• @jacktherippah@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    2
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    This is your nostalgia talking. CRTs were absolutely awful. I think my family still had one of lying around in the mid aughts. It was heavy, ugly, big, with truly awful picture quality and sucks down on power. Even the cheap LCD TVs we upgraded to were so much better than that crap.

      • @marx2k@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        32 years ago

        The weighed a ton, they were limited in size, their resolution was terrible, they sucked down electricity…

        • @Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          02 years ago

          Their screen was curved the wrong way until they released flat screen TVs

          4:3 resolution meant you lost some of the content from movies or you watched them with black bars

          • @Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            12 years ago

            Except movies keep changing so now if you want imax at home you need 4:3.

            Whatever isn’t available at home is what movies will change to to keep themselves unique.

            • @Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              02 years ago

              Widescreen has been the movie industry standard for how many decades now? IMAX is its own beast but most movies aren’t filmed in real IMAX resolution and now there’s digital IMAX which is basically 19:10 which is the same as many TVs…

              • @Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                12 years ago

                Movies used to be all 4:3 before tv. It’s called the academy ratio. Movies now do 1.85:1 and even 2.39:1. A few even do anamorphic 2.76:1. Anything but the dominant home format.

                • @Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  12 years ago

                  Major movie studios have mostly used widescreen since the 1950s and all the different ratios you mentioned except 4:3 are better watched on a widescreen TV than a 4:3 TV.

    • @Steve@startrek.website
      link
      fedilink
      02 years ago

      Stupid false nostalgia, just like the old c10 pickup trucks. They are rare now because they are SHIT and nearly all of them were scrapped like they deserve.

  • Phoenixz
    link
    fedilink
    12 years ago

    I will not break for 50 years

    Yeah as a guy who used to repair these with his dad as a kid, hells no. The average crt TV had a lifespan of about 10 years without breaking

    • Yup. A lot of survivor bias going on with the remaining crop of CRTs out there. Granted, there were probably a lot of perfectly good tubes that got thrown out back in the 2000’s. But the ones we have left still need repair now and then.

      • @frezik@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        12 years ago

        And a lot of them don’t have the brightness they did back then. These aren’t going to last forever, which is why good upscaling solutions for modern TVs are important.

  • @Toneswirly@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    12 years ago

    CRT sets weighed about 40 pounds, blurry picture, and cost as much as a mid range PC. Modern TVs are 5 pounds, cheaper than most phones, and have nice crisp picture. Smart TVs suck but so did the past. Nostalgia is a lie. Things are always bad, they don’t get worse they just stay bad

  • @31337@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    12 years ago

    The tech of CRTs seems almost futuristic to me. Bending electron beams with magnets to travel through a vacuum so they hit exotic materials at precisely the right locations seems much cooler than just miniaturizing LED arrays.

  • @BeigeAgenda@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    12 years ago

    Pro tip: Never connect your TV to the internet, just use it as a screen. Its easier to buy a new cromecast or Kodi Box when you need support for the latest streaming.