this post was submitted on 24 Dec 2024
354 points (97.8% liked)
Technology
60090 readers
2913 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
You know what was great about the era of CRTs? We didn't know what we were missing. If you look at almost every 70s/80s scifi movie depicting the future decades from then, and there is a computer display of some sort, it will be a CRT. Even inside vehicles.
Star Trek is the only one where I saw flat panels (LCARS terminals). AND they were touchscreens.
Back to the Future 2 had 16:9 flat screen TVs that were wall mounted. It's one of only two things it got right about the future, the other being that Japan would still be using fax.
Canada too, instill see loads of fax use here
CRTs have a huge advantage of not having fixed screen resolution. And my memory is not very good, but I think my eyes really did get tired much slower from them than from LCDs. I guess their size and their dangers were more important.
After all, space and health are very basic concerns in our world.
Our eyes are also much older now
If you don't regularly transplant new ones in maybe.
Depends on a refresh rate. < 60 Hz sucks, 75 Hz is acceptable, 85+ Hz ideal.
And how noisy is it, I mean in a high frequency range.
They had terrific brightness. (At least until they started to wear out)
The resolution was a mixed bag. They couldn't handle the resolutions we have today, But when you were running 800 by 600 on a 1600x1200 they looked pretty crisp. It was a problem on LCDs before they got their pixel counts up because they were driven purpose built for a given resolution and anything else was a hack.
Nowadays 800 by 600 on a 4K screen looks pretty decent.
The biggest problem we're dealing with replacing CRTs with LCDs are the sharpness was crap so the content looked good soft. We have to throw shaders and all kinds of crazy stuff on ROMs to degrade the screen enough to make them look good. And then any light screen devices that use pixel scanning for location just don't work because newer technology doesn't work that way. The best in the light guns are going so far as to use camera sensors to detect location.
I like the future tech of Camerons Avatar better than the bulky consoles in Star Treck and the like.
These are so far apart though. Future tech in a movie from 2009 (where we already had LCDs and iPhones) compared to TNG in 1987.
Even if they could have been even more forward thinking in their design, they wouldn't have been able to film I back then. LCARS was just backlit scribs with some CRT displays undreneath in areas that needed to animate. You couldn't CG it then and have it look believable.