3 ms·

I don't have a horse in this race, but I have often heard in these threads the rumor that the reason the Remarkable E-Ink tablet cannot be fully open-source is

I don't have a horse in this race, but I have often heard in these threads the rumor that the reason the Remarkable E-Ink tablet cannot be fully open-source is due to restrictive licenses for the E-ink technology they use. Basically people are upset (understandably) that they're holding this amazing technology in their hands but are not free to use it to its full potential, as the actual Remarkable software is pretty limited, despite running on Linux. I don't have any idea of whether this is really true or not, but at least it's a falsifiable claim that might help you or someone knowledgeable pin down the origin :)

robinsoh 5y ago
> but I have often heard in these threads the rumor that the reason the Remarkable E-Ink tablet cannot be fully open-source is due to restrictive licenses for the E-ink technology they use. isn't the founder of Remarkable an HN user? I am interested to knoww for sure if this is a fact. Is EInk is violating on infringing upon the GPL? > Basically people are upset (understandably) that they're holding this amazing technology in their hands but are not free to use it to its full potential, I think my understanding of the technology and its potential is different than what marketing people may be saying. Let me paste what I wrote before about it. " I work in the display industry. My take is neither will happen. Lets start with B. > B) Color e-ink displays get good enough for interactive use, movie watching, etc. There is no commercially sold genuine color e-ink today. Kaleido is a grayscale e-ink with a color filter laminated on top. Kaleido Plus is just the same with a light guide. E Ink did show off a genuine color display back in 2018 called Advanced Color and marketed as "Gallery". But it would take 30s to display an image and it was 32 colors or 16 colors. Not 16-bit color. I mean only 16 colors. E Ink tried to get the industry to buy in and start making products using this technology but nobody really signed on. They revamped their production to then start producing 7 color panels in much smaller sizes like 5" for signage. I heard that hasn't hit the numbers they needed to even cover their RnD costs. I doubt it will be a commercial success. When you say "good enough for movie watching", I'll say that'll never ever happen with electrophoresis. You can't violate physics. Either a pigment particle moves slowly and stably or it moves fast and is unstable. You'll never be able to get both. That's why newer technologies by various startups like ClearInk sacrifice the bi-stability in order to get fast video speeds. But look at the market response, the market isn't exactly embracing that either. Venture capitalists aren't exactly eager to fund the billions needed to create new display tech when they could invest in some new internet services startup or AI/ML startup instead. As for A), these are all emissive technologies. They will by their physics always be distinguishable from paper. As to whether you'll care or not, that is something I can't predict. "
- baybal2 5y ago
  > When you say "good enough for movie watching", I'll say that'll never ever happen with electrophoresis. You can't violate physics. Either a pigment particle moves slowly and stably or it moves fast and is unstable Do you remember mirasol display? You don't necessarily need pigments to produce colours.
  - robinsoh 5y ago
    > > When you say "good enough for movie watching", I'll say that'll never ever happen with electrophoresis. You can't violate physics. Either a pigment particle moves slowly and stably or it moves fast and is unstable > Do you remember mirasol display? You don't necessarily need pigments to produce colours. I hope you can see the main part where I specifically stated we are talking about electrophoresis only. If you want to start including interferometry then that's a different topic. There's sadly, good reasons why Qualcomm killed Mirasol. But that's another story for another day.
    - faeyanpiraat 5y ago
      Is it just a long story or you have an NDA?
kadoban 5y ago
You can run arbitrary software on the Remarkable, in case you weren't aware (quite easily even, you can ssh in out-of-the-box) The supplied software isn't all Open Source, and I wouldn't be surprised if there's some drivers or firmware that can't be Open Source on it. But I don't see how it even _could be_ the e-ink part that's forcing the main UI software parts to be closed source.

robinsoh 5y ago

> but I have often heard in these threads the rumor that the reason the Remarkable E-Ink tablet cannot be fully open-source is due to restrictive licenses for the E-ink technology they use. isn't the founder of Remarkable an HN user? I am interested to knoww for sure if this is a fact. Is EInk is violating on infringing upon the GPL? > Basically people are upset (understandably) that they're holding this amazing technology in their hands but are not free to use it to its full potential, I think my understanding of the technology and its potential is different than what marketing people may be saying. Let me paste what I wrote before about it. " I work in the display industry. My take is neither will happen. Lets start with B. > B) Color e-ink displays get good enough for interactive use, movie watching, etc. There is no commercially sold genuine color e-ink today. Kaleido is a grayscale e-ink with a color filter laminated on top. Kaleido Plus is just the same with a light guide. E Ink did show off a genuine color display back in 2018 called Advanced Color and marketed as "Gallery". But it would take 30s to display an image and it was 32 colors or 16 colors. Not 16-bit color. I mean only 16 colors. E Ink tried to get the industry to buy in and start making products using this technology but nobody really signed on. They revamped their production to then start producing 7 color panels in much smaller sizes like 5" for signage. I heard that hasn't hit the numbers they needed to even cover their RnD costs. I doubt it will be a commercial success. When you say "good enough for movie watching", I'll say that'll never ever happen with electrophoresis. You can't violate physics. Either a pigment particle moves slowly and stably or it moves fast and is unstable. You'll never be able to get both. That's why newer technologies by various startups like ClearInk sacrifice the bi-stability in order to get fast video speeds. But look at the market response, the market isn't exactly embracing that either. Venture capitalists aren't exactly eager to fund the billions needed to create new display tech when they could invest in some new internet services startup or AI/ML startup instead. As for A), these are all emissive technologies. They will by their physics always be distinguishable from paper. As to whether you'll care or not, that is something I can't predict. "

baybal2 5y ago
> When you say "good enough for movie watching", I'll say that'll never ever happen with electrophoresis. You can't violate physics. Either a pigment particle moves slowly and stably or it moves fast and is unstable Do you remember mirasol display? You don't necessarily need pigments to produce colours.
- robinsoh 5y ago
  > > When you say "good enough for movie watching", I'll say that'll never ever happen with electrophoresis. You can't violate physics. Either a pigment particle moves slowly and stably or it moves fast and is unstable > Do you remember mirasol display? You don't necessarily need pigments to produce colours. I hope you can see the main part where I specifically stated we are talking about electrophoresis only. If you want to start including interferometry then that's a different topic. There's sadly, good reasons why Qualcomm killed Mirasol. But that's another story for another day.
  - faeyanpiraat 5y ago
    Is it just a long story or you have an NDA?

kadoban 5y ago

You can run arbitrary software on the Remarkable, in case you weren't aware (quite easily even, you can ssh in out-of-the-box) The supplied software isn't all Open Source, and I wouldn't be surprised if there's some drivers or firmware that can't be Open Source on it. But I don't see how it even _could be_ the e-ink part that's forcing the main UI software parts to be closed source.