[[Shizo]]

Aren't flat screens better for your health? Because flats dont have light beams radiating through layers of mercury and toxic crap while CRTs do.

[Impaler]

Of course, it's a well-known fact that light waves carry mercury. It's why thermometers are invisible; otherwise, we'd all lose our hair and die.

You sit on your ass all day long, drinking coke and eating candy, posting on forums and browsing and whatever other commie things you do, and you worry about monitors adversely affecting your health?

Trust me, man. That comfy chair is more malevolant than some strictly FCC-regulated monitor. Not only that, but if CRT's were dangerous, then 99% of America would be dead in front of their televisions.

[ June 11, 2002: Message edited by: Impaler ]

[Pat]

Heh heh. Did someone piss in Impaler's cheerios or does my Irony-Meter need adjusting?

Actually, I did read an article that indicated that CRT's were harmful to your health. It had nothing to do with your eyes though, rather it focused on your ears. It seems that some CRT's emit a high pitched whine that, after a day of sitting at the computer, was supposedly worse for your hearing than attending an ear-splitting rock concert. It went on to say that the long term effects of such exposure could have profound impact on your hearing.

Good thing I'm deadening the effects of the CRT whine with loud rock music piped over some good earphones. If you're gonna go deaf, better the devil you know.

-Pat

[edraket]

I think it's just me...
But after one day behind a crt I am fucked up. Terrible headaches and stuff. My eyes just don't seem to handle it.

One day behind a lcd/tft.. Well a lot better.
I have never been able to explain it.

I have looked into it. And there are some health hazards to your eyes.

1- The fact that you eyes are focused on the same distance all days. This can be pretty bad. A friend of mine actually had to stop working for a few months because he couldn't focus on any distance exept for two ft.

2- The magnetic waves makes particles of dust and stuff bounce off and into your face.

3- There was some sort of problem with the pixels misleading peoples eyes somehow and making the focus get mixed up or something.


Excuse me for being somewhat erratic in my explanations. It's a while ago. #1 Wouldn't be fixed by an lcd off course. But 2 and 3 are.

[Loki]

haha, Impaler - you funny!

and shizo ... in your case it's the vodka ...

[Lunatique]

Shizo, your vodka drinkin' will kill you WAAAAY before the cRT monitor would.

My eyesight has gone to hell since I bought a computer in 98. It's EVIL.

[[Shizo]]

Yeah vodka haha .. hahaha

Anyways Pat - yeah the high pitched noise sucks. Both in TVs and Monitors. LCDs dont have it. It might not affect the hearing that much i dont think but ears do get tired of it. (that might partially cause headaches)
But mostly its the construction of CRTs, its really un-healthy. Try breaking apart any old CRT and you'll see tons of chemicals and nasty looking stuff in there - shining right at you all day
edraket gets headaches, who doesn't? I think we all should care less about visual quality and buy LCDs just because we'll have less headaches, thats a very good reason. Although that damn price on them is high *waits till year 2005*

[edraket]

LCD's are subsidized here because they are environment friendly. So that makes them a bit more affordable.

[Coaster]

If you listen closely to my old monitor your can hear a high pitched whine.

I think the eye problems are something to do with the flicker, which goes at different frequencies then your eyes can process or something (that would explain the headaches) and how there are no defined pixels since coloures on the monitor are made by placing red green and blue points of light REALLY close to make whatever colours. So I think the problem really is just NOTHING to focus on.

I'm fortunate to have an LCD.

~jeff

[[Shizo]]

Rich bastard

I looked up LCDs at pricewatch, and was disappointed. The average ones are about $600 for 17" which is 0.26 dot 1280X1024 and some refresh rate like 75kHz :0
Looks like it is about year 2005 until i get one.

[edraket]

Hey you do need to realise that the refresh rate is less important because it doesn't flicker anyways. (There is no projected images but one constantly changing one)
And the effective size of a 17 inch is pretty much comparable with the size of 19 inch crt.
The screenres..well. I have 1024 and I can manage. Running 3d Max with that is not fun though.

[[Shizo]]

hehe 1024x768 is what im using for past few years, dont diss it busta!
I'm not sure why they mention refresh rate then. Say, is there motion blur when things move quickly across the screen (w/ smudgy trails?) are there any other bad things about LCD that you can see?

[Dr.Squirley]

quote:

---

Originally posted by [Shizo]:
Say, is there motion blur when things move quickly across the screen (w/ smudgy trails?) are there any other bad things about LCD that you can see?

---

no.

[Loki]

the color response of an LCD screen is still pretty useless ... guess that'll change though ...

[Dr. Bang]

quote:

---

Originally posted by [Shizo]:
hehe 1024x768 is what im using for past few years, dont diss it busta!
I'm not sure why they mention refresh rate then. Say, is there motion blur when things move quickly across the screen (w/ smudgy trails?) are there any other bad things about LCD that you can see?

---

yeah, it got crappy contrasts. Its expensive.

But give LCD 2-3 more years and it should be able to almost catch up with CRT quality.

[Coaster]

Leaves a trail when things move? uhh, no.. that doesn't happen. Only the older 'passive' ones do. The contrast is the same as my CRT.

Because LCD's aren't bulged like CRT's, a 15 inch LCD is the same as a 17 et cetra..

*sigh* I have a good comp. Not going to describe it though, and I think its really really really fast on part that I use linux too (or it cold be the 256 meg ram and 1.2 ghz p4)

~jeff
In other words its just like reading a paper.

[ June 12, 2002: Message edited by: Coaster ]