Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
LCD or LED monitor, which is better?
45 views
Skip to first unread message
David R Lane
Apr 1, 2012, 9:42:00 AM4/1/12
to
Hi all comrades in ARMs,
What are the pros and cons of digital LCD monitors versus digital LED
monitors?
Dave Lane
--
Windows 7 Ultimate. Yes, let's hope it's the last one.
What are the pros and cons of digital LCD monitors versus digital LED
monitors?
Dave Lane
--
Windows 7 Ultimate. Yes, let's hope it's the last one.
Jess
Apr 1, 2012, 10:02:24 AM4/1/12
to
In message <00069d79...@lakeview.demon.co.uk>
not aware of decent size true LED monitors being available at decent
sizes.)
Standard LCD screens have a backlight similar to a florescent tube or
a CFL "low" energy bulb.
LED screens have LEDs as the backlighting.
These have the same advantages as LED house lamps have over the old
fashioned "low" energy bulbs. (In brackets might not apply to screens)
1. 40% of the energy use
2. Much longer life.
3. Reduced wear and tear caused by power cycling.
4. Quicker to achieve full intensity.
5. Smaller
(6. less susceptible to damage and less dangerous if damaged)
I personally would not buy any (new) screen that wasn't LED (just as I
gave up buying CFLs in favour of LEDs for my house lights, years ago.)
--
Jess Iyonix
David R Lane <D_L...@Lakeview.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> What are the pros and cons of digital LCD monitors versus digital LED
> monitors?
I assume you are referring to LCD monitors with LED illumination (I'm
> What are the pros and cons of digital LCD monitors versus digital LED
> monitors?
not aware of decent size true LED monitors being available at decent
sizes.)
Standard LCD screens have a backlight similar to a florescent tube or
a CFL "low" energy bulb.
LED screens have LEDs as the backlighting.
These have the same advantages as LED house lamps have over the old
fashioned "low" energy bulbs. (In brackets might not apply to screens)
1. 40% of the energy use
2. Much longer life.
3. Reduced wear and tear caused by power cycling.
4. Quicker to achieve full intensity.
5. Smaller
(6. less susceptible to damage and less dangerous if damaged)
I personally would not buy any (new) screen that wasn't LED (just as I
gave up buying CFLs in favour of LEDs for my house lights, years ago.)
--
Jess Iyonix
Alex Macfarlane Smith
Apr 1, 2012, 10:09:35 AM4/1/12
to
On 01/04/2012 15:02, Jess wrote:
> In message<00069d79...@lakeview.demon.co.uk>
> David R Lane<D_L...@Lakeview.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> What are the pros and cons of digital LCD monitors versus digital LED
>> monitors?
>
> I assume you are referring to LCD monitors with LED illumination (I'm
> not aware of decent size true LED monitors being available at decent
> sizes.)
>
http://www.engadget.com/2012/01/10/samsung-55-inch-super-oled-tv-eyes-on-video/
> In message<00069d79...@lakeview.demon.co.uk>
> David R Lane<D_L...@Lakeview.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> What are the pros and cons of digital LCD monitors versus digital LED
>> monitors?
>
> I assume you are referring to LCD monitors with LED illumination (I'm
> not aware of decent size true LED monitors being available at decent
> sizes.)
>
They're on the way :)
Alex.
Jess
Apr 1, 2012, 10:22:32 AM4/1/12
to
In message <4f78619f$0$281$1472...@news.sunsite.dk>
years away.
--
Jess Iyonix
Alex Macfarlane Smith <nos...@archifishal.co.uk> wrote:
>> I assume you are referring to LCD monitors with LED illumination (I'm
>> not aware of decent size true LED monitors being available at decent
>> sizes.)
>>
> http://www.engadget.com/2012/01/10/samsung-55-inch-super-oled-tv-eyes-
> on-video/
> They're on the way :)
Nice, however I suspect on the desktop prices are still a couple of
>> I assume you are referring to LCD monitors with LED illumination (I'm
>> not aware of decent size true LED monitors being available at decent
>> sizes.)
>>
> http://www.engadget.com/2012/01/10/samsung-55-inch-super-oled-tv-eyes-
> on-video/
> They're on the way :)
years away.
--
Jess Iyonix
Dave Plowman (News)
Apr 1, 2012, 2:20:32 PM4/1/12
to
In article <00069d79...@lakeview.demon.co.uk>,
LEDs are fine for general use, but can't give quite as accurate colours as
discharge tube types.
--
*If a pig loses its voice, is it disgruntled?
Dave Plowman da...@davenoise.co.uk London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.
David R Lane <D_L...@Lakeview.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> What are the pros and cons of digital LCD monitors versus digital LED
> monitors?
I assume you refer to the backlight method?
> monitors?
LEDs are fine for general use, but can't give quite as accurate colours as
discharge tube types.
--
*If a pig loses its voice, is it disgruntled?
Dave Plowman da...@davenoise.co.uk London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.
Tim Hill
Apr 7, 2012, 6:07:55 AM4/7/12
to
In article <5279b68...@davenoise.co.uk>, Dave Plowman (News)
odd backward step then.
I guess that was a subjective comment because those I have looked at seem
to have much more 'vibrant' colours. I thought this was because the LEDs
used are white, whereas tubes give a slightly yellow cast.
But screens can be thinner, the distribution of back light is more even
with LED and the blacks are soo much better with LED back lights which
selectively darken to match LCD 'brightness'. Some don't do this though.
--
Tim Hill of timil.com . . .
* supports TFT & shares in cheaper ethical telecoms http://tjrh.eu/phone
* has a genuine & spam-proof address for Usenet http://www.invalid.org.uk/
* accepts incoming email: substitute postmaster@ for tim@
... "God shall be my hope, my stay, my guide, and lantern to my feet" Henry VI, Act ii, Sc.3
<da...@davenoise.co.uk> wrote:
> In article <00069d79...@lakeview.demon.co.uk>, David R Lane
> <D_L...@Lakeview.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> > What are the pros and cons of digital LCD monitors versus digital LED
> > monitors?
> I assume you refer to the backlight method?
> LEDs are fine for general use, but can't give quite as accurate colours
> as discharge tube types.
Really? Lit with LED rather than fluorescent is worse? Seems a bit of an
> In article <00069d79...@lakeview.demon.co.uk>, David R Lane
> <D_L...@Lakeview.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> > What are the pros and cons of digital LCD monitors versus digital LED
> > monitors?
> I assume you refer to the backlight method?
> LEDs are fine for general use, but can't give quite as accurate colours
> as discharge tube types.
odd backward step then.
I guess that was a subjective comment because those I have looked at seem
to have much more 'vibrant' colours. I thought this was because the LEDs
used are white, whereas tubes give a slightly yellow cast.
But screens can be thinner, the distribution of back light is more even
with LED and the blacks are soo much better with LED back lights which
selectively darken to match LCD 'brightness'. Some don't do this though.
--
Tim Hill of timil.com . . .
* supports TFT & shares in cheaper ethical telecoms http://tjrh.eu/phone
* has a genuine & spam-proof address for Usenet http://www.invalid.org.uk/
* accepts incoming email: substitute postmaster@ for tim@
... "God shall be my hope, my stay, my guide, and lantern to my feet" Henry VI, Act ii, Sc.3
Dave Plowman (News)
Apr 7, 2012, 6:50:44 AM4/7/12
to
In article <527ca0...@invalid.org.uk>,
isn't one. Or rather, yet.
> I guess that was a subjective comment because those I have looked at seem
> to have much more 'vibrant' colours. I thought this was because the LEDs
> used are white, whereas tubes give a slightly yellow cast.
It's not a problem to produce 'vibrant' colours. It's those in between
which are much more difficult. A colour cast from the light source isn't
quite so important as the electronics can compensate to some extend. It's
a non continuous spectrum light (or spikey) which can make things
difficult, and LEDs are notorious for this.
> But screens can be thinner, the distribution of back light is more even
> with LED and the blacks are soo much better with LED back lights which
> selectively darken to match LCD 'brightness'. Some don't do this though.
As ever, swings and roundabouts.
--
*Confession is good for the soul, but bad for your career.
Tim Hill <t...@invalid.org.uk> wrote:
> > LEDs are fine for general use, but can't give quite as accurate colours
> > as discharge tube types.
> Really? Lit with LED rather than fluorescent is worse? Seems a bit of an
> odd backward step then.
LEDs have a number of advantages over fluorescent. Actual light quality
> > LEDs are fine for general use, but can't give quite as accurate colours
> > as discharge tube types.
> Really? Lit with LED rather than fluorescent is worse? Seems a bit of an
> odd backward step then.
isn't one. Or rather, yet.
> I guess that was a subjective comment because those I have looked at seem
> to have much more 'vibrant' colours. I thought this was because the LEDs
> used are white, whereas tubes give a slightly yellow cast.
which are much more difficult. A colour cast from the light source isn't
quite so important as the electronics can compensate to some extend. It's
a non continuous spectrum light (or spikey) which can make things
difficult, and LEDs are notorious for this.
> But screens can be thinner, the distribution of back light is more even
> with LED and the blacks are soo much better with LED back lights which
> selectively darken to match LCD 'brightness'. Some don't do this though.
--
*Confession is good for the soul, but bad for your career.
0 new messages