Thread 106263196

Why did technology regress?

jews or something idk

>>106263196 (OP)
you are unironically not old enough to remember using CRTs

>>106263196 (OP)
To create market dependence. Although image quality beyond movement did improve, and the high hz monitors are solving this problem.

>>106263208
I have a crt on my desk right now stop projecting gen A

>>106263196 (OP)
The boomer developers turned into rgb webdevs and have been ignoring hardware limitations ever since.

>>106263196 (OP)
Technology always regresses

>>106263233
Pic with date or fake

>>106263196 (OP)
>Why did technology regress?
In all cases, it's because of people being cheap, and patent fuckery.

>>106263196 (OP)
how was the cheese pizza watching experience on these?

>>106263196 (OP)
Problem is planned obsolescence in order to keep economy going they need to be making stuff constantly and that stuff needs to break right ? But that's not enough there also need to be a reason to swap no matter if it's shit it just need to be a bit better then previously which obviously isn't but no matter what goy-slop is going to sell.

why is concrete worse now than it was 2000 years ago

>>106263506
why is cp worse than 20 years ago

>>106263506
we water it down to make it easier to work with mostly

>>106263196 (OP)
>Old technology was bette-ACK

>>106264063
>turned on mouse trails in windows settings
>WTF WHY IS THERE A MOUSE TRAIL
3/10 troll harder maybe some zoomers will fall for it

>>106264110
actual schizo kys

>>106264063
this happens on old crt's, during high contrast where the phosphor layer has degraded enough.
can't really blame them for 20-30yo displays to have some sort of degradation. sort of reminiscent of 70/80's tv/movies where headlights of cars show similar behavior.

either way, for games crt monitors are far better than anything modern. far better.

>>106264156

mouse trails look exactly like the normal non trailed mouse retard
get your eyes checked cretin

>>106264198
>degraded phosphor glows for longer
Imagine believing this. Protip: as the phosphors decay the image simply gets dimmer.

>>106263208
>I have a crt on my desk right now stop projecting gen A
>>106263489
>Problem is planned obsolescence in order to keep economy going they need to be making stuff constantly and that stuff needs to break right ? But that's not enough there also need to be a reason to swap no matter if it's shit it just need to be a bit better then previously which obviously isn't but no matter what goy-slop is going to sell.
>>106264110
>turned on mouse trails in windows settings
>WTF WHY IS THERE A MOUSE TRAIL
>3/10 troll harder maybe some zoomers will fall for it
>>106264063
>this happens on old crt's, during high contrast where the phosphor layer has degraded enough.
>can't really blame them for 20-30yo displays to have some sort of degradation. sort of reminiscent of 70/80's tv/movies where headlights of cars show similar behavior.

>either way, for games crt monitors are far better than anything modern. far better.

>>106264224
So what else is it?
Caps that need replacement? Out of the box CRT monitors do not show this behavior.

>>106263208
>I have a crt on my desk right now stop projecting gen A
>>106263489
>Problem is planned obsolescence in order to keep economy going they need to be making stuff constantly and that stuff needs to break right ? But that's not enough there also need to be a reason to swap no matter if it's shit it just need to be a bit better then previously which obviously isn't but no matter what goy-slop is going to sell.
>>106264110
>turned on mouse trails in windows settings
>WTF WHY IS THERE A MOUSE TRAIL
>3/10 troll harder maybe some zoomers will fall for it
>>106264063
>this happens on old crt's, during high contrast where the phosphor layer has degraded enough.
>can't really blame them for 20-30yo displays to have some sort of degradation. sort of reminiscent of 70/80's tv/movies where headlights of cars show similar behavior.

>either way, for games crt monitors are far better than anything modern. far better.

>>106264231
>>106264252
Meds now

>>106264281
obsessed with tranny tube rays award

https://www.testufo.com/photo#pps=1920
can you read the number?

on crt it's effortless, even at 60hz.
maybe your 480hz oled is capable, not sure.

>>106263196 (OP)
All i know is that to buy CRT in the past was super easy, buying modern monitor on the other hand is pure nightmare, you have to worry if black is black enough, if there is dead pixel, shit colors, backlight bleed, glow, burn-Ins, fucking bezels everywhere. I could name few more but why bother.

>>106264231
>>106264252
Sharts are deranged

>>106264646
you were younger and cared about this stuff less. CRTs also came with their own tl;dr datasheets

>>106264110
Cope of the year.

People simply didn't want a gigantic hunk of plastic and glass on their desk or in their living rooms. You can go back and watch old shows and movies and even if the people are rich most people have a 21-27 inch TV in the living room. Anything bigger and you need custom furniture that doesn't physically crumble under the weight. On a desk the issue is even worse because back then people actually had other shit on their desks than the monitor, like a rack for your CDs, a jar for pens, dictionary, phonebook, a literal fucking landline phone, shit like that.

Now 20 years later we can sit around and complain about picture quality and ignore that it never once ever came up in conversations unless you were an a professional artist, worked in print media, or something like that. If you played FPS games maybe you'd give a shit about CRTs because you wanted an edge but most likely you'd be getting crushed from the ping on your trash connection rather than your LCD latency in online matches.

>>106263196 (OP)
Because not many things are straight improvements all at once without downsides especially now. And monitors got a lot better in a lot of ways CRTs can't like size, weight, color reproduction, brightness, contrast, etc.
>>106264813
Motion clarity is important to some people but it no longer matters practically except for an aesthetics purpose. There's nothing to argue for in favor of better motion clarity to the point you are willing to compromise technologies for any actual performance gain. People win FPS tournaments and do esports worth millions of dollars on flat panels. If the motion clarity actually was worth a damn, they wouldn't have switched. Only idiots like OP and the Smash community still clutch onto CRTs like they are the one and only true display technology that was invented and wrongfully done away with when it was the opposite. Technical luddites are actually worse than actual luddites in this sense.

>>106264662
>>106264231
>>106264252
>Sharts are deranged

>>106264662
kys baritroon

>>106265123
problem is, most here haven't seen a good quality crt. looking around in a 3d environment or scrolling in a 2d plane on a crt is infinitely better than on any flattech. this is not some subjective statement, this is objectively so.

as i stated before
>>106264400

most of you will just see a blurry image.
just like your interactive content will be a blurry image unless you stand still.

tired of dealing with these drooling morons that refuse or can't see the benefit of high quality crt's. your loss though, literally. like claiming your $20 earbuds sound better than a good system of a few grand.

>>106265520
id love to clearly see you get electrocuted when i shove your head into a crt

>>106265603
i'll lock you up and use you as my private toilet until you die, before that ever happens.

>>106265603
>>106265608
obsessed with each other like a bunch of homofaggots in denial award

>>106265603
>>106265608
Woah woah woah boys take your erp to the blue moon inn

>>106264674
Not that many no, not even close in fact.

>>106265520
>problem is, most here haven't seen a good quality crt.
No true Scotsman fallacy and you didn't address why it is anything other than a aesthetics preference. It's perfectly fine to prefer it for that reason thinking it is what everyone should measure display tech by is pure lunancy. Not to mention BFI this year with tandem OLEDS pushing 400 nits full screen will now outdo CRTs on the brightness aspect if you cut it in half with BFI so it's getting closer to replacement. Or if any of those microLEDs end up panning out. I fully expect those displays to come out and for you to still clutch onto them like your life depended on it. The sooner you accept you like looking at them for how they display and not any of the technical aspects about it, the better things will go over within the next several years.

>>106266053
>you didn't address why it is anything other than a aesthetics preference.
learn to read.

>>106263419
>and patent fuckery.
The bastards took SED screens from us.