4 ms·

Just before you get excited, it takes 30secs to refresh

• sydd 4y ago
  Yeah, this is the huge drawback. Also AFAIK there are better screens already out there with >1000 colours, e.g. Boox Nova C https://medium.com/boox-content-hub/e-ink-kaleido-vs-new-kaleido-plus-vs-acep-color-e-ink-comparison-647ed241cb3a https://medium.com/boox-content-hub/e-ink-kaleido-vs-new-kal...
  • shultays 4y ago
    I heard about that new tech but didn't know about them hitting the market. Are those also sold separately as just displays? Hopefully without the cost of an arm and leg
    • deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
    • sydd 4y ago
      The issue is that the eink company has a monopoly in the market mainly due to them owning lots of patents. Also they seem to be only caring of the wholesale market, thus their new tech for the DIY/hacker crowd arrives always with a significant delay. There is a single competitor DES color, but they seem to be in presale since years. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ckFJar6NC0o https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ckFJar6NC0o
• ElijahLynn 4y ago
  The article says 15secs. I don't know what is right, just sayin'.
  • shultays 4y ago
    It could be right, 30 secs was my own timings. 2 updates were taking about a minute. Although on a different brand 5.7" 7 color eink display (Waveshare) but they look the same except how they are connected I think it might be because I think two screens are using different algorithms to change images. Mine can only do a full clear, the author mentions that you need to do full clears from time to time to avoid ghosting or permanent burning. So maybe 15 secs is only for non-full clear image change Tbf not much difference between 15 or 30 secs when it comes to usability