• cubism_pitta@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    29
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    In that era you had CRTs or Rear Projection TVs.

    Rear Projection was bigger (55" 4:3) but often times was susceptible to burn-in and had a worse quality picture compared to a CRT

    Before LCDs it was plasma which until the the late 2000s had more technical advantages over LCD Refresh rate, contrast. LCDs couldn’t really match them until the 2010s (I never had a plasma display though so I don’t fully understand plasma)

    DLP was a thing and could get up to and over 80" while maintaining quality but DLP could not be wall mounted as they were quite big like rear projection screens

    • Lka1988@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      Before LCDs it was plasma which until the the late 2000s had more technical advantages over LCD Refresh rate, contrast. LCDs couldn’t really match them until the 2010s

      glances at Sharp Aquos 1080p LCD TV from 2007 currently in living room

      still works really well

      fucking 80 lbs

      • cubism_pitta@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        Bad viewing angles, poor contrast ratios, poor refresh rate and poor display speed.

        I was not saying that they were non existent or unreliable. The technology was just poor at that time and beaten by Plasma displays in those areas

        Plasma displays had 2 problems though (besides cost) They were heavier than LCDs and their backlights would dim over time.

        Edit: I was reading on wikipedia… they work like those plasma globes!

        Plasma displays were affected by screen burn-in where as LCDs typically are not.

        Also it seems like on Contrast ratio plasma still is not beaten by LCD displays

        Though there are a lot of LED backlight technologies that help. Such as being able to only run a portion of the backlight for a given area.

        For a while there were also Dual Layer LCD panels. They would effectively use one layer of LCD to control color and another to try to control brightness / prevent light bleed through. I think those are obsolete for the most part now.

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plasma_display

        • lessthanluigi@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          18 hours ago

          I still have the plasma TV in my house my dad bought in 2007. The backlight is a little dim but not too much, and there is no significant screen burn-in to my knowledge.

          It’s great for mid-late 2000’s consoles and TV shows.

          • cubism_pitta@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            15 hours ago

            I bet, they are still technically good displays that can potentially surpass most modern LCDs.

            OLED does beat them in every way now though

        • piccolo@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 days ago

          Plasma displays had 2 problems though (besides cost) They were heavier than LCDs and their backlights would dim over time

          Plasmas dont have backlights, they worked similar to oled.

          • cubism_pitta@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            2 days ago

            You are correct. They were susceptible to burn in and dimming over time but did not have a back light.

            I never owned a plasma display because they were too expensive. CRT until 08 when we upgraded to a Vizio LCD for me

            I should’ve corrected that after my wikipedia dive