesn't refresh in the same manner as a CRT. Which equates to 60Hz over here. I'm very sensitive to CRT's in that respect. They give me a headache. If they can boost the refresh rate to more than 120Hz, I might be OK tho.

I also like the possibilities with OLED.

Wile ESED does look good. SO long as it doesn't refresh in the same manner as a CRT. Which equates to 60Hz over here. I'm very sensitive to CRT's in that respect. They give me a headache. If they can boost the refresh rate to more than 120Hz, I might be OK tho.

I also like the possibilities with OLED.

CRTs have been able to do a lot higher frrequencies than 60 Hz for ages!! Mine for example can do 170 Hz on lower resolutions. I usually have it at 1600x1200 100 Hz or 1280x1024 120 Hz. 60Hz does hurt my eyes too, but anything above 85 Hz is right for me. That's mainly because the eye can see flickering up to 75 Hz aproximately. Some will see it even at higher frequencies (not by much really) and others won't see it even near 60 Hz.

Anyway AFAIK SED/FED will work just as LCDs when it comes to refreshing the panel, supposedly a lot better (100+ Hz) AND what it is more important, like (better than) CRTs when it comes to each pixel (300+ Mhz). Think of 3 microseconds response time!!

Of course it will have the image quality only seen on high quality CRTs: color, gamma, contrast...

SED does certainly look promising, while OLEDs are brilliant. I believe my old Sony MP3 player, the NWA-1000 (I believe it was that) had an OLED display. It was non-colour, but wasn't black on white, rather white on black. The display was brilliant, but the casing was too reflective and made it hard to read the display, which is a shame. My new iriver Clix 2 has an AMOLED colour display though, with 320x240 resolution, and it's extremely bright, the colours are really vivid, and even on the lowest setting, I can still read just fine in bright sunlight.

My old CRT was terrible for refresh rates, but could carry upto 1920x1200 at 70Hz, which was a high enouch refresh not to tire me out as much. My eyes didn't hurt, they just felt tired whenever I used a low refresh rate. That's one reason I love my LCDs. Both models I've had run at 60Hz on their highest resolution, but since it doesn't refresh like a CRT, my eyes don't burn, they don't feel tired, and I obviously can't see the refreshing goign on.

SED will be huge, the colour, gamma and contrast of a good CRT just beats an LCD, no question. The response times don't bother me, my first LCD had 8ms response, never saw ghosting, same with my current one, which has 5ms, I believe. My laptop probably has a higher response time, but no ghosting either. I had tried older laptops with older LCDs (obviously), and ghosting was only apparent when flinging the cursor quickly across the screen, but since the laptop was older, I always used to figure it was just too slow to refresh the screen, heh.

DarkMatterCRTs have been able to do a lot higher frrequencies than 60 Hz for ages!! Mine for example can do 170 Hz on lower resolutions. I usually have it at 1600x1200 100 Hz or 1280x1024 120 Hz. 60Hz does hurt my eyes too, but anything above 85 Hz is right for me. That's mainly because the eye can see flickering up to 75 Hz aproximately. Some will see it even at higher frequencies (not by much really) and others won't see it even near 60 Hz.

Anyway AFAIK SED/FED will work just as LCDs when it comes to refreshing the panel, supposedly a lot better (100+ Hz) AND what it is more important, like (better than) CRTs when it comes to each pixel (300+ Mhz). Think of 3 microseconds response time!!

Of course it will have the image quality only seen on high quality CRTs: color, gamma, contrast...

I know CRT can do over 60Hz, but I was referring more to the TV side of things with CRT. Mostly because I figure that's where these new technologies will likely emerge for consumers.

Ghosting IS an issue for me. I am able to see it everywhere on LCDs, on laptops it just hurts my eyes and my heart. I just can't bear it. While some other things are not as noticeable for me, ghosting is, but that's just me. Is one of the main reasons that I don't like LCDs.
The main reason is the fact that anything but the native resolution looks soo bad to my eyes, and since I like playing games on highest settings that's a big problem. And sadly that's one of the flaws that I see on SEDs too. Hopefully SEDs inherit the ability of CRTs to "blend" adjacent pixels and they don't look as bad, as well as they launch with smaller dot pitch than LCDs, so we can finally have <24" screens with really high resolutions (2160P? :rockout:). That way interpolation wouldn't be an issue and we could use whatever the resolution we wanted without quality loss.

I know CRT can do over 60Hz, but I was referring more to the TV side of things with CRT. Mostly because I figure that's where these new technologies will likely emerge for consumers.

Well, they released 100 Hz CRT TVs in the end of its lifespan. I still own one, and I have to say that it looks a lot better than LCD to me when reproducing standard definition (DVDs, standard TV): a lot better contrast (true blacks and whites FTW!) and brightness balance, and no ghosting (Damn I hate it so much! On TVs is even more noticeable on fast camera movements). It's not HD so LCD looks better then (even though sometimes I have mixed opinions). I have heard there where HD CRT TVs that did at least 720p, but never saw one myself. What definately favors LCD TVs is it's screen size and that they are flat, of course...

i get bad ghosting on my lcd, it shits me to no end. altho i dont think that sedtvs will take off, i like the pros about the concept. an extremely think crt (sedtvs has hundreds of tubes in them) they have potential of being very good screens imo, last time i had a look into them cannon were developing them and i think toshiba but arent too certain now. little off topic i know, but its relevant to screen technologies.

qwerty_leshi get bad ghosting on my lcd, it shits me to no end. altho i dont think that scdtvs will take off, i like the pros about the concept. an extremely think crt (scdtvs has hundreds of tubes in them) they have potential of being very good screens imo, last time i had a look into them cannon were developing them and i think toshiba but arent too certain now. little off topic i know, but its relevant to screen technologies.

Get a better LCD? Seriously, no high quality LCD from the past 2 yrs ghosts.

My CRT actually has noticeable ghosting with bright white stuff, kinda weird. But it is from 2000 (it's some big ass mitsubishi, apparently tech they used from sony's trinitron).

Yea, there are almost no probs with LCDs these days. When SEDs come out, there prob won't be any that are 24 inch 1920x1200s.

DangleDude, just get a dell!

But won't he end up as some loser waiter in the Northeast?

TheGuruStudGet a better LCD? Seriously, no high quality LCD from the past 2 yrs ghosts.

My CRT actually has noticeable ghosting with bright white stuff, kinda weird. But it is from 2000 (it's some big ass mitsubishi, apparently tech they used from sony's trinitron).

Ghosting on a CRT? :roll:

haha...that's one reason I won't get a Mac. APPLE LIES!!! :shadedshu

DarkMatterGhosting on a CRT? :roll:

Lol, you can come see it. If I move the mouse fast on a black screen you can see trails.
Or if there's a flashlight in a dark scene in a move.

It's old, but w/e, it'll do until I can get a big LCD.

TheGuruStudLol, you can come see it. If I move the mouse fast on a black screen you can see trails.
Or if there's a flashlight in a dark scene in a move.

It's old, but w/e, it'll do until I can get a big LCD.

I can't go, but I would like to. :D
I have never seen something like that. CRTs can't have the same ghosting as LCDs have, it can't be because response time, it must be something else worth investigating.
The only ghosting that I have seen in CRTs is when using Stereo 3D drivers and it's different, more noticeable sometimes, but different, only affects borders and such...
After all, I have to ask even if is a dumb question: you are not using stereo3D drivers, are you? :p

LOL, no stereo drivers. I didn't mean that it's LCD ghosting, I just mean that it looks similar. I guess it's more like a smear if that sounds a little different than ghosting.

TheGuruStudLOL, no stereo drivers. I didn't mean that it's LCD ghosting, I just mean that it looks similar. I guess it's more like a smear if that sounds a little different than ghosting.

Probably it's broken. If you don't have it near a powerful electromagnetic field and/or you have tried all the common suspects like degaussing it, reseting the beams or the monitor itself, etc. Probably it's just broken.

i just want them to release big OLEDs they look so much better than LCDs

read this for an OLED review
www.soundandvisionmag.com/hdtvs/2740/sony-xel-1-11-inch-oled-tv.html

cdawalli just want them to release big OLEDs they look so much better than LCDs

read this for an OLED review
www.soundandvisionmag.com/hdtvs/2740/sony-xel-1-11-inch-oled-tv.html

I'm going to have a look at the link, because I haven't been following OLED technology. Last time I checked OLED displays lacked badly of brightness and contrast compared to LCDs and most analysts deemed the technology to portable devices. Things could have changed, but anything with less contrast than LCD is not the way to go. When it comes to picture quality SED/FED was a lot better than anything else, I don't know how it is right now.

DarkMatterI'm going to have a look at the link, because I haven't been following OLED technology. Last time I checked OLED displays lacked badly of brightness and contrast compared to LCDs and most analysts deemed the technology to portable devices. Things could have changed, but anything with less contrast than LCD is not the way to go. When it comes to picture quality SED/FED was a lot better than anything else, I don't know how it is right now.

from how they rated it when i read it in the magazine it was one hell of a little display brighter and more contrast than the reviews big screen!

cdawallfrom how they rated it when i read it in the magazine it was one hell of a little display brighter and more contrast than the reviews big screen!

After reading it, my impression is that he is comparing that screen to high quality LCDs and that it is on par with them, maybe a little bit better in contrast. Colour on the other hand seems pretty bad. Also take into account that smaller panels have usually better picture quality than bigger ones. When we talk about SED, we are talking about a really big improvement over LCD. That panel is an evolution, but not a revolution. We want revolution!