Suggestions for Purchase of a new Graphic Design Monitor

I would like to upgrade to systems that would be more standard at this point (LCD), but we don't have the money to do them all at once, and having one monitor different causes a lot of frustration, since the primary users aren't very tolerant of technological differences/difficulties ; ) If the photographer takes her photo and sees it on one screen (using Windows Picture Viewer, since she's not computer savvy and isn't going to learn Photoshop), then goes over to our designer's computer, and sees a whole different looking photo in Photoshop, frustration ensues. Since this is already a problem, I don't particularly want to throw an LCD into the mix, unless it seems an LCD will be superior and inevitable.

unassassinable:

When you say calibration, do you mean going through the black/brightness and gamma/contrast tests, and then looking through various sample photos to eyeball colors? or do you mean more, like actually buying colorimeters, profiling, matching printer output to monitor output, etc.?

I'll post what I'm starting to find, reading through various sites and specs. However, it's mostly irrelevant to us for now, because we've decided to go with a switcharoo in the studio here, rather than buying something new.

Just to sum my general understanding, in the short amount of time I spent on it.
It's not really going to matter at this point, CRT and LCD, and CRTs, as stated above, are pretty much going away.
CRTs have better color reproduction and ranges (hardware measurement-wise), but LCDs "look" better and less strenuous to look at, have sharper pixels, are less weighty, take up less space (obviously), and use less energy (plus a smaller magnetic field). Sounds like LCDs generally require more configuration upon setup, whereas CRTs turn on ready to go (old data?).
Eizo is the "Rolls Royce" of LCDs, so... expensive. Apple, NEC, LaCie are excellent, as well. Samsung (since they make the screens some of these monitors use) must also have good models. Dells have many desirable specs and seem affordable with good warranties.
IPS type technologies are desirable, but many have no problem with S-PVA. The issue, or part thereof, seems to revolve around actually reproducing the full range of claimed colors (16.7 million often).
20ms or faster response time is good. I had no problem finding monitors with 16ms or 8ms gray-to-gray.
160°-178° viewing angles were also common.
Depending on lighting conditions, 110 cd/m² is, according to some, more than sufficient and is appropriate for viewing comfort. Most LCDs are way beyond that (220+). Some have sensors to adjust backlighting according to ambient lighting (some Eizo models, for example).
Some rotate for portrait layout. Cool! Some apparently don't come with the software to make the image also rotate... ? Not sure.

I appreciated all the comments, since each had useful aspects for me to consider.

The links below each had useful aspects, as well:
Void Pointer, Buying an LCD
http://textblog.anands.net/archives/11

LCD vs. CRT, part 1
http://americanprinter.com/mag/lcd_vs_crt_0305_1/

Comparative Test: CRT vs LCD
http://www.behardware.com/articles/511-1/duel-ecrans-lcd-contre-crt.html

Best LCD Monitor
http://www.graphicdesignforum.com/forum/archive/index.php/t-14044.html (quoted below)
(sukkapatta:
For graphic design, especially desktop publishing, stay away from TN,PVA,S-PVA,MVA Panels. Mostly made by Samsung & Au-optronics.
Your choices are limited(S-IPS, AS-IPS,H-IPS) panels made by LG.Philips, Hitachi but they are almost 100% higher than PVA and MVA pannels as PVA,MVA are 100% higher than TN panels, those you always see everywhere in big box stores.
So close to $1000 you can get decent NEC, Eizo, Lacei, Apple Cinema or view sonic VP series.
Go for latest IPS technology, highest resolution and digital inputs. EG. DVI-D,DVI,HDMI,HDCP
Hope this info is helpful)

LCD TVs and Response Times
http://www.flattvpeople.com/tutorials/lcd-response-time.asp

Oh! and contrast ratios varied from 500:1 to 1000:1, with 500:1 and 800:1 being common.

Aspect ratios are potentially important, too, since some claimed 4:3 was necessary for proper, undistorted display. So it seems you usually have to figure out the widescreen ratios, since most aren't stated directly (just in terms of dimensions).

would you mind telling us what monitor you got? i was going to ask a similar question. would love to know what you ended up purchasing