You can't make 1080p CRT's that's the point. 1080i was 720p, that was the maximum limit of an HD CRT which used different technology than regular CRT's.
I still have several. They are very good for being heavy and making white noise.
Bullshit. A normal gaming monitor around 2005 would run 1600x1200 at 85hz, that's 200 more lines of vertical resolution than 1080p. A high end gaming monitor like a 24" widescreen trinitron would do 1920x1200 at well over 100hz or 2048x1536 at 85hz, higher than "2k" is today.
And that was for monitors built in 2004.
LCDs are such an unbelievably shitty technology that's taken twenty years for them to just barely start catching up to CRTs in terms of resolution. Response time and image quality are still down the toilet.
It's just pathetic that you have to lie this badly.
A 24" CRT monitor. Yeah, that's pretty fucking high-end alright. Besides still not believing you on the stats, how much more expensive than the computer do you think that monitor typically was? Four times? Ten times? I'm sure you're gonna tell me that in 2005 you could buy one from Wal-Mart for $50.
Considering how long gamers have been obsessing about refresh rate and resolution in that time period, CRT's would not have gone away if you were right, which you're not.
You can't make 1080p CRT's that's the point. 1080i was 720p, that was the maximum limit of an HD CRT which used different technology than regular CRT's.
I still have several. They are very good for being heavy and making white noise.
I think 1080i basically cheated using the Interlace method that CRTs used for years, doing half the screen at once.
If you don't like them, I understand, but I do. =)
Plasma and LCD TVs used 1080i to cheat for a while before true 1080p became the norm
that's what I thought, thank you =)
Bullshit. A normal gaming monitor around 2005 would run 1600x1200 at 85hz, that's 200 more lines of vertical resolution than 1080p. A high end gaming monitor like a 24" widescreen trinitron would do 1920x1200 at well over 100hz or 2048x1536 at 85hz, higher than "2k" is today.
And that was for monitors built in 2004.
LCDs are such an unbelievably shitty technology that's taken twenty years for them to just barely start catching up to CRTs in terms of resolution. Response time and image quality are still down the toilet.
It's just pathetic that you have to lie this badly.
A 24" CRT monitor. Yeah, that's pretty fucking high-end alright. Besides still not believing you on the stats, how much more expensive than the computer do you think that monitor typically was? Four times? Ten times? I'm sure you're gonna tell me that in 2005 you could buy one from Wal-Mart for $50.
Considering how long gamers have been obsessing about refresh rate and resolution in that time period, CRT's would not have gone away if you were right, which you're not.