LED Vs LCD COMPUTER MONITORS, RELIABILITY OR SPECTACULER IMAGES ?

Except for one LED (Light Emitting Diode) computer monitor i'm typing on immediately I've never had a LCD (Liquid Crystal Display) computer monitor last over 5 years. The LED monitors are usually 15" and really expensive for his or her size within the range of $500 to $900. My 15" square LED monitor cost $400 around 10 years ago but remains going strong. My 25" screen LCD monitor just went black on me after 3 years so I'm faced with picking between another LCD with better image quality or an LED that's far more reliable.

I've seen LED monitors in larger sizes but a top quality LED monitor during a larger size is extremely expensive. you'll get off brand LED monitors for tons less but they use cheap electronic components so their reliability wouldn't be that great. All the LCD monitors and monitors I've owned within the past before the flat panel LCDs have only lasted 3 to five years then "Poof" they are going black.

Flat panel T.V. sets use an equivalent technology as computer screens as far as "Backlit Displays" and "Pixelation". Some T.V. sets are now found out as computer monitors and T.V. sets because the technology is so similar. LED TVs and computer monitors use far less energy and apart from the life like image quality they're far superior than the LCDs in everything but life like image quality.

The image quality on LCD monitors is extremely superior and cannot be equaled by the LED monitors at this point . LED computer monitors are on the increase now with new technology arising that's making the image quality of the LED monitors that of the LCD. This new LED technology is simply beginning to appear in T.V. sets. T.V. sets use an equivalent backlit technology as computer monitors, but my problem has always been with computer monitors presumably because computer monitors are manufactured at as higher rate than T.V. sets thanks to demand of computers over T.V..

The difference between the LED and LCD is that the back lighting. The LED uses "Light Emitting Diodes" that illuminate pixel areas which will last forever and therefore the LCD uses fluorescent Cold-cathode lighting that lights up each individual pixel. Backlighting individual pixels gives more vivid colors and true life images but uses a fluorescent Cold-cathode backlighting that goes bad and not well worth the cost of repairing. Purchasing a replacement computer monitor is more cost effective. The LEDs and therefore the "Light Emitting Diodes" can last forever and your computer monitor may die from other electronic component failure before the "Light Emitting Diodes" fail.

The LED will offer you more rich colors, but the LCD will offer you a more life like image. More people are flocking to the LCD due to the image quality which lowers the value of them, but LED displays are on the come with better image quality.

Plasmas are dead. I read that only LG is making plasmas now. LEDs and LCDs are more reliable. Plasmas run hotter since the whole screen is essentially just an enormous fluorescent Cold-cathode lamp while with LCDs the screen is formed from liquid crystals with just a few of small fluorescent Cold-cathode lamps behind. So since the LCD runs cooler, it's a extended life and therefore the LEDs hardly use any energy in the least with little or no heat.

Most likely i'm swayed to travel with another LED display and just pay the upper cost if I can find a reputation brand that manufactures a couple of 25" LEDs with quality electronic components. i prefer my little 15" square display monitor but with the wide screens I can open up 4 internet sites and obtain an outsized enough display on all 4 to satisfy me. immediately with the bad economy and therefore the dumping of older LED technology for the incoming new LED technology you'll get monitors being phased out for LCD monitor prices. I see many of the newer technology LED monitors high above the $400 price range.