4 ms·
>Not when the patents are tightly held by a greedy patent troll who seems to do everything in their power to stop hobbyists and hackers That's a bit disingenuo
by FirmwareBurner 3y ago
>Not when the patents are tightly held by a greedy patent troll who seems to do everything in their power to stop hobbyists and hackers
That's a bit disingenuous and short-sighted view from people not knowing or understanding the industry, market, technology and manufacturing challenges. Sure, like any successful tech company, e-ink owns patents and controls a large part of the market more-or-less, but patents aren't the main reasons why the e-paper industry hasn't moved forward.
That's kind of like saying "ASML's and Cymer's patents are the reason the EUV lithography hasn't moved forward and why they have no competition."
No mate, that's not true. Just like EUV lithography, making e-ink tech displays, affordably, and at scale with good yields and healthy margins to keep the industry afloat, is hard, very hard, bordering on magic, which is the main reason they have no competition.
Turns out making minuscule pigment electrostatic particles that can quicky move around inside a fluid suspension and hold their position long enough at various ambient conditions, is a huge challenge, and manufacturing that at scale with very low defects and sustainable margins is even harder.
Nothing in their patents currently is holding back competition, but competition can't reach the scale and yields that would make enough profits to support a viable competitor consider even entering this field, versus OLED displays, as that's where thew real money is in display manufacturing right now and that's where the competition is heating up and where all the R&D money gets poured.
That's why there's been various alternatives to e-ink-like tech popping up from university research labs and being displayed at trade shows, but going from a research lab one-off prototype being shown at trade shows, to mass production at scale with good yields and profit margins, is the real challenge and is where e-ink has their secret sauce that nobody can successfully replicate.
Similarly how China has been showing off working home grown Xnm lithography prototype chips that can compete with TSMC, but reaching the yields and volumes of TSMC is where the impossible to cross cliff lies, and why people get confused and don't understand that the major challenge lies in manufacturing at scale and not just the core tech that makes the widget unique.
I'm not defending e-ink the company and their corporate practices, just wanted to shed some light on the technicalities of the subject and hopefully clear some of the FUD and conspiracies that get wrongfully spread around.
- orhmeh09 3y ago> That's a bit disingenuous and short-sighted view from people not knowing or understanding the industry, market, technology and manufacturing challenges. For clarification -- disingenuous is defined as: > not candid or sincere, typically by pretending that one knows less about something than one really does In your post, are you claiming there's a shadowy group of people who at the same time are both unknowledgeable but also conspiring to hide their own knowledge?
- FirmwareBurner 3y agoSorry, I'm not a native English speaker. "disingenuous " was the wrong word in that context. I meant to use it as a synonym for "unfair" and made a mistake. >In your post, are you claiming there's a shadowy group of people who at the same time are both unknowledgeable but also conspiring to hide their own knowledge? No, that's nowhere near close to what I claimed. I think my post was clear on what I meant despite my mistake: that people are too quick to blame e-ink the company for malice without understanding the technical challenges around industrialization of such technology and the economic factors of the e-ink-like products market (profit margins, supply/demand) that drive competition and investments, or lack thereof, in this tech.
- kragen 3y agoit is definitely not a synonym for "unfair"; it is a serious attack on the integrity of the person you were responding to, and you should apologize to them
- FirmwareBurner 3y agoI do believe the first word in my previous comment was "sorry" for the mistake, and unfortunately I can't edit that comment anymore to correct the mistake. Also, I have no reason to apologies to the commenter as he did not provide any evidence to support his claims that "e-ink is evil" in order for his integrity to be affected, to warrant an apology for my counter-arguments, nor do I think the original commenter is petty enough to be offended by my honest mistake, which I rectified later.