Does any one know of a non-fixed pixel display technology, such as a CRT, that is in development? Video scalers are getting better all the time but it is nice to be able to watch SD and all other content in its original resolution.

Not likely. All signals will soon be digital, analog is on the phaseout. Not only is there no money in it, but US legislation requires products sold as 'TV' to have digital tuners.

None of which precludes including a good analog input and associated circuitry too. It's now expected that all TV devices should have a nice interface, menus, options, etc. all run by a computer inside. One that executes those operations by modifying the panel directly or the digitized signal data. Yes, all the analog ins on LCD/PDP are digitized ASAP.

What's the use making a device which has a digital input (likely), a digital processor path (certain), but not a digital output?

If you want the blur effect of the CRT's electron-beam bloom, just use a bloom filter in ffdshow or get some analog device to do it for you. Like a really long analog cable, etc.

Other than that, Sharp some time ago gave up the VGA analog interface on their LCD TVs, and would have probably given up the RCA analogs too if they didn't have to content with such an installed base of legacy devices.

Now, I use VGA for both my screens, one a 32" LCD. Analog interfaces can still be very useful, because digital ones sometimes don't work between devices, or one device (such as the video card) has a foolish port auto-disable that disables the secondary output on every reboot, if a digital device is not plugged in and turned on. Thank you, but I only use my 32" LCD TV at night, and won't be keeping it on all day, but it has to be disconnected to be moved to its day-rest position. And of course don't want to reboot every day.

But back to the origination. Analog output systems are dead, deader than a doornail. They won't be coming back, except in the feverish imaginations of underground sci-fi fans, who love watching those old films with the aliens or heroes twisting knobs on their gigantic computer-in-a-spacecraft stage mockups, with the hum of mercury-vapor stagelights and the rolling of the camera shutter, an intense and psychotic black-and-white world of monotonic nothingness. The voices shrill against the hollowed steel by drill, a glare averts the stare as the flashing coils exude lighting oils.

But back to the origination. Analog output systems are dead, deader than a doornail. They won't be coming back, except in the feverish imaginations of underground sci-fi fans, who love watching those old films with the aliens or heroes twisting knobs on their gigantic computer-in-a-spacecraft stage mockups, with the hum of mercury-vapor stagelights and the rolling of the camera shutter, an intense and psychotic black-and-white world of monotonic nothingness. The voices shrill against the hollowed steel by drill, a glare averts the stare as the flashing coils exude lighting oils.

^^^^^What???:confused: lol

If you want the blur effect of the CRT's electron-beam bloom, just use a bloom filter in ffdshow or get some analog device to do it for you. Like a really long analog cable, etc.

When I said "like a CRT" I didn't mean the analog nature of a CRT, I was purely referring to the dynamic pixel nature of a CRT. SD content is never going to go away, whether it be a digital or analog signal, you are still going to be sitting at 480 lines of resolution while playing Ocarina of Time or watching your favorite Bill Murray movie(assuming he doesn't come out with something better down the line). You can scale it up to 1920X1080 but you can't create lines of resolution that are not there. Unless you are saying that it is impossible to have a dynamic pixel display that is digital I don't really see what your point is.

I am saying that a physical device won't scale any better (actually much worse) than a mathematical scaling model inside a digital device (such as lanczos, bicubic). So long as your fixed-pixel display has sufficient resolution to avoid SDE, a proper math scaler will work fine.

Not only is there no need for the system you envision, but it will never be produced for various reasons which I won't go into here. Software scalers are nice and tunable; if you want to experiment then use them. They are the best that can possibly be made, or if they aren't you can program your own.

It is the certainty of a rectilinear fixed-pixel device that allows it to approach the theoretical maximum physical resolution. And it is the lack of certainty (blur) that prevents non-fixed pixel devices from ever reaching their spacial maxima. It also smooths out high-frequency noise and detail quite nicely, which is why many people prefer it for displaying the sub-standard signals they are so wont to watch.

This is really a fundamental design of our geometric spacial universe. There is no way around it. It is a rule from the almighty Designer.

Be happy with what you can buy: there will never be anything else, at least insofar as an alternative to fixed pixel grid. Buy the highest resolution you can afford and choose your scaler if you need it.

A better way to describe what I'm trying to say: if you want them all (different resolutions on a variable-pixel device), then you'll only get part of everything (you will never see the ideal sharpness of any one resolution).

But if you only want one (the native resolution on a fixed-pixel display), then you'll get all of it (100% of its resolution is visible).

Then you can use the best source signal, and if necessary a high-quality software scaler to idealize the signal delivered, and achieve the best of all worlds.

To put it another way, you can have one cake and eat it too, but if you want more of them then you get only a portion of each. But when we factor in the market as it exists now and is likely to exist within your lifetime, you have to choose between eating one cake or none at all.

OK, I can see what you are saying now. Its not really a question of being happy or unhappy with what I can buy, I was simple wondering if there was something in development. I agree that software scaling is nice, but I don't believe that scaling is better than watching something in its original resolution. It is clear that you feel that fixed pixel displays are superior to non-fixed pixel displays and I agree with that as far as fidelity while displaying a source with the same resolution, if we take into account what is currently available. With that in mind would you rather watch 640X480 content on a fixed pixel 640X480 display or a 1920X1080(or 1440X1080) display scaled with what ever software or hardware scaler you choose? If I am interpreting your last line correctly you would choose the 640X480 display, please correct me if I am wrong. I can't really see any high quality fixed pixel 640X480 displays coming out in the future, and that the lack of the ability to display SD content natively is where my original question comes from. As far as blur, you are referring to the current technologies available such as a CRT that have non-fixed pixel displays. Maybe it is not possible with current technology, but I don't see how you can say that it is impossible to make one that doesn't have blur in the future. Who knows you could have a display that can morph from one set resolution to another by detaching and joining display material, maybe I won't see it in my life time, but anything is possible.