CRT vs LCD

[ProXie]

Well my cousin is argueing with me saying no LCD has better color than a CRT. I responded with there has to be LCDs with better color than CRTs. He says CRTs have truecolor which makes them always better.

HM?

 

[BillLeeLee]

Uh, there are LCDs and CRTs with support for 24-bit color depth (16.7 million colors), which is what people call True Color.

There are also a lot of LCDs that only have 18-bit color and fake 24-bit color through dithering (blending adjacent colors together.

So I guess you both lose this argument, or something.

 

[rene mauricio]

Is 24 bit color better than 32 bit or something?

 

[Pyrolistical]

CRT over LCD, regarding colour.
CRT over LCD, regarding constrast.
CRT over LCD, regarding price to screen size ratio.
CRT over LCD, regarding viewable angle.
CRT over LCD, regarding resolution (LCDs are fixed).
LCD over CRT, regarding size/weight.
LCD over CRT, regarding flickering.

 

[BillLeeLee]

Is 24 bit color better than 32 bit or something?

I'm not completely sure whether the 32-bit color CRTs display is just the 24-bit color + 8 bit Alpha, or if it's actually 32-bit full color, in which case, CRTs walk all over LCDs, since:

24-bit = 16.7 million colors
32-bit color = 4+ billion colors

Someone enlighten us about whether CRTs do the full 32-bit color, or the 24 + 8 thing.

 

[Pyrolistical]

I'm not completely sure whether the 32-bit color CRTs display is just the 24-bit color + 8 bit Alpha, or if it's actually 32-bit full color, in which case, CRTs walk all over LCDs, since:

24-bit = 16.7 million colors
32-bit color = 4+ billion colors

Someone enlighten us about whether CRTs do the full 32-bit color, or the 24 + 8 thing.

I believe it is only 24-bit color with 8-bit alpha channel.

ie. you can have a 24-bit color image, with a 8-bit mask...but the result is still a 24-bit colour image

 

[rene mauricio]

So then LCD's use 16 or do they use 32 or 24? Does anything use true 32?

 

[BillLeeLee]

LCDs use 18-bit + dithering or 24-bit for the most part.

If it's the 24 + 8 case, then I don't know of any consumer level monitor with true 32-bit color. CRTs can go higher than today's color limits I believe, but you need the video card to be able to support it. I think, so don't quote me on that.

 

[datamage]

CRT over LCD, regarding colour.
CRT over LCD, regarding constrast.
CRT over LCD, regarding price to screen size ratio.
CRT over LCD, regarding viewable angle.
CRT over LCD, regarding resolution (LCDs are fixed).
LCD over CRT, regarding size/weight.
LCD over CRT, regarding flickering.

Fair enough, but you forgot a few.

LCD over CRT, regarding geometry.
LCD over CRT, regarding text legibility.
LCD over CRT, regarding overall sharpness.
LCD over CRT, power consumption/heat.
CRT over LCD, black levels.
CRT over LCD, response times (streaking/blurring/etc)

- D.

 

[nweibley]

Plasma > all except for sizerice and LCD resolution

 

[Happy Hopping]

CRT over LCD, regarding resolution (LCDs are fixed)

so what if I use a different res. other than the max. default res.? Say I use 800x600 instead of 1920x1200, what will happen? ANd what if I have an old game that only run 800x600? What then?

===========

LCD over CRT, regarding text legibility.

what's legibility?

 

[BillLeeLee]

so what if I use a different res. other than the max. default res.? Say I use 800x600 instead of 1920x1200, what will happen? ANd what if I have an old game that only run 800x600? What then?

Well, if you deviate from the native resolution of the LCD monitor, then the pixels can't change size. Instead, the image gets stretched to fit into the pixels, which is called interpolation. This can make it really ugly.

what's legibility?

From dictionary.com
1. Possible to read or decipher: legible handwriting.
2. Plainly discernible; apparent: legible weaknesses in character and disposition.

Just how easy it is to read text.

 

[rene mauricio]

Well, if you deviate from the native resolution of the LCD monitor, then the pixels can't change size. Instead, the image gets stretched to fit into the pixels, which is called interpolation. This can make it really ugly.

Fair enough, but how does this work if I use a higher resolution in games. The main reason I got this ViewSonic VX710 LCD today and got rid of my ViewSonic A90f+ CRT was because the refresh rates were horrid when I tried to up the resolution on such games as Unreal 2004. Over at FM they told me what I needed was a better CRT or a LCD since the LCD's don’t use refresh rates the same way that CRTs do... but failed to mention anything about using resolutions higher than that of the native one.

 

[Neurofreeze]

First, you cannot use a higher resolution than the LCD's max native resolution. Period.

Second, you don't have to interpolate a lower resolution. If you don't, then the image will simply have the necessary black borders around it. Ie. an 800 x 600 video game would have a black border around it that's 400 pixels on the top and bottom and 300 pixels on the sides on a 1600 x 1200 LCD. Also, interpolation varies on each LCD. Some LCDs do it very, very well, some do it very, very poorly.

 

[Drakensoul]

Higher resolutions are downsized to fit. Same as using a lower resolution: it can cause distortion.

If you have a really good LCD monitor it should be minimal, but there's no way to get around the fact that you're rendering an image with a different number of pixels than the monitor's physical, set number of pixels.

Current LCD technology cannot reproduce true color. A spectrum analysis of a well-calibrated CRT will have colors much closer to what they're supposed to be than an LCD panel.

 

[NeoNemesis]

life span of plasma is also a great deal less then LCD because the damn things seem to get darker and darker after 3-4 years.

 

[GCK]

Exactly...

One of the worst things about plasma is that the brightness is only 50% of what is was out of the box after approx. 20k-30k hours of use.

 

[nweibley]

Once again, as a plasma owner I laugh at the life expectancy nonsense. That simply is not true. Just like you dont recharge it after it "dies". And for the record, all of those doomsday 3-4 year figures are "half brightness" figures, so the set is still very usable at that "point" ... although with sane viewing habits it will NEVER be that soon.

 

[nweibley]

Exactly...

One of the worst things about plasma is that the brightness is only 50% of what is was out of the box after approx. 20k-30k hours of use.

I will also say that on our set "out of the box" you could make the thing so bright it was absolutely blinding. Perhaps 50% brightness is not all that bad anyways, considering most owners turn brightness / contrast etc down below 50% to get a near ISF calibration.

 

[Drakensoul]

I will also say that on our set "out of the box" you could make the thing so bright it was absolutely blinding. Perhaps 50% brightness is not all that bad anyways, considering most owners turn brightness / contrast etc down below 50% to get a near ISF calibration.

It is that bad, because you're paying for a product that performs as it does when you see it. Most people aren't told that the half-life for the plasma is 20kish hours, and that at that point it will be half as bright as it is now. The fact that, in your opinion, it's bright enough at 50% is completely irrelevant. It will be half as bright at any brightness setting, so if at 51% brightness it's well calibrated, 20K hours later, it would need to be at 101% to maintain the same level. And it will continue to dim.

A regulating body (FCC? Whatever) should require that the half-life time for plasma screens be advertised and explained to customers, because otherwise it's like a door-to-door vacuum salesman selling you a Dyson based on its awesome cleaning power, and then a year later it's a pale plastic toy version of the model you witnessed and bought and paid a high premium for.

The satement that under "sane" usage it will last longer is also completely irrelevant. Again, that's using your opinion of what "sane" is. If they aren't disclosing that it's going to dim by 50%, people shouldn't have to worry about curtailing their usage of it. If people want to leave the TV on 24/7, even when they aren't watching it, that's their business. This arguement would basically say to someone who came in to complain about their TV being half as lustrous as it was when he paid for it: "Well, you watched it too much." Uhh???

 

[Happy Hopping]

Exactly...

One of the worst things about plasma is that the brightness is only 50% of what is was out of the box after approx. 20k-30k hours of use.

Say taking the average of 25K. Most people, like myself, use 6 hr. a day, that yeilds 4166 days, which is 11+ years. That's pretty good consider I don't think the electronics behind the plasma will last that long.

Even at 20K hour, we still have 3333 days, which is 9.1 years, which means the electronics will fail behind the plasma screen itself in those 9+ yr.

 

[nweibley]

It is that bad, because you're paying for a product that performs as it does when you see it. Most people aren't told that the half-life for the plasma is 20kish hours, and that at that point it will be half as bright as it is now. The fact that, in your opinion, it's bright enough at 50% is completely irrelevant. It will be half as bright at any brightness setting, so if at 51% brightness it's well calibrated, 20K hours later, it would need to be at 101% to maintain the same level. And it will continue to dim.

A regulating body (FCC? Whatever) should require that the half-life time for plasma screens be advertised and explained to customers, because otherwise it's like a door-to-door vacuum salesman selling you a Dyson based on its awesome cleaning power, and then a year later it's a pale plastic toy version of the model you witnessed and bought and paid a high premium for.

The satement that under "sane" usage it will last longer is also completely irrelevant. Again, that's using your opinion of what "sane" is. If they aren't disclosing that it's going to dim by 50%, people shouldn't have to worry about curtailing their usage of it. If people want to leave the TV on 24/7, even when they aren't watching it, that's their business. This arguement would basically say to someone who came in to complain about their TV being half as lustrous as it was when he paid for it: "Well, you watched it too much." Uhh???

News flash. The people who spend 11 thousand dollars on a 42" TV are the same people that buy a hundred thousand dollar car just for the fun of having something extremely nice. They sell if a few years later and get another one.

It’s called disposable income. If people want to spend big money on some toys that are not going to last as long as the "financially sensible" alternative, so be it. I think you are partially taking that stance because you probably will never own one. You are discrediting them because you don't have / want to expend the means to get one.

That said, the people that DO have the means to spend so much on a nice plasma ARE NOT going to keep it for long. They are going to invest in the next new bleeding edge technology in a few years. The argument that these sets deteriorate rapidly is irrelevant. It still will not catch up with the amount of time these owners (myself included) are going to keep these TVs.

 

[nweibley]

For the record, my Sony XBR has been in my posession for just shy of a year and I watch it about 4 hours a day. 1461 hours later I still percieve the exact same brightness as the day I took it out of the box. Gee... I am so sorry I own it... it fits my room exactly the way I need, and I am yet to see an HDTV screen that rivals it (in real life, at least).

I sure should have gotten that sam's club DLP so I could watch the rainbow effect for the next 15 years. Awsome plan.

 

[figgie]

For the record, my Sony XBR has been in my posession for just shy of a year and I watch it about 4 hours a day. 1461 hours later I still percieve the exact same brightness as the day I took it out of the box. Gee... I am so sorry I own it... it fits my room exactly the way I need, and I am yet to see an HDTV screen that rivals it (in real life, at least).

I sure should have gotten that sam's club DLP so I could watch the rainbow effect for the next 15 years. Awsome plan.

Are you spitting what other people say or because you have seen it with YOUR Very own eyes? are you VERY aware that the so called rainbow is on a person by person case regardless of DLP tech used (be it HD2 HD2+ or 3 chip).

What in tarnation hell was that comment relevance on this thread anyway?

at this rate this thread is going to do what ever other VS threads does... get locked

 

[nweibley]

Are you spitting what other people say or because you have seen it with YOUR Very own eyes? are you VERY aware that the so called rainbow is on a person by person case regardless of DLP tech used (be it HD2 HD2+ or 3 chip).

My next door neighbor owns a brand new Samsung DLP widescreen that I set up for him and I find it completly intolerable.

Is that enough of MY OWN EYES for you?

Sorry, I am just speaking from PERSONAL actual experience. It doesn't have to be a locked thread. Nothing in here is really attacking. I hold strong on my opinions and information posted in my last post.

 

[Brad4321]

Well, there is something else you forgot to mention also.

CRT > LCD in size

After getting this 26", which is bigger than my TV, I won't go back to anything smaller. It makes my old 21" seem like a piece of shit.

 

[figgie]

My next door neighbor owns a brand new Samsung DLP widescreen that I set up for him and I find it completly intolerable.

Is that enough of MY OWN EYES for you?

Sorry, I am just speaking from PERSONAL actual experience. It doesn't have to be a locked thread. Nothing in here is really attacking. I hold strong on my opinions and information posted in my last post.

well then,

you should know that JUST like Plasma matures, DLP is no exception, Since we ARE talking about "high ticket items" We can go straight forward to HD2+ based DLP wheels ( btw that samsung is HD2 based). Those HD2+ based wheel have for the most part eliminated "rainbow" effect. Of course the only items that even have HD2+ currently are the big buck items that will more than likely fit in your budget. DLP based projectors. of course, if we have 100k cars rolling around that means we have disposable income (per your own words). No sense in dealing with color wheels at all and going straight up to 3 chip DLP based projection. No color wheel. Absolutley no way for rainbow. Of course we can still splurge some more money than that and get the be all, end all of the home theater world. Where digital (yes including the beloved plasma) WANTS to be but still has a way to go. Purchase a crt projector that will cost a cheap bmw brand new or watch our hard earned pennys and purchase a slightly used (20 hours usage) Marquee 9500lc for a price of a saturn. After all we are budget minded.

if you want i can discuss with you the merits and shortcoming of plasma in this thread or a new one. Up to you just because you say that you won't own the plasma for so long does not discredit the FACT that it still does lose brightness over time.

 

[nweibley]

just because you say that you won't own the plasma for so long does not discredit the FACT that it still does lose brightness over time.

Since you seem to know oh so much about HT, I am sure you know the FACT that CRT displays also lose brightness over time, many about as rapidly as Plasmas... little heard FACT.
Period.

 

[moralpanic]

Well, there is something else you forgot to mention also.

CRT > LCD in size

After getting this 26", which is bigger than my TV, I won't go back to anything smaller. It makes my old 21" seem like a piece of shit.

What monitor do you have that's 26"? I thought my Sony GDM-FW900 at 24" (with 22.5 viewing area) is the largest.

Also, 26" is large, but there are 30" LCDs now (computer monitors, not TV with their shitty resolutions).

 

[Pyrolistical]

Fair enough, but you forgot a few.

LCD over CRT, regarding geometry.
LCD over CRT, regarding text legibility.
LCD over CRT, regarding overall sharpness.
LCD over CRT, power consumption/heat.
CRT over LCD, black levels.
CRT over LCD, response times (streaking/blurring/etc)

- D.

Thanks, I knew I left out some

Oh and how about

LCD over CRT, regarding 'cool factor'.

 

[Clear]

CRT over LCD, regarding colour.
CRT over LCD, regarding constrast.
CRT over LCD, regarding price to screen size ratio.
CRT over LCD, regarding viewable angle.
CRT over LCD, regarding resolution (LCDs are fixed).
LCD over CRT, regarding size/weight.
LCD over CRT, regarding flickering.

That sums it up nicely... on a side note, I love my 172x even though the colors aren't perfect. No ghosting and text is amazing sharp.

 

[Drakensoul]

News flash. The people who spend 11 thousand dollars on a 42" TV are the same people that buy a hundred thousand dollar car just for the fun of having something extremely nice. They sell if a few years later and get another one.

It’s called disposable income. If people want to spend big money on some toys that are not going to last as long as the "financially sensible" alternative, so be it. I think you are partially taking that stance because you probably will never own one. You are discrediting them because you don't have / want to expend the means to get one.

That said, the people that DO have the means to spend so much on a nice plasma ARE NOT going to keep it for long. They are going to invest in the next new bleeding edge technology in a few years. The argument that these sets deteriorate rapidly is irrelevant. It still will not catch up with the amount of time these owners (myself included) are going to keep these TVs.

Wow, are you normally this unnecessarily rude to people in real life? No one posted anything that prompted your disgusting attitude, and we'll do fine without it. You didn't even read my message correctly, because I didn't in any way say anything about some mysterious "group of people" who are rich and spend extravagantly. Yet, somehow, you've managed to read my post as me being "jealous" of the rich, and decided that you subsequently have the right/responsibility to be an ass and flex your e-asshole.

"People who spend 11 thousand dollars on a 42" TV are the same people that buy a hundred thousand dollar car just for the fun of having something extremely nice. They sell if a few years later and get another one."

Well that's nice. Has absolutely nothing to do with anything that I was talking about, but woohoo. Oh, I suppose I can respond to it anyway. You see, unlike you, I don't claim to have an intuitive, inherent understanding (aka blanket generalization) of "the people" who do "things" like buy televisions. Your statment is flawed due to the fact that there's no correlation between people who buy televisions and people who buy cars. It's priority based: if people spend 90% of their time watching television, they'll probably allocate more of their budget to that aspect of their lives. And that has nothing to do with what car they drive. The "people" you've generalized no doubt exist, but to assume that you've accurately portrayed the populus is laughable.

"That said, the people that DO have the means to spend so much on a nice plasma ARE NOT going to keep it for long"

Another generalization which carries no weight. I'm sure there are some people who buy a new television every time the technology evolves because they have enough disposable income. But there are also people who make the $11,000 investment with the belief that it'll be something they can keep for a decent length of time without needing to upgrade. They both exist, so again, your statement is ultimately irrelevant.

"You are discrediting them because you don't have / want to expend the means to get one."

I'm glad you know me so well. Even though you don't know me at all. That takes skill.

I haven't discredited anyone. At all. Because I haven't even discussed the type of person that you've created to generalize everyone with. I said nothing about people who buy plasma televisions being unintelligent for doing so. I simply stated that the screens have a half-life which diminishes their performance by 50% after however many hours, and that this is a fact that customers should be made aware of. That's it.

Somehow you managed to take that premise and turn it into me attacking the rich because I'm jealous of their money. No, I don't really care what people spend their money on. If I even watched television, I might consider spending $11,000 on a nice one--actually, no, I'd get a DLP projector--but I don't, and so I won't. That also has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not I could afford it, nor does it contain any 'jealousy' on my part toward those who choose to buy them.

"Since you seem to know oh so much about HT, I am sure you know the FACT that CRT displays also lose brightness over time, many about as rapidly as Plasmas... little heard FACT. Period."

Seriously, I'd love to see data corroborating this for aperture grilles, as I've never heard of it (nor have I ever experienced it). Anything will lose efficiency over time, but I've never heard of an AG being anywhere near, by any measurement, as bad as a plasma.

But, yeah, I hope you feel better having found some anonymous venue on the internet through which to be overtly and unnecessarily angry and attack people for no reason. Get the anger out!

You're cool, you're cool!

 

[Dojo | Warlord]

Of course the exception to all of this is the:

NEC-Mitsubishi FP912SB / FP2141SB

19" and it's bigger 22" brother.

Best computer displays available. Although the NEC ones are hard to come by, the Mitsubishi 920SB is the same model as the 912SB from NEC and still being made. I don't know about the Mitsubishi "2141SB" version though...

At any rate, they are the creme of the crop in the CRT world and better than the vast majority, if not all current tech LCD's.

 

[nweibley]

Wow, are you normally this unnecessarily rude to people in real life? No one posted anything that prompted your disgusting attitude, and we'll do fine without it. You didn't even read my message correctly, because I didn't in any way say anything about some mysterious "group of people" who are rich and spend extravagantly. Yet, somehow, you've managed to read my post as me being "jealous" of the rich, and decided that you subsequently have the right/responsibility to be an ass and flex your e-asshole.

"People who spend 11 thousand dollars on a 42" TV are the same people that buy a hundred thousand dollar car just for the fun of having something extremely nice. They sell if a few years later and get another one."

Well that's nice. Has absolutely nothing to do with anything that I was talking about, but woohoo. Oh, I suppose I can respond to it anyway. You see, unlike you, I don't claim to have an intuitive, inherent understanding (aka blanket generalization) of "the people" who do "things" like buy televisions. Your statment is flawed due to the fact that there's no correlation between people who buy televisions and people who buy cars. It's priority based: if people spend 90% of their time watching television, they'll probably allocate more of their budget to that aspect of their lives. And that has nothing to do with what car they drive. The "people" you've generalized no doubt exist, but to assume that you've accurately portrayed the populus is laughable.

"That said, the people that DO have the means to spend so much on a nice plasma ARE NOT going to keep it for long"

Another generalization which carries no weight. I'm sure there are some people who buy a new television every time the technology evolves because they have enough disposable income. But there are also people who make the $11,000 investment with the belief that it'll be something they can keep for a decent length of time without needing to upgrade. They both exist, so again, your statement is ultimately irrelevant.

"You are discrediting them because you don't have / want to expend the means to get one."

I'm glad you know me so well. Even though you don't know me at all. That takes skill.

I haven't discredited anyone. At all. Because I haven't even discussed the type of person that you've created to generalize everyone with. I said nothing about people who buy plasma televisions being unintelligent for doing so. I simply stated that the screens have a half-life which diminishes their performance by 50% after however many hours, and that this is a fact that customers should be made aware of. That's it.

Somehow you managed to take that premise and turn it into me attacking the rich because I'm jealous of their money. No, I don't really care what people spend their money on. If I even watched television, I might consider spending $11,000 on a nice one--actually, no, I'd get a DLP projector--but I don't, and so I won't. That also has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not I could afford it, nor does it contain any 'jealousy' on my part toward those who choose to buy them.

"Since you seem to know oh so much about HT, I am sure you know the FACT that CRT displays also lose brightness over time, many about as rapidly as Plasmas... little heard FACT. Period."

Seriously, I'd love to see data corroborating this for aperture grilles, as I've never heard of it (nor have I ever experienced it). Anything will lose efficiency over time, but I've never heard of an AG being anywhere near, by any measurement, as bad as a plasma.

But, yeah, I hope you feel better having found some anonymous venue on the internet through which to be an angry asshole and attack people for no reason. Get the anger out!

You're cool, you're cool!

Why don't you PM me, I feel the context of our discussion will not be appropriate for this thread.

None the less, anything in our conversation outside of this thread that you feel important to make public: do so.

That said, I have a catagory 3 hurricane coming right at me, so it might be a while before we first get to communicate. I'm sure you understand.

 

[needmorecarnitine]

real life > specs

I have seen differences between different units of the same model (some monitors look better than others even of the same model). Not saying they all do it but it is out there

Of course the exception to all of this is the:

NEC-Mitsubishi FP912SB / FP2141SB

19" and it's bigger 22" brother.

Best computer displays available. Although the NEC ones are hard to come by, the Mitsubishi 920SB is the same model as the 912SB from NEC and still being made. I don't know about the Mitsubishi "2141SB" version though...

At any rate, they are the creme of the crop in the CRT world and better than the vast majority, if not all current tech LCD's.

I just bought a Mitsubishi DP930SB. I also recently returned a LCD. I want to get a better one (that one was decent but I want a better one). I had only had the Mitsubishi for about 4 days so I am still evaluating it.

It seems really good so far but I do have an issue. "Lines" are missing when using 120DPI at 1600x1200. Parts of every word (a line across the screen horizontally) are missing but appear if I highlight it. Only seems to happen at genmay though.

Running 1600x1200 @ 85Hz most of the time. I tried it at 1920x1440 also and it seem workable (everything is tiny though)

 

[Pcrepairman]

I also Had the 710T(Supposed the best on market) i returned it and got the 930SB and I am so happy now, I am just mad at myself that I paid the shipping on a LCD back and forth. IMO No LCS can even compare to a appature grille CRT, Well atleast not today they cant. There is always room for improvement and I hope there is going to be. Yes a crt is very big and takes alot of color and other things but now it is so much cheaper and the quality is just better. you just cant even compare IMO. To me the only people who should but LCD are those who needs them. To save space, power and other things that have already been mentioned. iff ya have room for a CRT then I would get one

 

[figgie]

Since you seem to know oh so much about HT, I am sure you know the FACT that CRT displays also lose brightness over time, many about as rapidly as Plasmas... little heard FACT.
Period.

Hmm... never i recalled complaining about that.... let see... just reread every post of mine and no where did I MYSELF state that CRT's DO NOT lose brightness. Funny that people actaully have been getting a confirmed 15k hours of usage out of CRT. This is before they start to actually burn the phosphor. mind you has plasma even gotten to that point yet?

Good luck with Hurricane Charlie. Cat 3 is no joke.

 

[Drakensoul]

Why don't you PM me, I feel the context of our discussion will not be appropriate for this thread.

None the less, anything in our conversation outside of this thread that you feel important to make public: do so.

That said, I have a catagory 3 hurricane coming right at me, so it might be a while before we first get to communicate. I'm sure you understand.

Nope, I won't be PMing you, because there's nothing to discuss.

I'm in Florida, too, projected to hit here Saturday morning, and I'm still able to type on a forum. It's magical.

 

[Ice Czar]

Nope, I won't be PMing you

however you have a PM

I hope you feel better having found some anonymous venue on the internet through which to be an angry asshole and attack people for no reason.

nweibley, employed argumentive tactics allowed by the rules, as did you right up to the asshole comment above, which does qualify as a flame, something we take very seriously around here

 

[Drakensoul]

Oh, I didn't even think of asshole as a flame.

I call everyone asshole; I really couldn't care less about the situation and thusly wouldn't be anywhere near the level needed to be angry enough to 'flame' someone. That's just what he's obviously doing.

Sorry for the misunderstanding, edited to reflect its actual intent.