4 ms·

I'm not convinced there is a large demand for these. While LCDs work poorly in bright sunlight, e-ink works poorly in darkness. Humans are more likely using a

by bsder 4y ago

I'm not convinced there is a large demand for these. While LCDs work poorly in bright sunlight, e-ink works poorly in darkness. Humans are more likely using a display in a poorly lit area than a brightly lit one. In addition, e-ink uses less energy only if the image isn't really changing. If the image is refreshing, there is a bunch of energy being blown to overwrite the old image. That's not power friendly. Finally, I seem to remember that there were a bunch of patents in the way.

TedDoesntTalk 4y ago
> e-ink works poorly in darkness Exactly why I’ve bought many kindle fires over the years but not a single kindle e-ink reader
- zoul 4y ago
  The backlight on e-ink Kindles works just fine.
  - TedDoesntTalk 4y ago
    Never knew it had a backlight!
    - locusofself 4y ago
      they are lit from the sides with LEDs. I've heard it referred to as "front light", they aren't backlit.
    - seized 4y ago
      It's been standard for quite a few years now. Not a huge hit in battery life either.
  - adhesive_wombat 4y ago
    Some of them can change warmth as well (at least on Kobo) which is a cute feature.
stormbrew 4y ago
> While LCDs work poorly in bright sunlight, e-ink works poorly in darkness I think if you took the backlight out of both of these options you'd find that the lcd doesn't perform so great in the dark either.
- AshamedCaptain 4y ago
  Actually, if you removed the backlight of the LCD, you'd find the LCD does become worse in darkness, but then performs significantly better in sunlight. Think classic Game Boy. This fact is the basis of transflective LCDs, which can work both in sunlight as well as in darkness conditions, and have improved up to the point they compete in contrast with e-Ink panels.
  - stormbrew 4y ago
    "significantly better in the sunlight" is not how I'd describe any pre-backlight Gameboys, honestly (including the original). The levels of light in which you could usefully play them were a very narrow band that I would describe as "lots of ambient light but no direct light at all". Hell even most of the front lights you could mount on a Gameboy created unviewable hotspots of light around the edges. eInk has a much much wider range of workable light levels than any lcd I've used, with or without a backlight. The recent trend away from diffusion layers on lcd glass has also made it a lot worse.
robinsoh 4y ago
> Finally, I seem to remember that there were a bunch of patents in the way. Remember? Meaning you worked in the display industry? I work in the display industry. I've never heard anything like what you describe, except on HN comments and blogs that use HN comments as citations. Look at my comment history. I think your claim is false because everytime I've challenged a claim like yours the poster has never been able to substantiate it, but I keep an open mind, if you can provide some real citations backing your claim then I'm happy to be corrected.
- 314 4y ago
  Looking through your comment history it seems that you have interrogated any poster who was ever mentioned patent problems, and demanded that they provide you with sources. It is not clear why they are required to do that. https://patents.justia.com/assignee/e-ink-holdings-inc https://patents.justia.com/assignee/e-ink-holdings-inc That is quite a jumble of overlapping / inter-locking patents. The goal is to prevent competition using similar technology. It looks effective. And to answer your next question, no I'm not in the display industry, just thought it seemed interesting.
  - rjh29 4y ago
    Challenging unsourced assumptions and combating misinformation is a noble goal. Is there any actual proof that companies other than e-Ink are unable to develop technology like this 7-colour display due to patents?
    - 314 4y ago
      Not that I could find - but I didn't look for long to satisfy my curiosity. There was a case where e-Ink defended against another patent claim, but not any where they were the aggressor. The set of patents could be for defensive purposes (as in to be used in defending against other patents), or to prevent competition. I didn't find anything definite either way, but as always absence of evidence doesn't really mean much.
      - 4y ago

by bsder 4y ago

TedDoesntTalk 4y ago

> e-ink works poorly in darkness Exactly why I’ve bought many kindle fires over the years but not a single kindle e-ink reader

zoul 4y ago
The backlight on e-ink Kindles works just fine.
- TedDoesntTalk 4y ago
  Never knew it had a backlight!
  - locusofself 4y ago
    they are lit from the sides with LEDs. I've heard it referred to as "front light", they aren't backlit.
  - seized 4y ago
    It's been standard for quite a few years now. Not a huge hit in battery life either.
- adhesive_wombat 4y ago
  Some of them can change warmth as well (at least on Kobo) which is a cute feature.

stormbrew 4y ago

> While LCDs work poorly in bright sunlight, e-ink works poorly in darkness I think if you took the backlight out of both of these options you'd find that the lcd doesn't perform so great in the dark either.

AshamedCaptain 4y ago
Actually, if you removed the backlight of the LCD, you'd find the LCD does become worse in darkness, but then performs significantly better in sunlight. Think classic Game Boy. This fact is the basis of transflective LCDs, which can work both in sunlight as well as in darkness conditions, and have improved up to the point they compete in contrast with e-Ink panels.
- stormbrew 4y ago
  "significantly better in the sunlight" is not how I'd describe any pre-backlight Gameboys, honestly (including the original). The levels of light in which you could usefully play them were a very narrow band that I would describe as "lots of ambient light but no direct light at all". Hell even most of the front lights you could mount on a Gameboy created unviewable hotspots of light around the edges. eInk has a much much wider range of workable light levels than any lcd I've used, with or without a backlight. The recent trend away from diffusion layers on lcd glass has also made it a lot worse.

robinsoh 4y ago

> Finally, I seem to remember that there were a bunch of patents in the way. Remember? Meaning you worked in the display industry? I work in the display industry. I've never heard anything like what you describe, except on HN comments and blogs that use HN comments as citations. Look at my comment history. I think your claim is false because everytime I've challenged a claim like yours the poster has never been able to substantiate it, but I keep an open mind, if you can provide some real citations backing your claim then I'm happy to be corrected.

314 4y ago
Looking through your comment history it seems that you have interrogated any poster who was ever mentioned patent problems, and demanded that they provide you with sources. It is not clear why they are required to do that. https://patents.justia.com/assignee/e-ink-holdings-inc https://patents.justia.com/assignee/e-ink-holdings-inc That is quite a jumble of overlapping / inter-locking patents. The goal is to prevent competition using similar technology. It looks effective. And to answer your next question, no I'm not in the display industry, just thought it seemed interesting.
- rjh29 4y ago
  Challenging unsourced assumptions and combating misinformation is a noble goal. Is there any actual proof that companies other than e-Ink are unable to develop technology like this 7-colour display due to patents?
  - 314 4y ago
    Not that I could find - but I didn't look for long to satisfy my curiosity. There was a case where e-Ink defended against another patent claim, but not any where they were the aggressor. The set of patents could be for defensive purposes (as in to be used in defending against other patents), or to prevent competition. I didn't find anything definite either way, but as always absence of evidence doesn't really mean much.
    - 4y ago