Originally Posted by googleme7
wait, wait, wait, wait, STOP.
As has been discussed earlier in this thread, the death of the CRT was from the retailer end.
??? What does that mean? The death of any product is on the consumer
end. Provide one example of a retailer that wasn't stocking HD CRTs next to LCDs (when HD CRTS were still being manufactured)
Wal-Mart and Best Buy were hitting everyone hard by volume selling. Eventually, when they figured out that they could sell, store, ship, LCD and Plasma 2:1 over CRT, they scaled back. What that ended up doing was leaving a big opening in the mid-range tv market. ie, the $200 to under a $1000 market.
Again, ???. What retailer doesn't try to "volume sell?" Stores respond to demand. They will sell whatever volume the consumer demands. People wanted flat panels over big CRTs. Whether that was a wise decision or not, considering the poor quality of first generation LCDs, is debateable.
I'm sure something happened like the big dawgs at Walmart and Best Buy calling up (insert cheap manufacturer here) and making a deal like this:
"we will order xyz amount of your **** product if we can get it at a ridiculously low price. It will still be profitable to you, because we will order so many."
Enter the 26-32" LCD's. The manufacturers realized they couldn't make Plasma for such a low price. They went LCD because it's a cheap product to make.
I assume by "I'm sure" you mean "I am speculating", so I won't even bother debating your imaginary scenario. You're either agreeing with my original point that shipping and storage costs play a big role in the cost of a product, or asserting some weird timewarp theory that retailers tell manufacturers what new products to make. LCD sets were on the drawing boards before
big box retailers placed orders. Of course manufacturers are aware of retailer costs, and design their products to suit the seller's needs. That again reinforces my original point.
It has nothing to do with service costs and service calls. Are you kidding?
explain to me how a manufacturer makes money on service calls under warranty.
CRT has been proven to be more reliable over the years, so if anything, Sony was losing money because they weren't getting enough service calls.
Old style 27" and under curved screen standard definition CRTs and widescreen 30"+ HD CRTs are two entirely different animals. It's a whole new set of manufacturing difficulties presented by these big sets. Even the best TV makers like Sony had trouble.
I would not be surprised to see the LCD's die at around 5-7 years.
I am still trying to figure out how a bulb for a 42" rear projection LCD can last average 2-5 years, but these flat panels are supposed to last 10-15 years at the same screen size. Based on what? The little 17" computer monitors that have been around that long?
What is the point of comparing two totally different technologies and making reliability assumptions?
If you want conspiracy, I think it looks more like the manufacturers are happy to get out of CRT because they are known to last 10-15 years on average, and they want people to have to buy a new tv every 5-7 years. Couple that with the fact that they can sell and ship them 2:1 over CRT. No doubt they are making a little more over CRT, but I will be waiting to see how people feel about LCD 4-5 years from now.
Even CRTs have electronic failures. Yes, the tube may last forever, but chips wear out over time due to stress and heat cycles. Every manufacturer wants to sell more product, and one way to do that is to innovate more quickly. CRT technology had been pushed to its limit. LCD and plasma has more room to grow, as evidenced by the rapid increase in features and picture quality over the past few generations.
I bet you will be hard pressed to find people on this forum that have an HDTV older than 5 years that isn't CRT based.
Yeah, but prolly cause it's a CRT forum?