Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Plasma computer monitors
- Thread starter cube
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Because the technology behind plasma displays makes it difficult to fit inside even the largest typical computer monitor (30"). It can be done, but the advantages are so few that it's not cost effective to do so.
Plasma displays are often found in large, flat-panel TVs today.
Plasma displays are often found in large, flat-panel TVs today.
I don't think that's really true anymore, plasma screens aren't as bulky as they once were.
However, the real reason we don't see them in computer displays is twofold, first power usage; plasma screens still gulp down quite a few more watts than today's LED LCD panels of a comparable size. Also; burn-in. Or rather, uneven pixel wear.
CRT != Plasma.
And yes, those old IBM CRT's did have burn-in issues; I worked with tons of them on production lines and EVERY one of them would get burn in.
Really, here is EXACTLY what you said.
No mention of the word plasma there.
Here is one example :
The screen uses phosphor to illuminate the glass. The phosphor is energized by the scanning electron gun where as the electrons are deflected by magnetics to illuminate different sections of phosphor that is pixelized by the mesh of the screen. Over time the electron gun burns away the phosphor especially when redrawing the same thing over and over for long periods of time. For example the "Please Wait" in the image above. Thus these "burnt" phosphor no longer energize like they used to, the screen appears dimmer in those locations.
It was very common, and thus the development of screen savers; to keep different sections randomly illuminated so that nothing was consistently written to the same locations over and over again.
I've been researching plasma TVs for a few months (in fact, getting ready to pull the plug on one). While burn in isn't much of an issue anymore when used as a TV, it could be for computer monitor usage. Furthermore, image retention (IR) is still a problem for many plasma owners and would be even worse when used as a computer monitor.
Even die hard plasma fans don't seem to think it's a good idea to use a plasma TV as a computer monitor; for that, they recommend LCD.
Even die hard plasma fans don't seem to think it's a good idea to use a plasma TV as a computer monitor; for that, they recommend LCD.
Why do you combine 2 unrelated sentences? If you knew the plasmas from 30 years ago you would immediately recognize the IBM I'm talking about.
If you had read the thread properly you would have understood my post.
Last edited:
Did this thread really happen?
Like others have said, not only do you get ghosting with plasma displays, but short to long term burn-in is also a huge issue.
Just look your computer screen right now. Look at all the static icons, images, words, everything. If it was a plasma and sat (like it does) for more than two minutes, it would be there for a while after that.
Like others have said, not only do you get ghosting with plasma displays, but short to long term burn-in is also a huge issue.
Just look your computer screen right now. Look at all the static icons, images, words, everything. If it was a plasma and sat (like it does) for more than two minutes, it would be there for a while after that.