Then we could have 2.35:1 Panamorphic Widescreen 1080P movies on HD-DVD/Bluray so NONE of the vertical resolution would be wasted on Black Bars.
Unfortunately because Plasmas and LCDs dominate the market, people will have to settle for ONLY 818 lines of vertical resolution on 2.35:1 aspect ratio movies.

2.35:1 movies are essentially "letterboxed" on HD-DVD and Bluray instead of being presented in FULL Panamorphic 2,073,600 Pixel Resolution.

People are settling for 818P instead of 1080P for 2.35:1 movies.

I know.

1080p CRTs have to exist before they can dominate anything. Hell, I haven't even seen a TRUE 1080i CRT yet.

1080p CRTs have to exist before they can dominate anything. Hell, I haven't even seen a TRUE 1080i CRT yet.

PC monitors?

PC monitors?

Ummm, OK. But we were talking about TVs, right?

1080p CRTs have to exist before they can dominate anything. Hell, I haven't even seen a TRUE 1080i CRT yet.

That's unfortunately because there's no market for it.
The Largest CRTs wer 43", the largest widscreen ones wer 38".
If they did more R&D on CRTs, we'd easily have 1080P 43" 16x9 CRTs on the market by now with a 1,000,000,000:1 contrast ratio. They'd have picture quality way better than Any Plasma, DLP, LCOS, LCD, etc. I'm rather have a 43" 1080P CRT than a 65" 1080P Plasma if given the choice. Contrast ratio is more important than Size.

The largest CRT Direct View TV is 40" by Sony.
The highest resolution TV is 1440x1080i by Sony.

BTW, many of CRT Projection/Direct View don't compress the resolution out of the black bar.
It depends if it has the feature or not. Mostly SDTVs have that to compress 16:9 HD.

we are moving backwards in audio/video quality

people are willing to settle for a fuzzy picture and pay thousands more for that privilege just because the cabinet is flat

people are willing to settle for the **** sound of mp3's because they can fit on their ipod and you can download them instead of waiting for the cd to come from amazon in a day or 2

people are stupid and the big companies are laughing all the way to the bank

we are moving backwards in audio/video quality

people are willing to settle for a fuzzy picture and pay thousands more for that privilege just because the cabinet is flat

people are willing to settle for the **** sound of mp3's because they can fit on their ipod and you can download them instead of waiting for the cd to come from amazon in a day or 2

people are stupid and the big companies are laughing all the way to the bank

Amen.

we are moving backwards in audio/video quality

people are willing to settle for a fuzzy picture and pay thousands more for that privilege just because the cabinet is flat

people are willing to settle for the **** sound of mp3's because they can fit on their ipod and you can download them instead of waiting for the cd to come from amazon in a day or 2

people are stupid and the big companies are laughing all the way to the bank

"People" pay for convenience. We're just a bunch of geeks. :cool:

people are willing to settle for a fuzzy picture and pay thousands more for that privilege just because the cabinet is flat

Let's calm down there. LCDs running in their native resolution are hardly "fuzzy." And *zero* geometry issues is also a significant selling point to some.

There are many good things about non-CRT based TVs that have nothing to do with how flat they are.

Let's calm down there. LCDs running in their native resolution are hardly "fuzzy." And *zero* geometry issues is also a significant selling point to some.

There are many good things about non-CRT based TVs that have nothing to do with how flat they are.
Bingo. Geometry is far-and-away one of the most important things for me in a display, and CRT just doesn't cut it. :cool:

Again. Not all TV technology is bad. Take a look at the Sony BRAVIA model. It's better than
XBR970. Plasma's are better than any CRT. They all have their ups and downs. But CRT
beats them all for the price.

The largest CRT Direct View TV is 40" by Sony.
The highest resolution TV is 1440x1080i by Sony.

BTW, many of CRT Projection/Direct View don't compress the resolution out of the black bar.
It depends if it has the feature or not. Mostly SDTVs have that to compress 16:9 HD.

Nope, Sony Used to make 43" CRT Broadcast monitors that cost $50,000 each.
I have a photo of the 43" tube somewhere with a dog used for a comparions from the guy who was selling it on Ebay years ago. I think that they could go a little bigger than 40", but it's the weight limitations more than the screen size limitations that prevent it.
Mitsubishi used to make 40" Analog TVs, and then ofcourse the ones you mentioned.

Nope, Sony Used to make 43" CRT Broadcast monitors that cost $50,000 each.
I have a photo of the 43" tube somewhere with a dog used for a comparions from the guy who was selling it on Ebay years ago. I think that they could go a little bigger than 40", but it's the weight limitations more than the screen size limitations that prevent it.
Mitsubishi used to make 40" Analog TVs, and then ofcourse the ones you mentioned.

OK Don't confused industry and consumer products. They are not the same. Yet the
current one used today is the Sony's 40". You cannot find Mitsubishi 40" anywhere
because it stopped production back in 1997, so that leaves Sony. Sony haven't
announced it stopped the FD Trinitron plant but speculations are floating. Broadcast
industry use a industrial version of XBR970 as I've seen here and in the Los Angeles
area.

That's unfortunately because there's no market for it.
The Largest CRTs wer 43", the largest widscreen ones wer 38".
If they did more R&D on CRTs, we'd easily have 1080P 43" 16x9 CRTs on the market by now with a 1,000,000,000:1 contrast ratio. They'd have picture quality way better than Any Plasma, DLP, LCOS, LCD, etc. I'm rather have a 43" 1080P CRT than a 65" 1080P Plasma if given the choice. Contrast ratio is more important than Size.

And it would weigh a ton...