Anarchy99 said:
im getting a dual 1.8 ghz g5 in a month or so and im a student and i cant afford an lcd especially apple's displays
so i looked on ebay and i can get a 20-22" crt for real cheep at least half the price of a lcd i told my friend this and he said crts are bad and didn't give me a reason
so my question is why are they so bad and cheep compared to lcds
LCDs cost more to make and there is higher demand for them, so those two factors keep their prices higher. Before demand dropped, CRT monitors were (relative to today) very expensive.
I have a 21" IBM P260. My 12" PowerBook (lid closed) is connected to its VGA input, and my Power Mac G4 is connected to its DVI-I input. At the same brightness and contrast settings, the VGA side seems brighter and slightly fuzzy, whereas the DVI side is neutral and just transparently clear and sharp. This monitor cost me less than $200 shipped.
The VGA input allows higher maximum resolution, 2304x1728 @ 60Hz, while the DVI input is limited to 1920x1200 @ 76Hz. I usually work with 1600x1200 @ 90Hz.
I'd like to buy an LCD but for now my priority is to get as fast a CPU as I can for the money, so my CRT is a stopgap solution. This monitor is huge, but I have my desk about 10" away from the wall behind and it sort of hangs / extends in that space (with the monitor's base completely on the desk, of course).
https://forums.macrumors.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=18448
I have a USB switch to share the keyboard and mouse with both computers, so the setup works nicely.
When I get an LCD it's likely to be the
HP L2335 23" LCD. It has component, composite, s-video, VGA and DVI inputs, and competitive (some better, some not) specs than the Apple 23" Cinema Display.