Actually, I'd advise against that. My laptop's have LCD screens; they blur when you move in 3D games. Go with the TFT or plasma if you can... IMHO... anyone back me/counter up in this?
Along with that LCD or TFT I don't care, a single dead pixel is a dead pixel while I'll end up staring at for half my goddamn life. Not to mention policies on dead pixels having to be something along quite a lot before manufacturer will do something about it.
Then you refresh rates, no TFT LCD gimme the plasma don't have refresh so CRT scan rates, though they do have pixel reaction times or something along those lines as I don't do much flat thin screen domickies. Which quite often is nowhere near as good as screen refresh rates.
Then you also got the natural screen resolution. Quite often being in the nether regions of 1024 * 768 or whatever flavour. The higher thus the more pricey and already I doubt you'd be able to get a decent thin flat again for $400.
They are very good however for office and desk space things, although for graphics, gaming and DTP go the monitor. To me on this bit CRT always look better regardless of what screen. Of course give me a plasma with a support high resolution and I'll be a happy chappy.
except for Jay, is everybody else joking around or what?
to add to Jay's point. most companies do not have sub-pixel guarantees or warranties that cover sub-pixels. if sub-pixels die then your screen can go whacko.
Plasma??? ahahahahahaha.
for one, it is terrible for gaming (low refresh rate, low resolution - highest i have ever seen, with my own eyes, was 852) and it looks bad close up (blurriness, blotchiness etc) then there is the enormous price. Wolfie, seen a plasma screen in action? attached to a computer? no? they're awful in every respect except size (they are huge) and weight.
so why bother?
the Philips CRT is true flat, 1920x1440 res, now what's so bad about that? (and the price isn't in the ten's of thousands)
Quote from psy_ave: Basicly i want it to run at atleast 100-120 hertz at 1600-1200 or higher in rez... i got $400 bucks saved so far for it aswell... People I think LCD's are out of the question, he wants a CRT. I'll ask a mate of mine that got a 19" just recently what he thinks of his (Hitachi or Phillips, don't remember).
Quote from psy_ave: Basicly i want it to run at atleast 100-120 hertz at 1600-1200 or higher in rez... and i dont want to go any higher than .02 dpi.
That's a very decent monitor that's wanted not to mention it can't be LCD since the fastest pixel refresh rate is about roughly 45Hz equivalent to screen refresh rate on CRTs. Not to mention the res is way above LCD capabilities.
The Phillips 109B is alright, but it tends to have problems with Moire which is very annoying. Mine seems to be pretty good but one of my friends also has one and its worse than mine.
which is the more professional one ;) no major problems that i noticed when i had a look at it :| although it was brand new so i'm not sure whether they may develop over time.