I use a TV as a monitor. When looking for a monitor at the time I noticed TVs are much cheaper. When I compared the specs, I couldn't find any disernable difference.

1. Is this still true that TVs are considerably cheaper than monitors?

2. Is there a difference, or one I should care about between the two?

TVs still are cheaper.

There are differences.

Just to name a few:

Monitors have better colour accuracy, higher refresh rates, have features like Gsync/freesync, way faster response times, more and better ports like displayport 2.1 and usb c, lower input lag.

This comment answers your first question in considerable detail: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42427344

Yes. Can I get a 60" monitor for cheap?

Can you get one for cheap? Yes Can you get a good one for cheap? No

Sceptre has a few 55 inch and 65 inch models.

E.g. 4k 55" for $599: https://www.sceptre.com/TV/4K-UHD-TV/U557CV-UMRB-55-4K-UHD-T...

I've also seen Supersonic and Caixun mentioned in these discussions.

Can also be worth looking at "outdoor TVs" like Sunbrite.

60" is too big even for me, but I'd pay good money for a 42" 8K monitor.

How about Postium? If you're willing to pay good money there are actually bunch of options even for individuals.

https://www.postium.com/8k-series

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1768977-REG/postium_k...

OK that's fair since I said "good money" but $10K is a bit out of reach. I was thinking more in the $2K range. My best option today is a MacBook Pro Max with a quad 4K setup, which is relatively affordable but unwieldy and requires at least two Thunderbolt cables (or a desktop setup).

I don't think these are 8K monitors. They support 8K input via 4x 12G SDI, but they contain 4K panels at 3840 x 2160.