I agree that stuck pixels being considered acceptable by manufacturers is disconcerting...I was surprised that the in situ testing of the new systems we're taking delivery of allows for up to 6 such faulty pixels! BTW, they don't tend to be just black or white as just a single colour can fail leading to pure R,G, B or other combinations of pixels too.
However, isn't it the case that faults like this (if they have any) on LCDs are very noticable because they tend to be digital in nature, where as faults on CRTs tend to be analogue in nature and much harder to spot? How many large CRTs can claim 100% colour purity across the entire image? Or exact geometry for that matter? And people prefer them for engineering?!
As an aside, of the 100+ screens I've witnessed personally now being set up, not one has had even a single failed pixel, which has surprised me.
...and then of course with CRTs you have drift from fluctuating magnetic fields in an area requiring degausing...You know, with this discussion I'm reminded of all the valve amp advocates in the face of the digital revolution
I'm betting you all have fancy analogue stereos too huh?
I'm wondering if some of the critisisms about LCDs looking poor is actually because they render an image very crisply, where as for artistic graphics, the innate tendency for the analogue circuits in a CRT to provide a degree of anti-aliasing just by the nature of the technology (phosphors glowing) makes the image look smoother/better?
BTW, refresh rates on LCDs have improved greatly in the past few years (though they refresh in a different way to CRTs so it's not comparing like with like). I used to ignore them when advising people on purchases if they wanted to play games for just that reason, but the latest generations are pretty darn acceptable I had to admit when I tested them...Certainly much better than they used to be, but admittedly still not CRT standard...yet.
The decision we took at work for LCDs wasn't based on good impression, but rather hard figures on TCO from a renowed auditing firm...they /are/ cheaper over the lifetime of a machine than a CRT.
The point about the old CRTs being land fill is a real issue. The EU has decreed that ex-computers are to be treated as toxic waste for some time now, and CRTs have been added to that recently, hence we had to pay for their safe disposal in the contract with the supplier of the new kit - but it still worked out cheaper. Ethically though, it's been difficult to justify to users why we're replacing their perfectly useable screen with a new one. Thankfully, most of the old kit is expected to be recycled and sold on or donated to charities, so they won't be in a landfill...yet.
I think what it comes down to though is that if you have a top of the range CRT it's going to out perform a top of the range LCD for the sorts of things people here wish to use it for, no argument....but I predict that when we all have 4000x3000 screens that theywon't be CRTs...they may not be LCDs either
