4 ms·

We saw the same trajectory with high refresh rate displays. Back in the CRT days, you could set your display to 200+Hz on some monitors, 85Hz was common, and 7

We saw the same trajectory with high refresh rate displays. Back in the CRT days, you could set your display to 200+Hz on some monitors, 85Hz was common, and 72Hz was the minimum. At the same time, you had devices with reflective LCDs that worked outside. Then LCD monitors came along, and suddenly we went from 1600x1200@75Hz to 1280x1024@60Hz. Anyone who complained was placed in nutjob territory -- "you can't see more than 24fps", "human reaction time is over 100ms", "you're holding it wrong", etc. Then, finally, high refresh rates became common, because they are objectively and subjectively superior. Eink will go through a similar process of nerd shaming as the patents expire and new competitors emerge, but eventually outdoor capable displays will also become a normal, acceptable option.

robinsoh 5y ago
> Eink will go through a similar process of nerd shaming as the patents expire and new competitors emerge, but eventually outdoor capable displays will also become a normal, acceptable option. Which patents? How will any company get past G = τ / γ ? You do realize that in the last 30 years of development in electrophoretics, the update time has remained around 700ms right? Those who do better like Clearink do it by sacrificing bistability. Please see my comment history, eg: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28740452#28746303 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28740452#28746303 , for why I strongly doubt your claims. I don't see how your observations about LCD apply to electrophoresis, unless there's some new physics that you're describing.