OT: SAMSUNG 'slimmer' TVs?

Who knows? Maybe it's the dimension of the CRT itself?

formatting link

Look at "rack dimensions" too. The front of the TV doesn't always have to sit flush with the shelf.

The 32" widescreen CRT TVs are pretty huge-- 53kg-- over 115lb. You could get yourself a nice 32" plasma-- 9.2cm depth and only 24kg.

formatting link

Best regards, Spehro Pefhany

--
"it\'s the network..."                          "The Journey is the reward"
speff@interlog.com             Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com
Embedded software/hardware/analog  Info for designers:  http://www.speff.com
Reply to
Spehro Pefhany
Loading thread data ...

One issue with the 'slim' CRT's is the extreme angle the beam must bend to get to the sides. This makes it very difficult, if not impossible, to maintain a decent focus and shape. I would think the picture quality on the sides would be noticeably inferior to the center.

--
If there is a no_junk in my address, please REMOVE it before replying!
All junk mail senders will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the 
law!!
http://home.att.net/~andyross
Reply to
Andrew Rossmann

I'm tediously searching specs of CRT widescreens, as my existing

15-year old 27" Mitsubishi is about to expire. Crucial factor is depth, due to furniture restrictions. My hopes rose when I came across this page describing the SAMSUNG WS32M204D 32" Digital TV
formatting link
where I read: "Samsung have launched a range of SlimFit CRT TVs with a depth of only 399mm a third less than a conventional CRT TV."

But in the details below I see that the depth is given as 21.77 inches. That's 554 mm, not 399. And 55.4 cm is about as deep as all the other sets I've been looking at.

My misunderstanding? A misleading description? Or what?

--
Terry, West Sussex, UK
Reply to
Terry Pinnell

Thanks. Yes, I initially assumed LCD or Plasma would be the way to go. But I've come to conclusion that I'd be disappointed in picture quality. And they cost 2 - 3 times as much, size for size. And technology is still evolving quite fast.

--
Terry Pinnell
Hobbyist, West Sussex, UK
Reply to
Terry Pinnell

Look at the pitch of the vertical phosphor lines, Sony's seem to be equal across the crt, Panasonic seem to be wider at the edges. Easier to manufacture. Also look at a tickertape type scroll across the bottom of the screen, the velocity of the scroll can vary across the screen, some people find it annoying. I did, but now I dont have a TV :-)

martin

Reply to
martin griffith

Reply to
Bennett Price

If you must have a CRT TV, consider Sony. Consumer Reports pretty much always ranks them at the top for CRT categories.

--
If there is a no_junk in my address, please REMOVE it before replying!
All junk mail senders will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the 
law!!
http://home.att.net/~andyross
Reply to
Andrew Rossmann

ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.