Slashdot Mirror
'Invisible Glass' Solves Screen Reflection Problems
An anonymous reader writes "The days of dealing with very reflective glass panels may soon be behind us. Nippon Electric Glass has used the FPD International 2011 conference in Japan this week to show off its new 'invisible glass' panel. What NEG has done is added anti-reflection films to both the front and back of the glass that are only nanometers thick. Look at a typical sheet of glass and you will see about 8% of the light reflected off of it. With NEG's anti-reflection film in place, that is reduced to just 0.5%."
has told me that I want a highly reflective screen!
That's a really cool coating, but will it be destroyed the first time you have to wipe off dust/fingerprints/etc...? I've had this problem with anti-reflective coatings in the past, especially when they get wet for some reason.
I read the internet for the articles.
Oh, I can't wait for this to show up on phones and tablets! It is probably my #1 complaint about modern capacitive touchscreens. For example, I could use my Xoom as a mirror, before applying an anti-glare film on it. And films are hard to apply, sometimes not pretty, and sometimes reduce the touch sensitivity.
After all - existing screens aren't that shiny until they put TruBright(TM) or Ultrabright(TM) or AmazaView(TM) or BlindUView(TM) coating of crap on them.
EMail: 0110001101100010010000000110001101110010 0110000101111010011011100110000101110010 0010111001100011011011110110
I am typing this from a 13" glossy Macbook Pro, and I think there's a misunderstanding about why people buy glossy screens. The glossy screen is the perfect Apple screen because I can simultaneously see the two most important things in the world: the blog I'm reading, and myself. Always myself.
We all know that the perfect monitor screen resembles (or should resemble) a highly polished mirror, and that the viewing of films, games, software or the web is a secondary effect that some people find occasionally useful.
So with that in mind, how is this technology a step forwards again?
Why OpalCalc is the best Windows calc
I thought they collided into pigs and blocks.
...and they brought us transparent glass. What's next, non-floating bricks?
Sorry about the mess.
no.
Either that or file suit because of it.... 50/50 odds.
"But we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it,..." - Nancy Pelosi
This isn't news, this is an advertisement.
1. AR (anti-reflection) coatings have been available on photographic lenses for decades. Even the ultra tiny lenses in your iPhone/Blackberry/Android phone have AR coating. AR coatings are *always* nanometers thick, by their very nature.
2. AR coatings have been available on eyeglass lenses for nearly as long. Most people these days get some sort of AR coating on their lenses.
3. AR coatings have been available on framing glass to protect valuable paintings, photographs, and other items in picture frames for the same scale of time. Drop by your local framing / art supply store and check out what's usually called museum glass.
4. AR coatings were used on nearly every CRT by the time sales started to plummet in favor of the LCD. I use a couple of them in my lab to this day.
5. AR coatings are already available on some laptop screens (eg, by Sony and Samsung, no doubt among others).
So, news about a new technology ("Solves Screen Reflection Problems")? No. Product announcement? Yes.
Put my fist through my alarm clock with its ding-dong death inside my ear. - The Blackjacks.
People would be more likely to fail to see a glass door if it has anti-reflective film, resulting in them walking face-first into it and hurting themselves and possibly also damaging the door.
Not to mention rendering it reflective do to the smudging from the person's face.
I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
Coal is mostly carbon. Carbon weighs about 12 g/mol *.
To burn, coal requires oxygen. Oxygen is found in the air. Oxygen has an atomic weight of about 16 g/mol and is found in the form of O2, which weighs twice as much, 32 g/mol.
1 mol C + 1 mol O2 => 1 mol CO2 *
CO2 weighs about 44 g/mol, or about 3.66 times the weight of carbon.
How could burning 1 pound of coal result in 3 pounds of CO2? Well, apparently the coal was only about 82% pure carbon.
* The mole, abbreviated "mol", is just a number of atoms or molecules. A very large number. It's a constant. As a matter of fact, it's exactly defined to be the number of atoms of C-12 in 12 grams of pure carbon-12. So that equation is perfectly balanced; there are equal numbers of molecules of C and O on both sides.