lol, good one.

Attached Link: Eizo CG221

Quote - Gamut/color depth is the reason to stick with a CRT.  If your just doing web work well maybe the LCD's are better for you.

Well, I play FPS and MMORPGs a fair bit.  While I'm not at the high end for power-gaming, I do spring for the better video cards when I get a machine, and I do like the eye candy when playing those games.  And my LCD is the monitor of choice.  And I have a selection of good CRTs I could choose from if I wanted.

So it's not just doing web-work or word processing.

Sure, if you want to do really precision work you might decide you need a CRT, but quite honestly the number of people who really need that precision is quite small compared to the number of people who flatter themselves and think they need it (or more importantly, think they can see the difference).

I work as a professional video editor and LCDs are my choice.

Of course all video work is checked on a video monitor to ensure television colors but LCDs are quite accurate and are better than CRTs in many ways.

Keith , it is true what you wrote,

"Sure, if you want to do really precision work you might decide you need a CRT, but quite honestly the number of people who really need that precision is quite small compared to the number of people who flatter themselves and think they need it (or more importantly, think they can see the difference)."

If you get a good TFT it is as good in image quality as a well-calibrated high end CRT. The only disadvantage is that, at the moment, you pay a lot for a good tft and crt prices have gone down.
The main problem is when you want to do and photoshop work and game. Then it's better perhaps to have a crt. (I don't game)
Dead pixels? Never ever saw one.
Black on my tft is blacker than most crt.
Calibration? What I see is what I print. (98% correct)
viewing angle: I do can move my head normally without having the image change before my eyes.
further advantages:
-less consuming
-less eye-strain, so less tiring
-less place
-no radiation in your face

We have two: a "high end" tft as first one and a cheap one as second. For managers etc the color quality is not important, nor is the viewing angle. I would not change back to crt.

 I'm a former TFT guy who is going back to CRT. Having an expensive TFT not last will do that to you. The TFT backlight is basically a light bulb which as one would suspect has an average useful life. A life that at this time is far to short for the expense.

CRT here.  I had an old NEC LCD that was great for basic, everyday use, but for artwork, it was awful.  It had pretty bad color banding and AA problems even at the native resolution.  I finally gave it to my sister and switched back to my old 19" CRT even though I barely have room for a cup of coffee on my desk now.  Some of the newer LCD's might be ok, but I'm going to have to see it in action before I plunk down the money for one.

Dead pixels are not an issues for some companies which have a 0 tolerance for dead pixels.

And there are ways around those companies which don't. 

Prices have come down on LCD screens if you shop at the right places.

LCDs are the way of the future.

Oh, yes, they are the 'way of the future'.  But currently, you can't match CRTs and LCDs feature-to-feature and price-to-price.  You will pay 2-4 times as much for an LCD than a comparable CRT.  When I win the lottery, this won't matter.  For now, I can't spend $2000 for several conveniences (weight, space-saving, eye-strain) that can be lived without for $500.
There is also the problem of 'native resolution'.  Most people will work in this (this is the same as the LCDs maximum resolution).  Gamers, on the other hand, may find themselves switching resolutions - LCDs suck when not at native resolution.  This is a well-documented problem - it's all interpolation.  I always work at maximum resolution, so this not a concern for me. :)

Now, to defend LCDs to a certain extent, I just purchased an Intel dual-core iMac G5 with 20" LCD (1680x1200) plus 1GB more memory for $2000 total.  That is a good deal for the resolution.  You get the entire computer and the hi-res display.  Interestingly enough, it is difficult to find stand-alone LCD monitors in this range.  I do note that the Apple 23" Widescreen Cinema Display has gone down by $1000 recently.  So, as I stated previously, the argument for CRTs may soon become moot as the pricing starts to equalize - I give it a year or two before this occurs.

The problem that I have is that a 23" LCD won't fit on my current desk configuration.  The 21" CRT has about 1-1/2" space on either side.  To accomodate a 23" LCD would require either a new desk (that's a lot of money and hassle) or some modification like removing one of the leveled platforms.  I also don't see anyone contradicting the view-angle problem.  That is a big bummer.  How much money do you have to spend to extend this?  Remember, I can see my CRTs screen up to ~90d.  Most LCDs lose visibility at much smaller ranges.

19 inch LCDs are fairly priced. When I was shopping I noticed the price increased much more for 20 inch monitors and up, so I chose 19 inch. A 19 inch CRT is the same price as a 19 inch LCD. So currently, 19 inch LCDs do match CRTs. Maybe a feature here or there doesn't match but the price does and LCDs have more benefits than CRTs. I can read my LCD from across the room so the view angle is a non issue.

19" = 1280x1024.  Sorry, I haven't used that low a resolution for over five years! ;P

21" CRT (mine) = 2048x1536

The closest is 23" ACD for $2000 (but slightly better resolution).

View angle has nothing to do with distance - it has to do with 'view angle' with respect to the perpendicular from the display plane.  Almost ALL LCDs have bad view angles.  Anything over 30d or 60d (depending upon the tech and cost) and you can't see the display well.  It is usually worse in the up/down direction, but can be as bad laterally.  So, yeah, across the room, the view angle goes to 20d or less.  But up close, but not directly in front of the display, you can't see crapola.  To a certain extent, this is a non-issue (you're usually in front of the display doing what you're doing).  But it reeks when you are moving around.

Expanding view angle technology for LCDs has improved, but it is still limited - unless you've got that winning lottery ticket.  Yeah, I could get all the features of my CRT in an LCD, but it would cost about $5000+.  Nein danke sehr.

You miss the point, 19 LCDs match CRTs. Not 21 and the like. 2nd, the view angle is not bad (as you already pointed out) because no one reads a screen on an offbeat angle like that? The prices for 19 inch LCD are great right now.

Right, but that is the level of compliance.  Beyond the 1280x1024 19" spec there is still disparity.  Whatever floats your boat, as they say.  Again, my prognostications of a couple years before the disparity dissolves holds true.

As for view angle - I do.  My LCD is to the right of my standard station (in front of my CRT).  I have to roll on over to see my iMac's LCD display.  If it were a CRT, this wouldn't need to happen.  These are special circumstances, but some of us aren't on a single monitor - I have three!  It would be great to replace all of these with one monitor capable of 4000+xY and have it all on there - but an LCD of that capability would be in the many thousands (a CRT of these specs would be in the thousands even!).  See Sharp's 64" LCD capable of 4096x2160 for about $6000!  Wow, I could get ten 21" CRTs of the same res as mine for that (20480x1536 or however you want to arrange the multi-monitor display over them).

why not turn the mac so it points to where you are? BTW, I am not a single monitor, I have 7 computers in 1 room with 5 on one long table. My old 21 inch CRT made so much heat that I am glad it is gone. When I am at one end of the table and I can't see the CRT on the other end well, I point it towards me with the space I saved with the 2 19 LCD screens. Anyhow if you want anymore CRTs you better buy them soon because they are being phased out. Nevertheless, to stay on topic, I think everyone knows what type of monitor you use.

Me, I have a flat thingie. Is that a TFT or LCD? I'm not quite sure what the difference is, to be honest. It's a ViewSonic VA1912w - widescreen,  1440x900.

I like this one because it's BRIGHT, even when it's not turned all the way up in brightness, and I'm a sucker for BRIGHT monitors.

It's also wonderfully flicker-free. The only drawback is that my cat can't lie on top of it like he used to do on the old, heat-emitting, CRT.

Oh and the black on my screen is definately BLACK.

As far as I know, TFT (thin-film-transistor) is just a type of LCD panel... so when you refer to a TFT, it's automatically also a LCD, but not the other way around... if that made any sense lol.

I think TFT is by far the most common type anyway, so most people that say LCD probably refer to the TFT type.

I agree, I think there is going to be a time when CRT monitors are going to be a thing of the past. I imagine I will have an LCD monitor by next year. My ViewSonic CRT maybe massive but it has such a lovely picture!

I use the “Sceptre X9 g-Komodo VII 19” LCD

"This seem to be a pretty nice design"

Sceptre makes some great monitors.

Here’s a link if you’re interested:  http://www.sceptre.com/Products/LCD/Specifications/spec_x9gKomodoVII.htm