←back to thread

235 points rbanffy | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
MenhirMike ◴[] No.40762400[source]
I'm kinda curious if CRT technology advanced to the point where a TV like that would've been possible at a better weight and price tag? I assume that CRT technology development stopped decades ago, but could we have e.g., replaced the heavy glass with some plastic-like material to save weight without compromising the picture? And are there any heavy components in the mechanism itself (Coils, Magnets?) that would have had alternatives?

I know it's just theorycrafting, but I do wonder what kind of CRT someone could've created if it wasn't for market economy forces.

replies(7): >>40762471 #>>40762611 #>>40762862 #>>40762908 #>>40763349 #>>40763829 #>>40764554 #
joezydeco ◴[] No.40762862[source]
The next big thing was supposed to be Field Emission Displays. Microscopic electron guns directly behind each phosphor. The big manufacturers experimented and tried getting it commercialized for decades, then pretty much gave up in the 2000s when LCDs got stupid cheap.

https://www.engineersgarage.com/field-emission-display/

replies(1): >>40763201 #
Gare ◴[] No.40763201[source]
There was also a brief reign of plasma TVs in-between, now almost a forgotten technology
replies(3): >>40763260 #>>40763946 #>>40764370 #
MBCook ◴[] No.40764370[source]
Despite its benefits over LCDs, it had no chance to compete on price. LCD prices just plummeted to far too fast.

OLED is the current equivalent (with perhaps QLED) and micro LED on the horizon.

replies(2): >>40768249 #>>40770522 #
1. layer8 ◴[] No.40770522[source]
The death knell was that they couldn’t shrink the plasma cells enough to support 4K. LCD didn’t kill it, in the same sense that LCD doesn’t kill OLED.