But also, don’t, they are expensive and novelty.
It feels weird reading this as someone who grew up with CRT screens, and remembers how bad they were not just in terms of displaying content, but also for the eyes.
I think I’m okay leaving this part of the nostalgia in the past. 🤣
I forget the headaches & eye strain.
A CRT with acceptable resolution would break my desk in half. And being that close to one… Not to mention the extremely high pitched sound they make during operation, painful.
Resolition ≠ size, and humans can only hear the high pitched whine with standard definition content (240p, 480i, and PAL equivilents). The higher the resolution, the higher pitched the whine, and humans can’t hear above 20kHz (which is less than 480p @ 60Hz)
Resolution is dictated by the size of the holes in the shadow mask and also by the windings of the yoke. You could theoretically have a 4k-capable CRT that’s 13" if the manufacturing tech was good enough.
My 19" Compaq S920 can do 4k interlaced at 60Hz.
CRTs also don’t have fixed pixels, so they look great at every resolution.
I think you’re more used to SD CRT TVs rather than VGA CRT computer monitors.
From watching Digital Foundry’s video, they say that due to a difference in how the display works a much lower resolution CRT is comparable or better in picture quality to a higher resolution LCD.
They specifically talked about being able to get a lot better performance out of games without any noticable decrease in picture quality by dropping resolution.
So acceptable resolution may be a lot lower than you think.
If you are into retro games fair enough, but 4:3 seems crazy for modern gaming.
I do miss the degauss button.
4:3 should mean the same horizontal FOV as 16:9 with additional vertical FOV, but that’s not typical in practice.
