Most active commenters
  • mikepurvis(4)

←back to thread

235 points rbanffy | 19 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source | bottom
1. esprehn ◴[] No.40763941[source]
My parents had a Sony KV-40XBR700, the 40in 300lb CRT. I thought it was the largest you could buy until learning about the even larger one in TFA.

The picture quality on the KV-40XBR700 was amazing for the era (~2003). My Dad cleverly cut a hole into the wall up high and stuck the TV into it, then put a picture frame around it giving us one of the first "high definition flat screens" even if it was an illusion.

Of course these days our 43in TV weighs less than 20lbs and is mounted with a couple small wall anchors.

replies(5): >>40764494 #>>40764510 #>>40764550 #>>40764696 #>>40768451 #
2. newzisforsukas ◴[] No.40764494[source]
https://www.ebay.com/itm/234568374191

Relive these days with the KV-40XBR800, only $750

replies(1): >>40764516 #
3. mikepurvis ◴[] No.40764510[source]
And wild to think that nowadays 43” is on the smaller side even for a non home theatre “living room” TV— the standard is much more around 55”.
replies(2): >>40764572 #>>40765551 #
4. MikeTheGreat ◴[] No.40764516[source]
Before I click "Buy It Now"... does this include shipping? :)
replies(1): >>40764807 #
5. IsoldesKnight ◴[] No.40764550[source]
I remember the KV-40XBR700. Those suckers were heavy. I worked at Circuit City in 2003 delivering those behemoths to customers until I dropped two in a single day (the handholds on the side weren't very good) and got moved to the warehouse.
replies(2): >>40764756 #>>40767440 #
6. TylerE ◴[] No.40764572[source]
Seems like every time I've bought one "standard" has moved up a size. My current is a 65", the one before that a 55", a 47" before that, and I think a 43 or 44 before that.
replies(2): >>40764704 #>>40772956 #
7. radiojosh ◴[] No.40764696[source]
I worked at "The Only Sony Only" store in St. Louis when this TV came out. I delivered and installed equipment among other responsibilities. I might have delivered two of these particular units. I believe it was actually like 305 pounds.

This television had a couple of interesting traits. Sony flat Trinitrons were apparently the only true flat CRT televisions where both the outside AND inside of the tube were flat. This is why they were so heavy - the flat glass had to be thicker to withstand the vacuum inside.

It was a high definition television, but it was 4:3 aspect ratio. They sold a 34 inch CRT that was the only 16:9 CRT they offered at the time.

Additionally, the size of the 40 inch tube apparently left it extra vulnerable to stray magnetic fields. CRT screens all respond to magnets by producing rainbow colored distortions, but the 40 inch was extra sensitive. We delivered one to a house and turned it on only to find that the screen colors were distorted. I'm not sure how we figured it out, but we realized it was the proximity to the metal floor beam, so we moved the TV to another spot in the room and the color distortion went away.

For context, you could get an HD 65 inch rear projection wide screen television at the time that only weighed 265 pounds. I delivered both the 40 inch and the 65 inch up a flight of stairs. Those moving straps that hang from your forearms were not yet popular.

8. mikepurvis ◴[] No.40764704{3}[source]
Yup, I have a 65” 1080p panel that came with my house and looking at a 77” 4K OLED to replace it.
9. maxden ◴[] No.40764756[source]
That seems like an even worse place to move you to!
replies(2): >>40766511 #>>40827722 #
10. smnrchrds ◴[] No.40764807{3}[source]
No, it says pickup only.

> Shipping and handling

> Item location:

> Negley, Ohio, United States

> Ships to:

> Will arrange for local pickup only (no shipping).

11. te_chris ◴[] No.40765551[source]
I actively waited for 47ish OLEDs to come out and drop in price before upgrading my tv as didn’t want or need anything bigger but definitely wanted OLED.
replies(1): >>40770080 #
12. asddubs ◴[] No.40766511{3}[source]
that's someone elses problem, I want this kid out of my deparment
13. epiccoleman ◴[] No.40767440[source]
If you have to do the dishes...
14. err4nt ◴[] No.40768451[source]
Here I am worried that my cat is going to knock my flat lightweight TV over one of these days, and you had a 300 lb TV? That sounds like what I need now!
15. mikepurvis ◴[] No.40770080{3}[source]
I’m getting bigger because I can but really going to OLED/HDR is a far bigger upgrade then either the size or the resolution bumps.
replies(1): >>40770433 #
16. TylerE ◴[] No.40770433{4}[source]
The resolution bump is a pretty big deal too, paired with 4K Bluray discs and players. Only way to get HDR content that hasn't been webcompressed to shit.
replies(1): >>40772120 #
17. mikepurvis ◴[] No.40772120{5}[source]
It’s true, and I did get a player and a handful of favourites to watch on it, so maybe in fooling myself that the hdr is more important than the resolution.

I think the difference is that I’ve already watched 4K content on my computer but hdr is genuinely something new.

18. Dylan16807 ◴[] No.40772956{3}[source]
The suggested viewing angle of 30-40 degrees has been stable, so it becomes a matter of how far away the seats can be to maintain that angle on a reasonable budget.
19. IsoldesKnight ◴[] No.40827722{3}[source]
Only the delivery team had to actually lift a 400 lb TV by 1/2" sloped handholds. I'm the warehouse, we had forklifts and pallet jacks to handle that.