Sorry to bump a page 4 thread 1 month later, but, I figured I'd toss mine out there and get it off my chest. 😜
Everything you are about to read will be very surprising coming from someone who possesses a very strong interest in CRT monitors. Ready? I can't stand the Sony Trinitron GDM-FW900 or the hype surrounding it. Period. Is it a nice monitor? Sure. But, I can't stand it when people claim it is the so-called "holy grail of CRTs", because, no, indeed it is not.
From a standpoint of electronics engineering and repair, they are very problematic. I'm not entirely sure if it has to do with simply pushing the limits of CRT technology itself, or if perhaps these monitors were designed with a focus on performance in lieu of reliability. In any case, they're trouble. They are known for experiencing failures of multiple critical components - in particular, the HOT (Horizontal Output Transistor) and the flyback transformer.
A lot of people will tout the fact that it can run at resolutions as high as 1440p. The truth is, not even 1080p will show up very clearly on that tube. The dot pitch is simply not there. If you have an FW900, and you think 1080p (or perhaps even 1440p) looks fine on it, that's great. I'm glad you enjoy your monitor. But from what I have seen, it's just not that great, at least when it comes to modern usage. In a similar vein, many will claim that it is "better than every LCD monitor on the market" and that "LCDs can't come close". Both of these statements are, ultimately, incorrect. While LCDs couldn't top CRTs for a long while, you would, in today's modern world, be much better off with a brand new high-end LCD or OLED monitor than with an FW900. Unless you want to plop that 200+ lb beast on your primary desk, and have enough desk depth to accommodate its monstrous depth, it is not practical. Again - if you have done any of this, and you are happy, that is great. I am happy that you are happy. I am, simply and personally, not the world's biggest fan of this monitor and some of the now-false claims made in regards to it.
Going back to problems, they are notoriously difficult to fine-tune (requiring WinDAS software and a special USB I2C adapter connected to a header within the monitor), and have a serious issue with the anti-glare coating. That coating will scratch to all but smithereens if you so much as look at it funny and therefore hurt its very delicate feelings. To be fair, this does not exclusively affect the FW900. Almost all late-model Sony monitors have this issue - my CPD-G200R has the same wretched coating.
And that is why, when I see an FW900 in use, I don't get jealous. I'm just thankful I didn't drop hundreds of dollars on an unreliable monitor from 20 years ago. 😀
Apart from that, I haven't got any other retro confessions. I still use floppies, and old PSUs, if that counts.
Presario 425|DX2-50|8MB|SB V16S|D622/WFW3.11 😎
Deskpro XE 450|DX2-50|32 MB|NT4.0/95
SR2038X|Athlon 64 X2 3800|2G|GT710 WINXP
Dimension 4400|P4 NW 2 GHz|256M|R128U AGP|WINXP