5 ms·
I'm torn. Yes, this should be focused on. Ideally, things get better. But things are better. Sure televisions have a shorter life span. They are also absur
by taeric 2y ago
I'm torn. Yes, this should be focused on. Ideally, things get better.
But things are better. Sure televisions have a shorter life span. They are also absurdly cheaper than they have ever been. To not ack that the lower cost options are, at large, what we are complaining about hits me the wrong way.
- fortylove 2y agoThe environmental impact of producing a product that needs frequent replacement should not be ignored. Especially when it's proven to be avoidable.
- BobAliceInATree 2y agoActually, the thins screens are higher cost because they are more expensive to make. So it’s not the case that cheaper ones break sooner.
- taeric 2y agoThey are higher cost than what? My point was that televisions, as a category, have absolutely plummeted in costs. It is laughable how much they have fallen. When we moved into our first house, we kept a few nice CRTs because we thought they would make good extras for the house. By the time we admitted that they were silly, a replacement panel was barely $100 and nobody was accepting the CRT for resale. I would be interested in knowing how much harder it is to recycle these new panels. And what the environmental impact of producing them is. I would not be at all shocked to know that the effort that goes into making them lowers both of those metrics. I would be shocked if it is dramatic.
- vel0city 2y ago> I would be interested in knowing how much harder it is to recycle these new panels. I actually had a hard time finding a place to actually take my last LCD TV for recycling. It was 55", but the local recycler only took LCDs up to 50" in size. They suggested going to Best Buy or other places as they took TVs up to I think 70" or something. But the people at the Best Buy nearby didn't understand me wanting to recycle the TV, they kept asking why I didn't just throw it in the trash. They ultimately wanted to charge me something like $40 to take the TV for recycling.
- taeric 2y agoThis is the exact run-around we got for our 27" CRT. I think they were charging more to take it for recycling, oddly. Flat didn't accept it for landfill.
- cubefox 2y ago> They are also absurdly cheaper than they have ever been. Are they cheaper or just larger?
- Slyfox33 2y agoThey are absolutely cheaper. You can get a pretty decent 48 inch TV for ~$200.
- cubefox 2y agoFor that price you could also get a CRT TV.
- echoangle 2y agoThe point was: they are cheaper per size. You can either get LCD TVs at the price of a CRT that are much larger than a CRT of the same price, or a LCD TV at the size of a CRT which is much cheaper than the same-sized CRT.
- amlib 2y agoIf CRTs kept being manufactured and evolving, maybe they would be more competitive on price compared to today's cheap LCDs.
- thfuran 2y agoThere's no world in which Walmart is selling cheap 70" CRTs.
- taeric 2y agoYou can get a 70 inch TV for $400 at Walmart today. My last CRT was a 27" and I payed $1,000. They are absolutely cheaper. Edit: To be clear, I'm agreeing with parent post here. It is mind blowing how cheap televisions have become.