Slashdot Mirror


E Ink Creates Full-Color Electronic Paper Display (mashable.com)

SkinnyGuy writes: The reflective display company finally figured out how to make those ultra tiny balls produce 32,000 colors in one super-low-powered display. It's a breakthrough for E Ink, display advertising and, maybe someday, e-readers and digital photo frames. The new prototype display, which can be manufactured in an array of sizes, features a 20-inch, 2500 x 1600 resolution and is equally as power-efficient as the monochromatic display. E Ink Holding's Head of Global marketing Giovanni Mancini said it can be powered with solar cells used in bus stop signage, for example. Some of the limitations center around the resolution and refresh rate. As of right now, the resolution is only 150 pixels per inch (ppi), which is about half the resolution of a typical 6-inch, monochromatic E ink display. It also takes about two seconds to fully resolve images, which is pretty slow when compared to today's e-readers. The company is currently only focused on using the new color display for commercial signage.

96 comments

  1. Wait.... Again?! by wierd_w · · Score: 5, Informative

    I may be a little addled in my ability to remember, but I have this deeply nagging feeling at the back of my mind that they had a full color e-ink prototype waaaaaaaaaaaay back in the late 90s that used a super hydrophobic cell layer with electrically conductive partition walls.

    IIRC, the paper was made from 4 transparent layers over a white back layer. Each layer held a CMYK pigment component in the form of an aqueus solution, held into a tight microdot form by superhydrophobic coatings inside each cell. When the cell is energized, hydroelectrodynamic forces cause the droplet to spread out and cover the cell, with the applied voltage to the cell determining how fully the droplet flattens and covers the cell.

    That was waaaaaaaaaaay back though. I will dig to see if I can find the old press releases.

    1. Re:Wait.... Again?! by wierd_w · · Score: 5, Informative

      Here we go. Hot news from 1999!

      https://www.newscientist.com/a...

    2. Re:Wait.... Again?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ah, yes, back when slashdot was one big advertisement for newscientist.com. I hated their spam.

    3. Re:Wait.... Again?! by wierd_w · · Score: 5, Insightful

      To be fair, at least NewScientist was better, subject-matter wise, than the more recent love affair with Forbes.com

    4. Re:Wait.... Again?! by twohorse · · Score: 1

      Article is pay-walled unfortunately

    5. Re:Wait.... Again?! by Immerman · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I seem to recall that the folks behind the Kindle's e-ink screen had color versions as well, but it was prohibitively expensive to make. As I recall it used basically the same technology as the two-tone version, except instead of a uniform sheet of e-ink it had subpixels of the different colors printed in a grid. Unfortunately that made the displays FAR more expensive to produce, as it required precise alignment between the e-ink layer and the controlling electronics, unlike the greyscale models where the e-ink layer was uniform, and pixels were determined entirely by the electronics laminated to them.

      I would assume the required precision also meant that the color models couldn't benefit from the the free sub-pixel anti-aliasing that makes the greyscale screens look so incredibly crisp and smooth even at relatively low resolutions.

      --
      --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
    6. Re:Wait.... Again?! by _KiTA_ · · Score: 3, Informative

      To be fair, at least NewScientist was better, subject-matter wise, than the more recent love affair with Forbes.com

      One of the things we learned during the last few months of Gamergate is that Forbes is now a glorified blogging network that pays per click. So you have a serious economic incentive to get your article out there for clicks... and tailoring a pitch for it for Slashdot is a great way to do so.

      Also, that means that Forbes.com is about as newsworthy as Wordpress.com.

      Clickbait: The More You Know (TM)

    7. Re:Wait.... Again?! by dbIII · · Score: 1

      I may be a little addled in my ability to remember, but I have this deeply nagging feeling at the back of my mind that they had a full color e-ink prototype waaaaaaaaaaaay back in the late 90s

      That display has colours that are not very intense. Ectaco sells a device with it. It compares with faded old comics on newsprint for colour. It's not something the advertising industry would be interested in for signs.

    8. Re:Wait.... Again?! by Cochonou · · Score: 1

      This sounds like Liquavista. It has been for a long time in the making, but it seems they didn't find yet a solution to industrialize it efficiently.

    9. Re:Wait.... Again?! by hankwang · · Score: 0

      Colored subpixels arranged side by side are not very useful for a reflective display. Suppose you use R, G, and B subpixels that can vary shades between black and R, G, or B. Then you can't get any brighter than a 33% reflective gray. Maybe you misremember how it worked?

    10. Re:Wait.... Again?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe it had white subpixels as well?

    11. Re:Wait.... Again?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Where did you get RGB from? Isn't it way more likely that they have a white base color and a grid of CMYK subpixels?
      The colors will still look a bit washed out, but all black and all white should look acceptable.

    12. Re: Wait.... Again?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I believe these ARE the people behind the Kindle's e-ink displays.

    13. Re:Wait.... Again?! by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 1

      Technology advances. Older technology is flaky, unreliable, labor-intensive, and so forth; newer technology is cheap. For example: farmers have been growing wheat in the US since as far back as the 1790s, but they've since obsoleted 97% of the direct farming workforce and, since as recently as 1900, have removed 75% of the workers from the front-to-back production chain (that includes all workers--right down to the oil prospectors finding crude feed stock to make fuel to power tractors). No doubt the combine was a break-through even though we've been harvesting soy beans for thousands of years.

      Currently, we can manufacture a 60-inch OLED panel with scattered defects, and salvage most of it for cell phone screens. That's about labor-equivalent to LCD screens, so AMOLED cell phones are cheap. We can use a different process which requires roughly 8 times the total invested labor to carefully produce a perfect 60-inch OLED panel, hence why an LCD 60-inch TV costs $500 and an OLED 60-inch TV costs $4,000. One day we'll announce a new breakthrough manufacturing ... the same fucking panels made of the same OLED we were making back in 2002.

      We've got a new type of E-Ink now on a new manufacture process. It's cheap and efficient compared to old color E-Ink.

    14. Re: Wait.... Again?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I love it when sites are paywalled. It keeps me from wasting my time doing pointless reading. Thus giving me more time to do pointless posting.

    15. Re:Wait.... Again?! by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

      Am I sufficiently interested to try to break the paywall? No. That is extremely BAD NEWS for the AdvertCorp behind the paywall.

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
    16. Re:Wait.... Again?! by hankwang · · Score: 1

      For whomever might be reading this (or who modded me down): CMYK subpixels arranged side by side are just as useless, since you cannot achieve anything resembling black. C, M, Y reflect about 2/3rds of the light, so you can't get anything darker than 50% gray.

    17. Re:Wait.... Again?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      (I do remember it too, but there are ALWAYS other considerations; once upon a time pages would download in a few microseconds, but NOW they have more colorful images AND they are all dynamically determined... etc)

  2. Arduino! by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I'm dying to get ahold of an e-ink display that is roughly iPad-sized that I can program with an Arduino. Why? Oh I dunno but I feel like I could come up with tons of ideas really fast.

    --

    "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

    1. Re:Arduino! by Lumpy · · Score: 1

      Buy a Kindle DX and snatch the E ink display out of that.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    2. Re:Arduino! by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 1

      Is it hard to send a signal to the e-Ink display to make it refresh?

      --

      "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

    3. Re: Arduino! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes. You'd have to reverse engineer it and I feel like that kind of framebuffer wouldn't fit in an arduinos memory

    4. Re:Arduino! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I would like some really large colour E Ink displays to cover the walls in my house. No more repainting, I could just load a new colour or picture.

    5. Re:Arduino! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Imagine the potential for porn - life size on your walls.

    6. Re:Arduino! by demonlapin · · Score: 1

      Given the refresh rate of e-ink, I'm thinking more in terms of wallpaper that changes at a whim.

    7. Re: Arduino! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes. You'd have to reverse engineer it and I feel like that kind of framebuffer wouldn't fit in an arduinos memory

      Why does an e-ink display even need a framebuffer?

    8. Re: Arduino! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In the old days when computers had memory measured in kilobytes, you'd draw your stuff a scanline at a time.

    9. Re: Arduino! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Forget it. The tech is riddled with patents ang generally not available if you don't buy thousands. Oh, you can get them in 2" mono and expensive as hell...

    10. Re: Arduino! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In the olderer days when computers had 4,16 or 32k of memory, one screen of text, 40x24(=960B) took up a significant amount of usable memory of a 16 bit address space and cost $50/kB.

    11. Re: Arduino! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      correct about the memory, you'd have to go with an ARM based arduino compatible as the atmega328 only has enough ram to handle a postage stamp sized e-ink display. Check out the tutorials at learn.adafruit.com etc. They sell support boards and 2.2" displays.

    12. Re:Arduino! by RuffMasterD · · Score: 1

      I want to do the same with a Raspberry Pi. I could get a cheap e-ink display from an old e-reader, but I haven't figured out how to convert the video signal from a Raspberry Pi into something the e-ink can display. If I figured that out, then I can add a small bluetooth keyboard and a USB battery pack with solar panel to make an uber versatile energy efficient light-weight travel computer. I know, I could just use an Android based e-reader with browser etc instead, but that's not the point.

      --
      Human Rights, Article 12: Freedom from Interference with Privacy, Family, Home and Correspondence
    13. Re: Arduino! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think they were thinking porn wallpaper (pornpaper?). In this Internet age, how soon do we forget not all porn is videos?

    14. Re: Arduino! by mlts · · Score: 1

      The e-Ink tech would be useful for a lot of things. I have always wanted it on Wi-Fi APs, so if someone does a hard reset of a consumer router, the default WPA2 password would change, but be displayed on the bottom, with the option of turning that off in the config later on. For other appliances/IoT devices, just a means of displaying a default password for first access would be useful, or displaying a code for Bluetooth pairing. There is a big market and use for e-Ink... I just wish it were used more often, as I have not seen it used past e-Readers, and the shipping label on the Amazon Snowball.

    15. Re: Arduino! by OrangeTide · · Score: 1

      It doesn't need a framebuffer, but then you're stuck with the slowest form of updates. If you know what contents the screen already contains, then you can skip the flashing stages of the update and directly move to the screen state you wish.

      The controllers are MIPI with some custom commands. There is some unusual voltages used to drive the TFT, so take note. (I'm not a hardware guy, I've only dealt with the software side of things)

      --
      “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
    16. Re:Arduino! by omnichad · · Score: 1

      You could also install listening software on the Kindle itself with some custom firmware. That sounds a lot easier, honestly, aside from having to have a USB cable sticking out of it.

    17. Re:Arduino! by maelkum · · Score: 1

      Or, buy Onyx Boox M92. They have 9.7" eink displays and run plain old Linux with BusyBox. These guys also have examples of how to write software for it on GitHub but never checked the quality of the code. The M92 should be available for about $100-120, it's a 2011 model.

  3. I don't care, and still my brain works very fine. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    HTML5 assynchronous data transfer is making media users having an inferno instead of a personal computer. Thank You marketing assholes, but no.

  4. I would care... by Gaygirlie · · Score: 1

    ...if e-Ink displays didn't cost a fucking arm, leg and half a kidney. Can't get any reasonably-sized, reasonably-priced displays for use with Arduinos/ESP8266/STM32/etc. I would be all over that shit if only the displays were cheaper.

    1. Re:I would care... by mark-t · · Score: 1

      I think that current eink prices are in a catch-22 situation. As I understand. prices are still fairly high because demand isn't high enough to really enable mass production to lower prices, and eink simply does not offer enough advantages over alternatives like oled for most people to justify paying the extra expense.

      Having color may help on the latter end, and if so, it is only a matter of time before that ends up impacting the former.

    2. Re:I would care... by GuB-42 · · Score: 2

      e-ink found its way into a $30 cell phone in 2006 (motofone f3), and the screen on the first pebble watch is estimated at $1.69.
      The tech is cheap. It is just that no one bothered making one for Arduinos at a reasonable price.

    3. Re:I would care... by Gaygirlie · · Score: 1

      e-ink found its way into a $30 cell phone in 2006 (motofone f3), and the screen on the first pebble watch is estimated at $1.69.
      The tech is cheap. It is just that no one bothered making one for Arduinos at a reasonable price.

      I don't consider either of those "reasonably-sized." You can get e-ink displays for Arduinos and the likes at similar size for about 25€, but personally, I'm looking for 8" or bigger ones for more permanent installations.

    4. Re:I would care... by Bite+The+Pillow · · Score: 1

      Kindle DX one year after release was about $300, nowhere close to "a fucking arm, leg and half a kidney". Now they are cheaper.

      First, you didn't specify that you wanted some prepackaged display controller, hopefully you're that guy who figured it out instead of whinging about convenience and cost needing to both be inexpensive.

      Second, if $300 is literally all of those body parts, I'll give you $50 for half of your kidney, if it's in good shape. But you have to provide an installer. Because a kidney should not cost "a fucking arm, leg and half a kidney". And I'm not going to reverse engineer that process.

    5. Re:I would care... by Solandri · · Score: 1

      I expect we'll see a resurgence of e-ink in niche applications in the next few years - the patents are starting to expire (first patent was 1996). If those niche applications can generate enough commercial interest, that'll drive the price down. And maybe we'll finally get the low-cost passive displays the technology promised 20 years ago.

    6. Re:I would care... by dbIII · · Score: 1

      It's a licence issue. The owners of the e-ink IP only want their stuff in "premium" products so the rest of us can apparently just go jump. Some authors, programmers etc would love a low end machine with an e-ink screen to do stuff with text but the only thing that comes close is using a Boox tablet with a bluetooth keyboard, and that's only become available a decade after sucha thing would have been possible without a lot of effort.

    7. Re:I would care... by thsths · · Score: 1

      Yes, the Kindle DX did cost "an arm and a leg". Certainly compared to competing tablets, which had colour, back light, and a higher resolution. Cost is what killed the Kindle DX, cost is what made Android tablets so popular in the low end market.

    8. Re:I would care... by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      The Pebble wasn't eInk though, it was a Sharp MemoryLCD. Basically a sunlight readable ultra low power LCD. It's so low power it's less than the self-discharge current of most batteries, but the refresh rate is that of a normal LCD. It's actually lower power than eInk for some applications.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    9. Re:I would care... by mark-t · · Score: 1

      That explanation seems more like unsubstantiated rumour than anything else. Vague terms like "owners of e-ink IP" are enough that make it suspect, at the very least. To be honest, it reads like a baseless conspiracy theory.

    10. Re:I would care... by dbIII · · Score: 1

      It has been a very widely reported common complaint for the last decade and has been widely discussed even here by people other than myself more qualified to comment. Do a search on slashdot articles and you will find plenty on that topic with ease. Instead of that you decided to go for accusation of tinfoil hattery - waste of space and nasty with it.

    11. Re:I would care... by mark-t · · Score: 1

      Sure... discussed here. In comments, by commenters, and not article submitters... and with no other reputable sources to back them up. Much like the comment to which I responded, above.

      Before I made the above comment, for what it's worth, I put the words "e ink", "licensing", "expensive" into Google, to cross check before I hit submit, and the search revealed no information that I could find anywhere that is relevant to how e-ink IP is being kept artificially high priced... and I went through about the first several pages or so before I gave up. It's entirely possible I wasn't using the right combination of keywords to get a lot of matches, but I would have expected *something* to have come up in the first 60 or so that I checked. But I got zilch.

      So perhaps before you decide to accuse me of not doing research, you should perhaps check and see what information is actually out there to support the claim.

      So yeah.... it looks like a conspiracy theory by all accounts that I can see. By all means, however.... I would invite you to respond and provide reputable citations to back up what you are talking about, if you are able to dig them up.

  5. While there are applications that this.... by mark-t · · Score: 1

    ... would certainly be fine for, I can say quite confidently that I would not be in their market.Although the 15 bit color depth is slightly disappointing, it's something that I could live with. However, the resolution needs to be kicked up a notch. Resolution is going to impact readability at close distances, so while this resolution might be fine for things like billboard ads, it's not going to be very good for books that you hold in your hands. Also, I'd want a refresh rate that's probably capable of at least showing full motion video. If I'm going to use a display simply as a reader, I don't want to get distracted by visual artifacts of screen refreshing when I am flipping pages... The page should update the instant that I make the gesture on the device to do so... I should not be able to consciously perceive a delay, particularly since the kinds of things I would want to store on a portable ereader are books that I would as likely as not be quickly skimming for particular information as opposed to simply spending extended time on a single page, and waiting two seconds for each page refresh is not remotely usable (of course, neither is normal epaper refresh speeds IMO... but maybe that's just me).

    1. Re:While there are applications that this.... by demonlapin · · Score: 3, Insightful

      e-ink displays are not for skimming - they're for reading. They're a specialized market. I'd rather read on my iPad than my Kindle, generally, but the Kindle has amazing battery life and can be read in full sun. There really is no substitute for it, other than having servants who will bring you printed books on command. It's always been marketed to people who read lots of books, for that reason. E.g., my wife, who reads 2-3 books a week.

    2. Re:While there are applications that this.... by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 1

      Actually, this tech is usable as-is. E-Ink displays are transparent/black, and so you could layer a modern Kindle e-ink display on top of a new, half-resolution color display. Refresh would first immediately draw the black lines, then slowly fill in low-resolution color. The result is a sharp image immediately, with color that gets there eventually. While the color fill-in period would be unconventional, it's far-superior to a pure-color screen with low-resolution and a two-second draw time, and only *adds* color to a snappy black-and-white display.

    3. Re:While there are applications that this.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What black lines? What happens if there is no black in the image? What the fuck are you even babbling about?

  6. Addendum by mark-t · · Score: 1

    Yes, I'm aware that what I described is not a pure catch-22 because there is an out, while in a real catch-22 there is not. The out being feature improvement to the point that it offers advantages over alternatives that would justify the expense. My point is that such features have not been forthcoming for eink, so the result feels a lot like a catch-22.

  7. Did you see the example picture?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is that a painting from the 1800s or does this eink screen make picture look like paintings from the 1800s?

    1. Re:Did you see the example picture?? by Andreas+Mayer · · Score: 1
    2. Re:Did you see the example picture?? by TuringTest · · Score: 1

      Actually that's not bad at all for a beta version of a new cheap technology.

      It may not look the best for random photos (like those in a magazine), but it would be great for showing diagrams (useful in companies); and advertising companies might fine-tune their designs to be displayed on that and still look good.

      And surely, it it catches on, further versions will have higher resolution and thus more accurate colors.

      --
      Singularity: a belief in the "God" idea with the "demiurge" relation inverted.
    3. Re:Did you see the example picture?? by hattig · · Score: 1

      I thought the image quality and feel was very close to that of 1970s magazine print.

      i.e., Warm, slightly golden, slightly odd contrast and range.

      If they could sell these 20" displays with a DisplayLink driver and USB port for a reasonable price there could be a reasonable amount of interest. I wouldn't mind throwing a PDF onto one of these (and being able to carry it around), using it as a textbook, etc. But for me the price would have to be very attractive to buy on a whim.

  8. Man! You are always the wise guy in the room by Trachman · · Score: 1, Funny

    I have to assume that you are always the wise man in the room.

    Somebody who has a memory more voluminous than the elephant, combined with the details comparable that of the photo. Photographic memory, so to speak.

    You work for a large corporation. And you are a smart ass director.

    You either have PhD, or considered having one.

    1. Re: Man! You are always the wise guy in the room by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You either have PhD, or considered having one.

      I would hope it is the latter, because the former would just be said considering how wrong that poster has consistently been on the past on physical science topics, and arrogantly so, arguing against cited, basic intro level material. At least unlike some other repeat offenders, this poster has grown to the point of now posting only on things they are actually familiar with instead of on topics that they learned from reading the first half of a Wikipedia summary.

  9. Grr commercial signage by Areyoukiddingme · · Score: 3, Insightful

    20" high resolution color zero-power-while-not-refreshing photo frame? Shut up and take my money!

    This is precisely what a digital photo frame should be. Program it to change the photo once a week from the internal SD card and a single battery charge could last half a year, if the designers are smart enough to implement it with a microcontroller instead of an Android-running behemoth. And it should have the longevity, too. I still use my eInk bookreader I bought in 2007 daily, and it works great, after far more frequent page turns than a photo frame is likely to need.

    I would advocate for non-removable internal storage accessed via USB in order to avoid paying the Microsoft tax on FAT32, but it would be a shame not to make the storage upgradeable given that Samsung seems to be determined to make it possible to lose a terabyte in the couch cushions.

    But anyway, details. Shut up and take my money!

    1. Re:Grr commercial signage by Solandri · · Score: 2

      The problem with these passive display technologies as photo frames has been that reflected light (like a photo) is dim and murky. Projected light (like an LCD or OLED) is bright and lively. Talk to any film photographer from back in the old days - they prefer slides to negatives partly for this reason. If you don't believe me, take a printed photo, scan it (or take a digital photo of it), then do an auto-levels adjustment to set the photo's white point at your monitor's max white, and the black point at its max black. Then hold the photo next to the monitor. There is just no comparison - the print will only have about 30%-50% the dynamic range of the monitor. That's the limitation of using reflected ambient light to indirectly generate colors, vs projected light to directly generate colors.

      A passive display photo frame stood a chance two decades ago, when the nearest competitor would've been standard photo frames. But now that people have been "spoiled" by LCD photo frames, they don't stand a chance. The only one that did was the Mirasol stuff, which used interference patterns to generate colors (like a butterfly's scales). That had the potential to create colors which were much brighter than you could get by simply reflecting ambient light. But it never panned out - people were spoiled and wanted to be able to use it to view video in addition to just photos, and that turned it from a power miser into a power hog.

    2. Re:Grr commercial signage by Andreas+Mayer · · Score: 2

      This is precisely what a digital photo frame should be.

      Now they just need to get the colors right.

      Real:
      http://www.vdweerd.nl/wp-conte...

      E Ink:
      https://blueprint-api-producti...

    3. Re:Grr commercial signage by Areyoukiddingme · · Score: 1

      This is precisely what a digital photo frame should be.

      Now they just need to get the colors right.

      15 bit color definitely hurts.

    4. Re:Grr commercial signage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      That really didn't make much sense; you're comparing apples to oranges.

      When you take the auto-levels of the image -- all you're doing is normalizing the histogram of the image, which maximizes the dynamic range. (Bear in mind, a good photographer with a light meter will have largely done that already.)

      If you print out THAT image and compare it to the one on-screen, they won't be very different.

      If you want to see a real difference, view a (passive) reflective hologram next to a transmission hologram, the wow factor will snap your jaw shut. The latter just requires a coherent light source to produce anything!

    5. Re:Grr commercial signage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, clearly it is the 15 bit color and not the image->real world lighting conditions->camera conversion that it has gone through.
      Try taking the original image and cropping it down to 15 bit. The result is banding artifacts on the sky gradient if you don't do proper dithering, not washed up colors.

    6. Re:Grr commercial signage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      100000 times YES.

      get rid of those fucking ultra-bright LED color marquees and lights that banks, gas stations, arenas and other businesses and places have installed, that absolutely totally blinds you as you're driving.. even from blocks away.

    7. Re:Grr commercial signage by jabuzz · · Score: 1

      Screw USB connections, of microSD/SD cards. Who the hell wants to be fiddling around changing cards, plugging laptops etc. into a picture frame?

      Personally I would like it to get the photos from a server wirelessly. I would advocate Bluetooth for the lower power requirements, but I guess WiFi would be more practical. So it wakes up every day, checks the folder on the server downloads the next picture, changes the display and then goes back to sleep.

      Oh an before you ask I would prefer it that the server was local in my house, so the thing never needs to go out on the internet.

      As such it only needs internal storage for a handful of pictures, a couple of GB is more than enough.

    8. Re:Grr commercial signage by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      20" high resolution color zero-power-while-not-refreshing photo frame? Shut up and take my money!

      Or, make it even bigger and make an actual smart whiteboard. Well, OK, even a 20" slate for your desk would be probably enough. Give it good interactive software and you'll have the ultimate medium for your thinking (well, except perhaps for the future computer implants in your head).

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    9. Re:Grr commercial signage by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      With good enough resolution, dithering should not be a problem. (But the fact that reflective images require proper illumination could be. Isn't that a major part of why the latter picture looks so bad? Including re-photographing it?)

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    10. Re:Grr commercial signage by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      I think it will be a while before this tech is suitable for displaying photos. The colours looks quite artificial, like an old Technicolor film from the 50s, and the contrast isn't very good.

      One day we won't need photo frames, we will just use this stuff as wallpaper.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
  10. I'd be happy with b&w if large enough by oneiros27 · · Score: 1

    When I was town commissioner (probably about 6 years ago), our president was talking about getting one of those horrible LED monstrosities that you see in front of mega churches.

    I convinced the others that they'd be out of character for our historic village, and they're horrible due to causing night-blind issues.

    Unfortunately, I couldn't find a *single* company that sold an e-ink display of any considerable size. The closest was a company that packaged up tiny squares (I think they were 6"x6") that you'd assemble into a larger screen.

    You can finally pre-order a 32" screen for $5k ($6k for color) ... but for it to be visible from the road, I'd likely need an array of 4 of 'em. I could care less about high DPI -- I'd be happy with WXGA so long as it was around 60" diagonal, and could be packaged for outdoor use.

    --
    Build it, and they will come^Hplain.
    1. Re:I'd be happy with b&w if large enough by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why not just 1 or 2 big screen TVs and run them off an arduino or something? Should be much cheaper and less night-blindness problems.

    2. Re:I'd be happy with b&w if large enough by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They will also not be readable in direct sunlight.

    3. Re:I'd be happy with b&w if large enough by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can think of 100 things a town should spend money on before fitting itself out with $20,000 of displays, E-ink or not.

    4. Re:I'd be happy with b&w if large enough by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      What's the longevity of e-ink in direct sunlight, though? Many inks and dyes fade when exposed to harsh elements, for example.

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    5. Re:I'd be happy with b&w if large enough by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 1

      I can't think of many. In Baltimore, with 660,000 people and roughly 380,000 tax payers, that's a little over 5 cents per person. While I can think of many things I need more than a stick of gum, I can't think of anything better to spend 5 cents on--that is, I can't think of anything that I should buy, am capable of buying, and won't be capable of buying if I spend 5 cents. As long as I don't stockpile gumballs and bic pens, this is utterly irrelevant.

      Even a small town of 20,000 people is talking about $1 per person.

    6. Re:I'd be happy with b&w if large enough by hattig · · Score: 1

      Giant Fresnel Lens, that's what you need :p

  11. I shudder to think by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    “We have encapsulated four different things in one micro-cup.”

    So, "four girls, one micro-cup"?

  12. Pebble Watch is not eink. by default+luser · · Score: 2

    Pebble watch uses a Sharp Memory LCD, which is a regular trans reflective LCD with storage so it only updates the pixels that change between frames. This gets rid of the constant full-screen refresh you get from a standard LCD, which means that if you're not watching video, it uses a whole helluva lot less power. But it has the same fast response as LCD, which makes it more capable as an interactive device than eink.

    It's still miles more power consumption than e-ink when nothing is happening (it requires standby power AND switching power, whereas e-ink just requires switching power), but it manages to find a happy midddle in battery power between normal backlit LCD (1-2 days battery life) and e-ink.

    But that's why it costs nothing. It's LCD with memory.

    --

    Man is the animal that laughs.
    And occasionally whores for Karma.

  13. Kobo + Pocket + color by cerberusss · · Score: 1

    This would be very, very nice. Currently, I'm using Pocket to save articles offline. It's integrated with Firefox plus has a dozen plugins. But more interestingly, it also comes standard on the Kobo eReaders. It's bliss -- I can read articles in bed from an eInk display with really subdued lighting.

    However photos really suck. That hasn't been a problem so far, but recently I got interested into electric cars: Nissan Leaf, Volkswagen e-Up!, Renault Zoe, etc. However.... articles on cars are nice, but much better with some decent pictures. Color displays would really make a difference on such subject matter.

    --
    8 of 13 people found this answer helpful. Did you?
  14. worst contrast ever by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Whith the absolute absence of real black particle is going to heve the worst constrast ever, for people like me with eyes with a bad relationship with color and contrast this is going to be the last kind of display I will use...

  15. "Equally as power-efficient" by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 1

    equally as power-efficient

    which I assume is marketing speak for "also uses zero power once the image is set."

    --
    systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
  16. Looks pretty awful (where's the K)? by DrXym · · Score: 1
    The sample image looks simultaneously oversaturated and washed out. The article seems to suggest its basically CMYK but without the K - the black component that should contrast and depth. So black is just CMY mixed together and looking like muddy brown.

    I don't see people who want colour in an e-reader wanting this. They want to read magazines, graphic novels, comics, perhaps even web content. They expect those things to be rendered faithfully in the reader, not the way this thing appears to render them.

    Maybe the tech is fine for store displays where garish saturated logos are eye catching and useful. I don't see e-readers getting it the tech in this form. Maybe they need to reverse what they did with E Ink Triton and put the black over the colour E-ink using a grayscale LCD layer.

    1. Re:Looks pretty awful (where's the K)? by brantondaveperson · · Score: 1

      Do you remember what LCDs used to look like? They were pretty terrible. Narrow viewing angles, low contrast, high latency. Give this technology a few years (ok, decades?), and the basic principal has the potential to completely replace display technology as we know it. The only reason that I continue to use my ancient Nokia phone, is that I don't have to turn on the backlight to see the display, I can just pull it out of my pocket and see the screen without pushing any buttons. E-ink displays could increase cellphone battery life by an order of magnitude, simply by not requiring any backlight power when using the phone in daylight.

    2. Re:Looks pretty awful (where's the K)? by DrXym · · Score: 1
      I don't see any reason to believe this technology will replace display technology as we know it. E-ink displays have never been fast and there is nothing to suppose this display will ever be any faster than mono displays. It's simply inherent to the way the technology works which is like some glorified etch-a-sketch, shaking the particles to reset them and then electrically setting them in some state.

      The comparison to LCD is particularly off. I don't know what your Nokia phone's display is, but even the earliest passive colour LCD in a laptop would have looked better than this display and would have been responsive enough to use, albeit a bit washed and blurry with motion.

      There are far more promising technologies for passive displays which consume little or no power. Bistable displays, interferometric modulation (mirasol), transflective LCD, electrowetting etc. All would have faster refresh rates than e-ink. Amazon even bought out a electro wetting tech called Liquavista so perhaps they intend to roll with that. Even OLED displays consume power only for the pixels which are on which is why some new phones like the Samsung Galaxy S7 even default to show an always-on clock.

  17. I need a cell phone with this display for outdoors by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I need a cell phone with this display for outdoors use!
    There are a lot of folks who work and/or play outdoors, and who are endlessly frustrated [and occasionally put at risk] by poor-to-useless screen legibility when outdoors.
    Could someone make an add-on screen, that could be plugged into the USB port on a phone? I'd pay a couple of hundred bucks for that, and it could be sold to a very wide market if it could be made to work with enough phones.
    Come on business people, please make it happen.

  18. 4 Things 1 Cup by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Now where have I seen that before....

    From the article:

    E Ink Holding’s Head of Global marketing Giovanni Mancini. “We have encapsulated four different things in one micro-cup.”

  19. Nobody likes it when you round by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It would be a 32,768 color display with 32 intensities for each color component.

    1. Re:Nobody likes it when you round by omnichad · · Score: 1

      Unless it's CMYK. Then it might be 8 intensities for Black and 16 intensities for each color component.

  20. What hsppens to said signage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wihen elictricity goes out? We really don't need to be going so whole hog trying to fix things that aren't broken. Silocon valley has become one giant speculative solution in search of problems. Really hoping the shiny wears off at some point.

    1. Re:What hsppens to said signage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      E-ink without power continues to display whatever it was displaying before, IIRC.

    2. Re:What hsppens to said signage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dumbass. E Ink only requires power if you are changing the image.

  21. Great Job! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Knew this was coming someday. Great job eInk!!!

  22. airplane arrival screens by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    this is perfect for those screens that tell you when a plane is going to land at the airport

  23. E Ink brings rich color to ePaper by zac4kmt · · Score: 1

    But no to reader..damnnnnnnnnnnnnnn http://readnews247.com/detail/...