3 ms·

Even at high-quality display, B&W e-ink offers 2--4 Hz refresh, and can offer ~16 Hz or better in "X-Mode" display. I won't pretend that's great video quality,

Even at high-quality display, B&W e-ink offers 2--4 Hz refresh, and can offer ~16 Hz or better in "X-Mode" display. I won't pretend that's great video quality, but it is possible to view animations or videos using it. There are higher-refresh displays as well. This one advertises 60 Hz refresh and colour (it's not clear whether colour can drive at 60 Hz). <https://www.tomshardware.com/monitors/new-open-source-high-resolution-e-ink-monitor-announced-modos-paper-delivers-1200p-in-a-133-inch-form-factor https://www.tomshardware.com/monitors/new-open-source-high-r...> <https://www.modos.tech/blog/modos-paper-monitor-pre-launch-on-crowd-supply https://www.modos.tech/blog/modos-paper-monitor-pre-launch-o...> Video demo: <https://yewtu.be/embed/pXn-bAwzNv4 https://yewtu.be/embed/pXn-bAwzNv4> It's true that some colour displays currently run slower. There's also an "e-paper" technology, based on LCD, which offers far higher refresh and AFAIU no ghosting. (I've been using an e-ink tablet for the past 3+ years, and frankly love it.) And yes, I'll also freely admit that e-ink is better tuned to less-active text displays. That said, it absolutely can refresh multiple times per minute if necessary, and that's sufficient for quite a number of display applications.

Dylan16807 2y ago
Those look like a blurry mess when you put video on them. "Possible" is not good enough. With black and white you can probably get a clean frame change in a second. With color, if you want it to look good it's going to take a long time to swap images. And even then the people you're trying to impress will not like the whole screen flashing when it clears ghosts. > There's also an "e-paper" technology, based on LCD That's just a marketing name. It's worth talking about but pretty separately. And if you want color the brightness is going to be awful.
- dredmorbius 2y ago
  Your original claim was that e-ink displays are incapable of "multiple frames per minute". Even allowing for hyperbole, that's simply not true, and it's well past time we retired that very tired meme. Fact is that e-ink delivers acceptable multi-Hz update capabilities. I've used one such device (Onyx BOOX Max Lumi, with E INK Mobius and Carta HD display). I use it for interactive applications, animations, and video regularly. Yes, it's advisable to change the display mode, but at anything but the highest display quality, most animations are tolerable. Not ideal, but tolerable. And you don't have to take my word for it, there are numerous reviews and videos showing performance. And if you're specifically designing applications or use-cases for the devices capabilities, you can do far better than that. Which would include frequent updates. Appropriate use of technology means playing to strengths, and e-ink has numerous capabilities emissive displays simply cannot match which I've discussed previously, e.g., <https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31396797 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31396797>. For a large-format display application you absolutely can have frequent updates. More than once a minute is trivial, and as often as several times a second involves very few distractions or compromises. No, you're not going to prefer e-ink for gaming or as your principle display for streaming video over an OLED or similar monitor. But both of those uses are reasonably within achievable capabilities of products shipped years ago. "Gaming on e-ink" turns up numerous demos. No, it's not what you'd get on a gaming rig, but despite everything you've said and doubled-down on, it is possible: <https://yewtu.be/watch?v=gPwiNVcppmg https://yewtu.be/watch?v=gPwiNVcppmg> (Actual usage starts around 8 minutes in.) Similarly, that gaming rig doesn't do so hot in direct sunlight, persisting display, or low-power consumption. Each tech has its strengths and weaknesses. The distinction between "E Ink" and "E Paper" is made because they're both extant shipping technologies, similar in some regards but based on distinct and different processes, and with different display capabilities. Accuracy, truth, and distinctions all matter.
  - Dylan16807 2y ago
    > Your original claim was that e-ink displays are incapable of "multiple frames per minute". In the context of a color display, getting good brightness, and not tolerating visible artifacts, I stand by that claim. Compromising on some of those lets you go a lot faster. But it's also a lot less impressive to look at. You lose the advantages over a bright (by TV standards) TV.

Dylan16807 2y ago

Those look like a blurry mess when you put video on them. "Possible" is not good enough. With black and white you can probably get a clean frame change in a second. With color, if you want it to look good it's going to take a long time to swap images. And even then the people you're trying to impress will not like the whole screen flashing when it clears ghosts. > There's also an "e-paper" technology, based on LCD That's just a marketing name. It's worth talking about but pretty separately. And if you want color the brightness is going to be awful.

dredmorbius 2y ago
Your original claim was that e-ink displays are incapable of "multiple frames per minute". Even allowing for hyperbole, that's simply not true, and it's well past time we retired that very tired meme. Fact is that e-ink delivers acceptable multi-Hz update capabilities. I've used one such device (Onyx BOOX Max Lumi, with E INK Mobius and Carta HD display). I use it for interactive applications, animations, and video regularly. Yes, it's advisable to change the display mode, but at anything but the highest display quality, most animations are tolerable. Not ideal, but tolerable. And you don't have to take my word for it, there are numerous reviews and videos showing performance. And if you're specifically designing applications or use-cases for the devices capabilities, you can do far better than that. Which would include frequent updates. Appropriate use of technology means playing to strengths, and e-ink has numerous capabilities emissive displays simply cannot match which I've discussed previously, e.g., <https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31396797 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31396797>. For a large-format display application you absolutely can have frequent updates. More than once a minute is trivial, and as often as several times a second involves very few distractions or compromises. No, you're not going to prefer e-ink for gaming or as your principle display for streaming video over an OLED or similar monitor. But both of those uses are reasonably within achievable capabilities of products shipped years ago. "Gaming on e-ink" turns up numerous demos. No, it's not what you'd get on a gaming rig, but despite everything you've said and doubled-down on, it is possible: <https://yewtu.be/watch?v=gPwiNVcppmg https://yewtu.be/watch?v=gPwiNVcppmg> (Actual usage starts around 8 minutes in.) Similarly, that gaming rig doesn't do so hot in direct sunlight, persisting display, or low-power consumption. Each tech has its strengths and weaknesses. The distinction between "E Ink" and "E Paper" is made because they're both extant shipping technologies, similar in some regards but based on distinct and different processes, and with different display capabilities. Accuracy, truth, and distinctions all matter.
- Dylan16807 2y ago
  > Your original claim was that e-ink displays are incapable of "multiple frames per minute". In the context of a color display, getting good brightness, and not tolerating visible artifacts, I stand by that claim. Compromising on some of those lets you go a lot faster. But it's also a lot less impressive to look at. You lose the advantages over a bright (by TV standards) TV.