Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Flat Screen Monitors Sales to Reign This Year

CowboyNeal posted about 12 years ago | from the lcd-versus-crt dept.

Hardware 282

swimfastom writes "Yahoo! News reports that sales of flat-panel computer monitors will top sales of bulkier traditional models this year, signifying a long-expected turning point in the computer monitor market. Flat-panel screen sales are expected to grow at a 49-percent compounded annual growth rate from 2001 through 2006, giving them an 82-percent share of the desktop computer market."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

postus firsticus (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 12 years ago | (#4517684)


NOT! (5, Insightful)

Lumpy (12016) | about 12 years ago | (#4517688)

Until 19" flatscreens are available for sane prices they will not sell as well as they predict. the 15" models are ok priced ($299.00 compared to $100.00 for a 15 inch monitor is a tough one) but anything larger is nuts and any model that is fast enough for gaming get's up in price really fast.

and then you have that nasty problem with not running at the native resolutions...

Re:NOT! (0)

btornado (612847) | about 12 years ago | (#4517709)

Yeah from what I've heard LCDs are not very good for fast games such as FPS because the liquid crystals can't "turn on or off" as fast as a CRT can. Until they get better for gaming and the prices for a 17-19" LCD come down, I probably won't be getting one.

Of course, I may be totally wrong :(

Re:NOT! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 12 years ago | (#4517728)

Gamers who use LCDs fool themselves into believing they can't see the ghosting.

Re:NOT! (3, Funny)

King of the World (212739) | about 12 years ago | (#4517914)

Actually gamers fool themselves into believing it's FSAAx8.

Re:NOT! (5, Insightful)

Telastyn (206146) | about 12 years ago | (#4517734)

Most computer sales are to businesses and newbs though. At work they won't get >19" and my grandma can't see over 800x600 anyways. What will happen is that computers are getting cheaper, but people (read: businesses) will still pay $1500 per machine. Once Dell and HPaq start bundling 17" lcd's with their (now cheaper) boxes, the LCD sales will grow alot.

what ?!?! (5, Insightful)

Archfeld (6757) | about 12 years ago | (#4517856)

I am the PC tech for a large BUSINESS, 17" is too small, we order on 19" or larger. For business the LCD's are nice and easy on your eyes, for gaming they just plain suck, slow blurry and running at low end resolutions. I'll stick with my 21" .23 monitor at 1200X1600.

Re:what ?!?! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 12 years ago | (#4517908)

If you're the PC tech, it's not that large a business, is it? ;p

Re:what ?!?! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 12 years ago | (#4517957)

Maybe they run unix and only need one tech.

Re:what ?!?! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 12 years ago | (#4518019)

Unix on PC's? Tell me another one.

Re:what ?!?! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 12 years ago | (#4517959)

PC Tech?

What the hell are you on about?

Re:NOT! (1)

King of the World (212739) | about 12 years ago | (#4517946)

my grandma can't see over 800x600 anyways
The resolution only has something to do with the on-screen size when,
  1. You're using 2D
  2. and you're using a popular although crappy desktop system that still uses pixel-based layout.

If you're not doing both of those then you're fine. Which leaves me doing work with, wel, er...

Totally agree (was: NOT!) (3)

Rev.LoveJoy (136856) | about 12 years ago | (#4517770)

So what if one more 'research agency' (DisplaySearch) says 'This'll be the year of the LCD, really!' Big deal.

Maybe we should go back to reporting sales statistics after they actually happen rather than the reverse?

-- RLJ

low refresh rate (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 12 years ago | (#4517777)

the refresh rate of LCD monitors is only about 40 hertz.. pretty awful if you ask me. if you go to a store showing off different monitors (where they're all hooked up to the same computer playing a movie) the differences between LCD and CRT are very, very obvious.

Re:NOT! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 12 years ago | (#4517784)

I bought twin 17" LCD's for my senior year of college. I figured I was going out into the real world soon, so I should get some equipment to help me max out my development time. Of course, what I mostly do with them is play Unreal Tournament :D And they're fine. If you get a computer that can run them at the max resolution, then you won't have any problems with the "native" resolutions.

BTW I go to Boviyan University in Chalmers, VA. It has an excellent CS program, and the "weather" is great down here ;)

Sales Power of Experience (3, Insightful)

kryonD (163018) | about 12 years ago | (#4517817)

I'm not so sure on that one. I've helped alot of people put together computers and in some cases, they had used a flat panel at work and were willing to pay the rediculous price for the monitor since I got the rest of the PC for them so cheap. You can also get E-machines with 17in flat panels from Best Buy for under $1000. I have also used these flat panel displays at work and it is damned tempting. The screen is much sharper and brighter. However, I'm in love with my $350 19in that I've had for a year and a half, so I personally will wait. The question is, how many home users(read mom,dad, grandma, etc...) who only use a PC for IM and email actually have a 19in or larger monitor? The article may have some validity.

Sales in DOLLARS not UNITS (5, Insightful)

shirai (42309) | about 12 years ago | (#4517911)

Everyone should take not that this article probably refers to sales in "dollars" and not sales in actual "units." This is why we barely see or know anybody who has a flat panel display.


Best thing about LCD monitors (2)

Gerry Gleason (609985) | about 12 years ago | (#4517932)

This wasn't mentioned in the LCD roundup the other day, but the really big pro on the LCD side is that it doesn't look like something to climb on top of to my 2 year old. We use our "17 KDS in the living room, and it is just perfect for our application.

Yes, the >17 are still way to expensive, and I would be happy to pay a few hundred less for a one the size I have now, but the difference in cost is now small enough to justify the advantages (depending on importance to you, of course).

Re:NOT! (1)

BESTouff (531293) | about 12 years ago | (#4517961)

Guess what ? There was a day when even 14" 800x600 flatscreens were really expensive, and not that bright. Rest assured your sane priced 19" will come.

Re:NOT! (1)

DrinkDr.Pepper (620053) | about 12 years ago | (#4518025)

Has anyone considered shipping costs? If I buy a CRT from an online vendor I might be able to save money when you factor in shipping costs vs. an LCD.

I don't buy it (4, Interesting)

silicon_synapse (145470) | about 12 years ago | (#4517691)

I don't see it happening. There has to be another alternative. LCDs just don't look as good as CRTs. They just cannot display colors as well. Hard core gamers, graphic artists, etc. will demand better. What ever happened to those really thin CRTs I heard about a while back?

Re:I don't buy it (3, Interesting)

mindstrm (20013) | about 12 years ago | (#4517750)

Well.. I'm a fairly hardcore gamer.

The 15.1" LCD on my laptop is HELLISHLY good looking.

Gimme a break.You can talk about latency and whatnot, but I guarantee a gamer won't notice a degradation in his gameplay due to a good LCD screen nowadays. I would rather look at my LCD anyday; especially when rendering systems take into account the sub-pixel control they can use.

As for colors.. yes, that's an issue, and one that will affect graphic artists for sure... but only those who need to move color into the real world (film, print). Those doing computer only will have to put up with display mechanisms that use lcds anyway.. so it's moot.

Re:I don't buy it (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 12 years ago | (#4517780)

Ditto. 18" SGI here and it rocks. Colors are way crisper than a CRT.

Re:I don't buy it (5, Interesting)

Rev.LoveJoy (136856) | about 12 years ago | (#4517801)

As for colors.. yes, that's an issue, and one that will affect graphic artists for sure... but only those who need to move color into the real world (film, print). Those doing computer only will have to put up with display mechanisms that use lcds anyway.. so it's moot.
That's a really good point about color. One of the areas where I have been buying flat screens like there's not tomorrow is for our CAD people. The fact that flat screens are geometrically correct makes all the difference in the world when you spend your day drafting on one. Color doesn't come into it (who cares what color your lines are in AutoCAD? you can specify the plot colors to be whatever you like!)

-- RLJ

Re:I don't buy it (1)

trevinofunk (576660) | about 12 years ago | (#4517791)

On some older LCD"s this is true, but I swear, every two weeks I hear about some new Flatscreen technology that will bring about the domination.

I think that we are witnessing the death rattle of the CRT.

Re:I don't buy it (2)

RatBastard (949) | about 12 years ago | (#4517805)

Most computer people are not artists or high-end gamers. Most people want something that they can do wordprocessing on, surf the web with, etc... that won't take over their desk. For most users today's LCD displays are fine.

Who cares? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 12 years ago | (#4517692)

Pie is better than some crappy flat screen monitor.


If I cannot have (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | about 12 years ago | (#4517696)

If I cannot have a laptop attached to the monitor for that price, who cares!

well, if you go by sales alone... (5, Insightful)

eupheric (618980) | about 12 years ago | (#4517697)

flat panels, in general, cost a lot more than traditional CRTs, so "measuring by dollars" isn't necessarily the best way of calculating market share. it's like saying that more people saw "the waterboy" than "gone with the wind," just because it made more money in the theater.

Re:well, if you go by sales alone... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 12 years ago | (#4517799)

mod parent up! this should be the final word in this whole discussion.

Re:well, if you go by sales alone... (1)

Tuffnut (618438) | about 12 years ago | (#4517807)

If you actually read the article you'd know that there was nothing having to do with monetary value of the monitors, but simply the amount of specific monitor types being purchased by consumers is what they were counting. i.e. X sold 4 LCDs, Y sold 1 CRT.

did you read the article? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 12 years ago | (#4517839)

dammit There are still expected to be more traditional monitors -- which like televisions work with cathode ray tubes -- sold than flat-panel monitors until 2004. But measuring by dollars, flat-panel screens will overtake cathode ray, or CRT, monitors this year, DisplaySearch said.

Re:well, if you go by sales alone... (1)

snowlick (536497) | about 12 years ago | (#4517832)

If they're saying that Flatpanels will make more money, then this has everything to do with market share. More money == more power. Since the cost of manufacturing these things is low, the winner is the flatpanel maker. Also, in a related theory, more money == more problems.

Movies and Games (1)

56 (527333) | about 12 years ago | (#4517706)

I remember that earlier models had problems drawing fast-paced things such as movies and games correctly. I haven't been keeping track, have they fixed those issues?

I wrote flatscreen monitors off when I was on the market a year ago for a monitor as their price was so high - hopefully this has come down since then.

Re:Movies and Games (2)

the_other_one (178565) | about 12 years ago | (#4517833)

I have an NEC MultiSync LCD 1700v in front of me. I have noticed no problems with either movies or games. Also the viewable area is almost as good as the 19" ViewSonic Monster that sits beside it.

Re:Movies and Games (2)

be-fan (61476) | about 12 years ago | (#4517955)

I've got a new Dell LCD in front of me, and the only artifacts I notice is slight blurring of text when moving a window quickly around the desktop. For stuff like games and movies (that aren't as sharp as text) I have noticed absolutely zero artifacts. DVD's (even high action ones) look incredible on this thing.

Seems a little slow to me. (2, Interesting)

Capt. DrunkenBum (123453) | about 12 years ago | (#4517712)

I have been saying for the past couple of months that flat panels will replace CRTs for monitors within 2 years. I think thay are being VERY conservative, it their estimates.

Not a moment too soon (5, Funny)

darkov (261309) | about 12 years ago | (#4517714)

I have two 21" Sony monitors on my desktop. My desk makes eerie straining noises whn I put my glass hands on the keyboard and a have a tan just on my face.

It's a worry.

btw (2)

darkov (261309) | about 12 years ago | (#4517749)

I don't have glass hands, it's a typo.

Re:btw (1)

word munger (550251) | about 12 years ago | (#4517820)

I'm just curious.... what were you trying to type?

Re:btw (2)

dimator (71399) | about 12 years ago | (#4517822)

What about a bucket and a blowhorn [] ?

Re:Not a moment too soon (1, Offtopic)

aardvarkjoe (156801) | about 12 years ago | (#4517810)

Yeah, that was off topic. Don't try to divert the discussion into one about monitors, darkov!

Re:Not a moment too soon (1, Funny)

stevejsmith (614145) | about 12 years ago | (#4517829)

If I gave you fifty cents, could I touch you? Just touching somebody who has a setup like that would definitely be the highlight of my life.

Re:Not a moment too soon (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 12 years ago | (#4517927)

do you speak english? or are you just part of the next wave of intelligent american high school graduates :) what glass hands and tan face have to do with your desk or your sony monitors eludes me.

The Actual Report.. (4, Informative)

__Maad__ (263535) | about 12 years ago | (#4517722)

The actual report that the Yahoo article is talking about is here [] . Anyone else here think this is a little premature? I don't know a single person who has an LCD panel or is planning to buy one anytime soon. Everybody seems to be upgrading to nice big CRTs (now happily down in price) instead.

Re:The Actual Report.. (1)

bottlecap (17692) | about 12 years ago | (#4517865)

I agree with you, nobody I know is even considering downsizing or paying the ridiculous amount for a large lcd. I just replaced my aging 17" with a 21" trinitron for $300CAD and I love it!!! How does paying $1000 for a 19" lcd make sense? Only place I see it would is if you REALLY have no space on your desk ...

Price showdown (4, Interesting)

davisshaver (583015) | about 12 years ago | (#4517723)

Has anyone calculated the price per inch of flat screen monitors and of CRT's. It would be interesting to compare those rates to monitors 6 months ago.

I am not surprised at all (5, Informative)

geddes (533463) | about 12 years ago | (#4517744)

I do tech support for my college, and at the beginning of the year as I went from room to room in the dorms to help people set up and configure thier computers, I noticed that about 90% of them had new flat-panel monitors. Most were 15'', but they had them. Not just the iMacs either, the kids with Dells _all_ had Dell branded flat screens. This was a huge change from last year, where 90% of the incoming freshmen had brand new computers with CRT monitors.

The rise of the flat panel is very good for colleges, not just in terms of power-saving costs but also in terms of space. The CRTs just take up a lot of space on the small college desks. My CRT/keyboard prevents me from even having room for a notebook and pen to do math problem sets on - I need to go to the library to do any non-computer work. Whenever I go support someone with an LCD I eye it with envy, and the day approaches when I will be forced to get one for myself :-)

Re:I am not surprised at all (1)

davisshaver (583015) | about 12 years ago | (#4517765)

Did your school give any special rates if you bought from dell? my cousin goes to Penn State and he got something like 5 or 10 percent off any computers he ordered there.

Re:I am not surprised at all (1)

geddes (533463) | about 12 years ago | (#4517853)

Yeah, we have a deal with Dell and a deal with Apple, they give thier education discount rates to all the students we refer to them.

The default on all of Dell's setups now is a flat-screen, and if you are buying from thier website you have to deselect the lcd monitor and specifically select a CRT. With apple of course, you can only get an iMac in flatscreen (it is interesting to note that though several students did come in with nice new iMacs, none of them came in with the cheaper , CRT-Based eMacs)

Re:I am not surprised at all (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 12 years ago | (#4517819)

If you sleep in bed with another guy, this also saves space in college.

what about laptops? (5, Funny)

nevershower (587070) | about 12 years ago | (#4517748)

I bet LCDs have a slighty higher percentage of the laptop market.

I don't have one, don't want one. (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 12 years ago | (#4517751)

Most people say the biggest advantage of the LCD screen is that it is compact, but most people who I've seen using them put the screen so it is as close to them as a traditional CRT. That leaves a large empty spot behind the LCD that they don't see.

Re:I don't have one, don't want one. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 12 years ago | (#4517844)

Yes, but you can use that space to store your textbooks.

This just in (1)

ekrout (139379) | about 12 years ago | (#4517755)

Flat Screen Monitor Sales to Reign This Year; Smart Computer Users Stick with CRTs, Cite Sub-par 25-50HZ Refresh Rate of LCD Diodes

-- Eric Krout []

Re:This just in (0, Offtopic)

Robert1 (513674) | about 12 years ago | (#4517836)

Slashdot Poster Attempts to Sound Intelligent by Pulling Numbers Out of Ass; Readers Not Suprised, Poster Seen Standing Up in Anger and Promptly Sitting Back Down -- Panting.

Re:This just in (1, Troll)

ekrout (139379) | about 12 years ago | (#4517886)

Your wish [] is my command (even though you're an arrogant know-nothing prick).

I dont' think so (1)

Vilim (615798) | about 12 years ago | (#4517759)

flatscreens havea higher price than CRT's and lower quality. Until they can bridge the price/quality gap there is no way they can compete

define terms (1)

Urox (603916) | about 12 years ago | (#4517868)

There is a difference between flatscreens and flat PANEL monitors.

Re:I dont' think so (2)

furiousgeorge (30912) | about 12 years ago | (#4517905)

yeah - you're right. i guess all those people buying them are just confused.

Re:I dont' think so (2)

u19925 (613350) | about 12 years ago | (#4517979)

flatscreens havea higher price than CRT's and lower quality

However, they do have lots of advantages too:

Smaller size, quiet (i can hear the sound of many CRT monitors and TVs), less power, easy to move and rotate, no startup time, no need to degauss, no flicker, environmentally safe, less hazardous when breaks, less heat, no geometry problems and so on.

Gaming (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 12 years ago | (#4517764)

For gamers, price isn't SUCH huge concern for the screens, but the ghosting itself. Sure, the ghosting for these guys are getting better, but still aren't nearly close to what a CRT can do. Also, refresh rates are very poor compared to CRTs, so playing a fast paced game with a high end video card doesn't look as good when the screen is tearing (most LCDs are at 60 or 75 hz, my monitor will do 120hz at those gaming resolutions). Sure, not everyone is a gamer, but gamers are finicky and won't convert unless the solution is perfect. Nothing worse than killing someone and listening to their complaints about their low FPS system lag.

five to one??? (5, Insightful)

sssmashy (612587) | about 12 years ago | (#4517766)

By 2006, the group said, flat-panel screens will outsell CRT monitors by a ratio of five to one.

That's a pretty optimistic prediction, because the current price ratio is about 5 CRT monitors for the cost of 1 flat-panel. Common sense tell us that the price of a flat-panel screen would have to drop by about 60%-70% before the majority of consumers would consider buying forking out the extra cash to save 1 or 2 cubic feet of desk space.

Re:five to one??? (1)

Patik (584959) | about 12 years ago | (#4518008)

the price of a flat-panel screen would have to drop by about 60%-70% before the majority of consumers would consider buying forking out the extra cash to save 1 or 2 cubic feet of desk space.
Not everyone buys it just for the space. I bought one for the lack of strain on my eyes. At work, a couple hours at the CRT would give me a nice headache, while I could sit at my laptop for hours at a time without any strain. I decided to get an LCD for my new desktop for just this reason. It cost a pretty-penny, but considering you spend 100% of your PC time staring at the monitor, it would be stupid to buy something that hurts your eyes.

Not until they become cheaper (1, Insightful)

stevejsmith (614145) | about 12 years ago | (#4517772)

Personally, I wouldn't buy a flat screen until I could get a 19" one for under $499. I have lots of deskspace and another desk is always cheaper than the price difference between a CRT and LCD. I'd be interested, in the Slashdot community, how many people use LCDs, and for those who don't, what would the price/size have to fall/rise to that you would buy one?

Re:Not until they become cheaper (1)

DrinkDr.Pepper (620053) | about 12 years ago | (#4517968)

What happens when you run out of space to put another desk? Moving to a new/larger building costs more than buying an LCD.

Re:Not until they become cheaper (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 12 years ago | (#4518045)

Moving to a new/larger building costs more than buying an LCD.

Do you have any links to back up that statement?

waiting.. (1)

D4Vr4nt (615027) | about 12 years ago | (#4517773)

LCD's are cool.. Yet I'm still stuck with CRTs cause LCD's aren't cool enough. I run dual monitor setup 21+19, and granted it's heavy, but the quality can't be matched on LCD's (to the best of my knowledge).

The only thing I'd really like is to have dual widescreen LCD's, which are just taking off lately (samsung released a 24" Widescreen LCD yet costs something like 5k). If they make a 40" LCD (yes, yes plasma, I mean monitor / highrez), I'm so there.

I figure at least 3 more years till it's totally mainstream.

LCDs will become cheaper (1)

Whyrph (620050) | about 12 years ago | (#4517778)

IIRC, LCD monitors, if produced in the same volume as CRTs, would actually be cheaper.

Flat PANEL not Flat SCREEN (2, Informative)

Proc6 (518858) | about 12 years ago | (#4517781)

Dammit, you and Ted Waitt need to figure this out once and for all. Any monitor [] can have a flat "screen". Flatscreen CRT's have been around forever. Look at most any Sony Trinitron. Flat PANELS refer to LCDs.

Re:Flat PANEL not Flat SCREEN (2, Interesting)

Door-opening Fascist (534466) | about 12 years ago | (#4517972)

Trinitrons techincally aren't flat. The external curvature of the screen might be zero, but Sony introduces a slight internal curvature to minimize edge distortions. See the FD Trinitron Technology Tour [] website for details.

The best part is... (2, Insightful)

redragon (161901) | about 12 years ago | (#4517797)

The best part about this report is that it will hopefully kick some people in the pants and get them to make more, better, and cheaper LCD monitors (anything less than 1600x1200 and I'm not interested). This will in turn mean that there is more competition in the market, meaning lower prices, meaning more people adopting.

Seriously, if I could get a 19" LCD for $200-300 more than a 19" CRT with the same resolution, I'd do it. I know that price point is a long way off, but if you've got lots of companies making the parts, and serious competition, it could happen (closer to their 2006 time frame). Anyway, LCD's are so much easier on the eyes.

Just a thought...

Depends on the market (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 12 years ago | (#4517800)

I wonder if they have limited the research to certain markets.
For the home market, here in this part of the world at least, I have seen almost zero presence of flat-screen displays. Plus they are not really suited for games. Not to mention the price tag!

I expect this growth to be in business areas, where desk space is very limited. Our offices have almost all been converted over to flat-screen LCD's. And for this kind of work, they are perfect.

woot!! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 12 years ago | (#4517818)


ppppppSegmentation fault (core dumped)

But everyone wants a flat screen! (-1, Offtopic)

RJWolf (576582) | about 12 years ago | (#4517823)

All the better to enjoy some of the quality images [] the internet has to offer...

Depends.... (3, Interesting)

Wister285 (185087) | about 12 years ago | (#4517835)

I think that this is a good thing, but flat panel technology still has to improve drastically for me to use it over my nice Samsung 955df. The newest flat panel I have used was a laptop screen, but I have seen some of the nice flat panels at CompUSA. From my experience, view angles are still a big issue for me to upgrade. While more people site in front of their computer, I like using my monitor with my TV Tuner and I don't want to sit in front of my monitor all the time. Speaking of 19" monitors, I can't take out a loan to buy a 19" flat panel.

The laptop monitors and flat panels that I have use are not highly advanced like CRTs are, but this will come in time. They don't like resolutions other than their native resolution, they don't have nice full colors all the time, and they some panels still have ghosting! This is all ok for web browsing, but for image editing, web design, programming, anything to do with graphical design, and gaming flat panels are not adeqaute for my need. Maybe I am just bitter because my laptop doesn't go over 800x600 unless I want to scroll the actual screen. :-)

Flat panels surely have their advantages. The technology just needs to mature a little.

I'm sorry to say it but... (2, Funny)

AlbanySux (248858) | about 12 years ago | (#4517852)

The past is not a real indicator of the future. If it was I would be making $60,000 a year instead of fight battling with a bunch of people with 4+ years of experience to get a level 1 help desk job. Flat panel monitors are just too damn expensive if you want something large.

The article is right because... (5, Insightful)

rayd75 (258138) | about 12 years ago | (#4517899)

Most computer sales are to corporations. Home users only account for something like 20% of Dell or Gateway's sales. Corporations are interested in the presumably increased life of LCDs, their reduced power consumption, space savings, and the effects of CRTs on their employees' eyes (People sue for everything after all). I work for a medium-sized credit union (which, unlike banks, are non-profit) with ~250 seats and we are already to the point of being 30% flat panels. By next year we will be over 70%. I love not pulling a muscle every time I have to swap a display out.

someone better get their terms right (5, Informative)

frovingslosh (582462) | about 12 years ago | (#4517900)

There is an awful ambiguity here between flat screen displays such as LCD displays, and flat screen monitors, which are still big bulky CRT based monitors, but have a flat screen rather than the slightly curved screens on earlier CRT monitors. Many manufacturers, including mainstream names like NEC and Viewsonic [] market Flat Screen Monitors . If these are getting into the count of expected sales then of course they will top sales of bulkier traditional models this year, but it will not do much to make space available on your desk.

Not just yet for me (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 12 years ago | (#4517903)

still to expensive. I'm not buying an LCD until i can get a 21 inch display for a reasonable price.

I already own a nice CRT... (2, Interesting)

Nyktos (198946) | about 12 years ago | (#4517910)

So logically the next thing I would buy would be a fancy schmancy flat panel.

Are these figures skewed for reasons like this?

More analysts predictions? (1)

Neumann (240442) | about 12 years ago | (#4517913)

You know I would love to see the accuracy of these "analysts" predictions. When I talk machines with my friends, flat-panel monitors arent usually mentioned, but 21-inch monitors are. Its not worth the $$. (You could buy a lot more ram for the difference)

Re:More analysts predictions? (2)

ShavenYak (252902) | about 12 years ago | (#4517981)

When I talk machines with my friends, flat-panel monitors arent usually mentioned, but 21-inch monitors are.

Among non-geeks (most of my friends) flat-panels are more highly admired, for their sleekness and "hi-tech" look.

Its not worth the $$. (You could buy a lot more ram for the difference)

Sure, but I have half a gig of RAM now, and I've never noticed my system starving for more. I do notice slight headaches and eyestrain after looking at my 17" CRT at home for more than an hour or so. I'm considering a flat-panel for that reason. If it saves me from needing eyeglasses or contacts, it'll nearly pay for itself.

Just pointing out that anecdotal evidence goes both ways. The analysts are probably just going off sales forecasts from manufacturers, though, so who knows how close they'll be?

They already have 100% share of the Media market (3, Interesting)

serutan (259622) | about 12 years ago | (#4517916)

Have you noticed that in every recent movie and tv show, and every commercial for any kind of product whatsoever, almost every visible computer monitor is a flat-screen? Walk around in the real world and they are far from universal, but in media-land EVERYBODY has one.

Their product placement investment must be through the roof!

Re:They already have 100% share of the Media marke (2)

ShavenYak (252902) | about 12 years ago | (#4518001)

Walk around in the real world and they are far from universal, but in media-land EVERYBODY has one.

That's because everyone in media-land is rich and attractive, and we all want to be just like them.

Re:They already have 100% share of the Media marke (1)

davisshaver (583015) | about 12 years ago | (#4518014)

the best example of this is the 5 flat screen monitor set up in sword fish.

What about the quality? (5, Interesting)

deragon (112986) | about 12 years ago | (#4517920)

Anybody got quality concerns? I have never seen an LCD screen which colors come and crisp display come close to my CRT. And what I hate the most about LCD, its that the colors change with the angle of viewing; a little slight tint change when you move your head. Its very anoying. Some people say that this only occur with passive LCD screens, but then stores only sell passive LCD screens because I never saw an LCD without this tint changing effect.

They better substantially increase the quality of the displays before I buy one, and I hope keeping my CRT at work until the quality improves.

But, I agree that business might buy them for saving power, space and avoid the "bad" radiations emitted by CRTs.

Evidence (1)

sameb (532621) | about 12 years ago | (#4517937)

I've got myself a Samsung 171P. I bought it early this year, mainly because my desk was too small to fit a CRT monitor. Since I spend so much of my day/night in front of a computer, it is *well* worth the cost to get a beautiful, sleek, monitor. I can't tell you how happy I am with this monitor. Everyone that sees it (and cares slightly about computers) comments on how awesome it looks and how wonderful the picture looks.

No real amazing fabuluous story here -- just a review from an owner of an LCD monitor. I'd give it 3 thumbs up if I had three thumbs.

21in CRTs (2)

asv108 (141455) | about 12 years ago | (#4517949)

I was in the market for a larger flatscreen since my 4 year old Hitach superscan elite CRT was showing its age. After looking around, there was no way I was going to pay $2000 for a 21in LCD when good 21in CRT's [] are available on ebay for less than $300. I ended up purchasing a Sony CDP-G520P [] at NewEgg [] . Its flat. its 21in, and its silver so it will match everything else since silver seems to be dominate color these days. Whenever someone walks in to my room [] the first thing the comment on is the monitor. Stick with CRT unlesss you can deal with a 15in LCD.

Not for me until the price is EQUAL CRTs (2)

Geeyzus (99967) | about 12 years ago | (#4517970)

I will NOT own a flat screen monitor, until the price is the same as CRTs.

- I don't care about the power consumption
- I SO don't care about saving desk space... my desk is built to handle a bigger monitor anyway
- CRTs look just as good as LCD monitors, IMO, if not better

Why spend any more? I have a 21" monitor, and there is no way in hell I could afford a 21" LCD. Even a 19" LCD probably costs more than what I can get a 21" for.

For people that want flat screen monitors, I say go for it, but it is nothing but a waste of money...


Sorry, nay-sayers (3, Informative)

Snarfvs Maximvs (28022) | about 12 years ago | (#4517984)

I got my 17" LCD a little under a year ago and am sold. I don't play games enough to care if there are any artifacts due to "refresh rate". When reading/coding, it's easier on my eyes, doesn't flicker, and is WAY more convenient.

I will NEVER buy another CRT.

Check your references (4, Insightful)

indros13 (531405) | about 12 years ago | (#4517987)

The supplier of this news to Reuters is the DisplaySearch [] firm, "The Worldwide Leader in FPD Market Research and Consulting." Hello, they make their money offering information and marketing data to help sell more flat panel displays. Not really surprising that they'd release this kind of economic news--free advertising anyone?

compactness (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 12 years ago | (#4517998)

I noticed a few people said that LCD's are more expensive and worse quality than CRT's, but they are more compact, so they sell.

This got me thinking. Cellphones are worse quality than landed lines, and more expensive, but they are compact, and they sell (and people use them at home). Laptops are slower and more expensive than desktops, and they're hard to type on, and the mouse sucks, but they're compact, and they sell (even in the home). Music CD's have a horrendous markup, but they're compact, and they sell. MP3 players sound worse than CD's, and flash memory is expensive, and you have to upload all the songs (which is the same work as burning a cd), but they're compact, and they sell.

It seems like compactness is the ultimate feature. But then why do so many people drive SUV's?

Refresh Rates for Gamin (4, Informative)

nilstar (412094) | about 12 years ago | (#4518013)

Prices will fall that is inevitable, but for the gamer market (which is many, many people) - you need a screen that can refresh fast enough. Current "cheap" LCDs can't do this - a refresh rate of 40 ms is common. But, realistically you need 25ms.... have you ever played Quake on an LCD with a refresh of even ~30ms - it is wishy washy to say the least!

Fast refreshing LCD monitors won't be cheap for a while.

Flat panel monitors only or Laptops too? (3, Insightful)

u19925 (613350) | about 12 years ago | (#4518017)

Are they counting only monitors or laptops also (since they include flat screen monitor)? If they count laptop monitors, then obviously the sales will be larger than CRT for simple reason that the laptop monitors cannot be reused while CRTs can be reused.

LCDs (3, Interesting)

be-fan (61476) | about 12 years ago | (#4518021)

There is a funny thing about LCDs. The desktop LCD market is a bit behind the laptop one in screen quality. My laptop has a 1600x1200 15" screen, and it has perhaps the most perfect image (color aside) I've sever seen. At 133 dpi, text is rendered more than one pixel wide, which improves quality immensely. I've yet find a desktop LCD, however, that hits that high a DPI. Which is a shame, because high-DPI LCDs are just the thing for people who stare at text all day (a large percentage of computer users!)

Headline is wrong. (1)

stickb0y (260670) | about 12 years ago | (#4518024)

"Flat screen" monitors are not the same as "flat panel" monitors. "Flat screen" includes those huge, bulky, traditional CRTs that have (surprise!) geometrically flat screens.

"Flat panel" refers to monitors that are geometrically flat and also are relatively thin (LCDs, plasma displays, etc.).

Not in my house.... (2)

_ph1ux_ (216706) | about 12 years ago | (#4518026)

not on my new salary in the post dot com era. although i am thankful for my job - and my 21" crt that I was able to buy when work and money was plentiful.

Smaller Cubes!!! (1)

sunbane (146740) | about 12 years ago | (#4518056)

Hooray! Think how much smaller our cubes can be with a flat panel monitor!

(Now if we can just eliminate the people!)

A little history repeating itself (3, Insightful)

interstellar_donkey (200782) | about 12 years ago | (#4518057)

I remember sometime back the lust I had in my heart for one of those new, fancy 17" monitors. There were occasionally rumors or adverts of something larger. But 17" was the holy grail of geekness above the 14-15" myself and everyone I knew had.

"Someday, it'll be afforadable" I thought to myself. That someday came in the late 90s. So I got one. Of course, I liked it.

Flat panels are the same way. Do I want one? Yes. Will I eventually buy one? Yes. Will I spend 700-1500 for a good quality one right now? Not on your life.

If these industry experts really belive that it will pass up CRTs this year, then they really have to change the pricing structure on them.

In the meantime, I'm very happy with my current 19" NEC, in black, which looks dang cool and cost me $250.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?