The main advantages of CRT’s include:
Some could argue that more energy is used, but these people tend to be the most wasteful. Also disposing of CRTs can be infuriating. If someone is about to complain about lead or radiation, there are more harmful radio waves that you can't control, as well as microwaves including the machine named after it; there are always worse things.
CRTS lasted a long time
CRTs can produce a lower Progressive scan ratio, although I find Interlaced superior.
The highest resolution I found of a CRT is the Sony GDM-FW900 Computer CRT 2304*1440 with an 8:5 ratio (some people would say 16:10, you are supposed to reduce it).
The highest TV ratio was 1080i around 30 and 40 inches.
The only problem is that it can be an issue of size, if you make some too big, they die quickly. Although this is from the older CRTs, the newer ones are very very thin. They were making improvements as late as the early 2000's (just a decade ago).
Cathode ray tubes are great. HDCRTs could easily be cheaper today than [digital] HDTVs, we could probably up the resolution above 1080i. But because two out of thousands hang them up they need to be "flat" stopping CRTs from being sold. There were HDCRTs being made that were just as thin as other HDTVs. Force a higher price on something that doesn't need it. Plus many people have them fall and break; from just stands. How many CRTs break on their own? TVs should have weight to it, and forcing something smaller to increase price is ridiculous. There were thinner CRTs, people tend to remember the really fat ones, although I think they were more expensive so not worth taking ten inches off of my TV stand that won't be used.
They were expensive, they were new. Unless you get a Digital twelve inch (16:9 so it seems smaller) it will cost you plenty. I remember being able to get a 19inch CRT for $100 in 2000, inflation will change price, but even if you factor value of $:$ it is still cheaper.
CRTs are superior to Digital HDTV, the only thing people could argue is resolution; that could easily be fixed. True blacks, high contrast, and viewing angles to name a few. We've gotten to the point where "flatscreens" need to be curved. Add these HDMI ports and you could be done. People had to use a VHS to have composite plugs. If we needed to we still could.
I for one think that widescreen is to wide. Yes humans see with a wide gaze, but people ignore focal point. I hate 16:9, I would prefer a resolution like, say, 5:3; hear me out, the resolution might seem low, but quality isn't necessarily so. 5000:3000 would be higher than what is commonly sold. I think that is severely high and possibly not used by CRTs, but more easily possible by technology and price effectiveness.
I wish [Surface-conduction electron-emitter display] SED TVs were made like they were going to. I'd love to have seen them and use them. Imagine a thin screened CRT TV, but with the giant tube being many small tubes behind each pixel. If they were around I would get one no sweat.
I still use CRTs, they have lasted an extremely long time, the only problems I have are some Modern Video Games and Widescreened TV (I see most fine, reading can be difficult and wasted borders annoy me) including fathead, skinny-head, picture frame and the static sounds changing to commercial breaks.