4 ms·
> e-ink are more than sufficient for text, and suffice for getting a general sense of video Hard disagree but I understand this is personal and that perceived
by DoingIsLearning 4y ago
> e-ink are more than sufficient for text, and suffice for getting a general sense of video
Hard disagree but I understand this is personal and that perceived experience will vary across the board.
- dredmorbius 4y agoI'm curious how you find e-ink insufficient / unsuited to text specifically.
- DoingIsLearning 4y agoYou left out the rest of the sentence :) ... E-ink is not the medium for getting a sense of a video, also at least for wrinting tasks more than reading, smooth scrolling is a much needed feature to not get disoriented. I agree that e-ink is great for _reading_ text which is why it is used in e-readers.
- dredmorbius 4y agoAnd you'd not indicated what you were disagreeing with. I'll say again that on the device I have, I can quite reasonably get a sense of a video. Video of BOOX playing video: https://yewtu.be.com/watch?v=XRDJv_-wWBI https://yewtu.be.com/watch?v=XRDJv_-wWBI (Videoception!) Yes, it's B&W, yes, the framerate is low (about 4--8 fps AFAICT), and yes, there's some ghosting. But it's clear what the content is. Not appreciably worth from an old B&W television in the day --- better resolution for lower framerate, perhaps, on e-ink. If I'm writing text, it's almost always within vim or a similar text editor, and my navigation is either paging forward or back through the document (full-screen repaints), or using search. Again, that is well-suited to e-ink.