Apple exploring hybrid e-ink-LCD displays with independent regions

2

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 47
    thepixeldocthepixeldoc Posts: 2,257member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post


    Your inside source for this 'no intention' knowledge at Apple is ...?



    It could well be a feature that will be see on iPads as a user option in the future. Maybe it can even be partially done in an iOS update. A slider to modify a page or an area of a page to be monochrome with a lower contrast ration between back ground and text and over all brightness should be doable. Perhaps even the current hardware is improvable for those that prefer e-Ink although a new generation of iPad could mix software and hardware mods to totally emulate e-ink where required.



    Actually, I was expecting this preference feature with iPad1, and I can't believe why it couldn't be implemented system-wide, meaning from one app to the next, or from Apple's apps, automatically until the user changes the preference.



    Definitely a worthwhile addition to iOS5!
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 22 of 47
    charlitunacharlituna Posts: 7,217member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post




    Apple could accomplish this by having a translucent e-ink display that would be placed on top of the traditional LCD or OLED screen on an iPad. The top screen would allow users to see past it, so that video content in full color could be displayed on the screen below. And of course, atop all that would be a touch panel, allowing users to interact with the device.



    Or they could skip the second display and achieve the same goals with way better light sensors (perhaps even putting in more than one), way better back lights and using a top screen that has at least some anti-glare to it. I"m not talking necessarily the full amount that is on their laptops but say something halfway between that and the full glossy.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 23 of 47
    charlitunacharlituna Posts: 7,217member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by xsu View Post


    The might get sued if next Kindle uses that design, if Apple does receive that patent a couple years done the road.



    Not if Amazon licenses the tech from Apple.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 24 of 47
    mdriftmeyermdriftmeyer Posts: 7,503member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by charlituna View Post


    Not if Amazon licenses the tech from Apple.



    Apple is not in the business of licensing hardware patents to competitors.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 25 of 47
    myapplelovemyapplelove Posts: 1,515member
    great news, the best ones we had in a while, if this can happen it will be truly revolutionary, and mark my words here.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 26 of 47
    mennomenno Posts: 854member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post


    Too bad Apple just patented it then.



    The problem with this is that Dualmode LCD/Eink Displays already exist. So Amazon wouldn't have to worry about this patent if they wanted to make a dual mode device.



    The PixelQI display is the one that comes to mind. Granted, it's not exactly like this patent. The point is that the technology exists already, so This patent applications shouldn't hinder development at all.

    Quote:

    Personally I never "got" eInk from a consumer point of view. Dark grey text on lighter grey paper is not "easier to read" IMO and I do a hell of a lot of reading.



    The new "Pearl" eInk technology found in the Kindle 3 and Kindle DX is VERY easy to read. Traditional books arn't white pages with deep black text. The contrast is softer than that. The New kindle screens are insanely easy to read, easier than a "real" book even, and a hell of a lot easier than any form of LCD.



    Quote:

    The eInk display looks as if someone was trying to replicate the experience of reading an old pulp paperback in a dimly lit room. I prefer reading crisp black text on snowy white paper in a good light which is kind of what it's like reading on the iPhone. I almost prefer the iPhone over the iPad because of the crispness and brightness but iPad wins in most situations because of the size.



    Reading on the iphone isn't bad because of pixel density, but it's still prone to strain if you read it for long periods of time. For myself, I like reading in the early morning or at late night. I don't want my pages lighting up the room around me.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 27 of 47
    mennomenno Posts: 854member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer View Post


    Apple is not in the business of licensing hardware patents to competitors.



    They don't have to be. The tech already exists. It has for at least a year. This is a new take on it, granted. But dual mode eink/LCD screens is not something Apple came up with. Amazon can make a functional screen without having to license anything from apple as long as they don't directly copy the tech (unless said tech has prior art)
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 28 of 47
    Let's just hope it doesn't have a 1.5:1 aspect ratio:



    http://www.applepatent.com/2011/04/o...of-patent.html
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 29 of 47
    irelandireland Posts: 17,802member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Kolchak View Post


    With their enormous amount of cash on hand, Apple should just buy Pixel Qi. I'm sure that little company can be had for a pittance, by Apple standards.



    Those displays are not good at either.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 30 of 47
    irelandireland Posts: 17,802member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by cgc0202 View Post


    That is true mainly for mostly text books. How would e-Readers, like Kindle handle image rich books.



    People don't buy the Kindle to read image-rich books. They buy the Kindle for reading Novels. For reading Novels the iPad is not the way to go. For many, many, many reasons.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 31 of 47
    Electronic paper sounded like a good idea when people started talking about it, but after seeing the Kindle, I'm totally underwhelmed. They need to boost the contrast ratio about 100 times and increase the resolution to at least 300 dpi (maybe dithered to look like 600, the way printers do), and increase the screen size to 6" x 9" (or at least 5.5" x 8.5") before they become any kind of substitute for a real book.



    Even then, most of the ebooks I've downloaded (heavily illustrated HTML and scanned PDF, not to mention DjVu) couldn't be read on a Kindle (or an iPad either, for that matter). My computer screen works fine though. Why can a lighted display get away with coarser resolution than paper? I don't know, but it does.



    I'd like to see e-ink deliver on its promise, but it's not remotely there yet.



    P.S. Why couldn't someone come up with a tablet with an LCD or OLED screen on one side and e-ink on the other?
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 32 of 47
    mennomenno Posts: 854member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Mac-sochist View Post


    Electronic paper sounded like a good idea when people started talking about it, but after seeing the Kindle, I'm totally underwhelmed. They need to boost the contrast ratio about 100 times and increase the resolution to at least 300 dpi (maybe dithered to look like 600, the way printers do), and increase the screen size to 6" x 9" (or at least 5.5" x 8.5") before they become any kind of substitute for a real book.



    Even then, most of the ebooks I've downloaded (heavily illustrated HTML and scanned PDF, not to mention DjVu) couldn't be read on a Kindle (or an iPad either, for that matter). My computer screen works fine though. Why can a lighted display get away with coarser resolution than paper? I don't know, but it does.



    I'd like to see e-ink deliver on its promise, but it's not remotely there yet.



    P.S. Why couldn't someone come up with a tablet with an LCD or OLED screen on one side and e-ink on the other?



    So they need to have a higher res than a real book, a bigger size than a real book... just to compete with a real book?



    The Kindle3's Screen has crisper text than most printed paperbacks, and the size of the page is comparable to a mass market paperback. The Kindle exists for Text based content, not HTML or scanned PDF's. Those arn't even Ebooks in the traditional sense.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 33 of 47
    sprockketssprockkets Posts: 796member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Ireland View Post


    The latest hardare is the Kindle 3. It's poorly built and poorly designed. Even the most important part of the product, besides the display - the page buttons, are terrible. Like REALLY terrible! Steve Jobs wouldn't let that crap out the door. Not to mention the software. It's amazingly abysmal. And the keyboard, it sucks.



    The three things that don't suck about the Kindle 3 are its weight, its slimness and its display. The display is too small though. It should be around or at least 7". Even small paperback novellas are 8" measured diagonally. The thing just wasn't properly thought through.



    Weird. I find it well made and thought out. Accidentally dropped it from 4 feet onto concrete with no damage at all. Complain all you want that it doesn't have a touchscreen for input, because...



    Quote:

    Apple could accomplish this by having a translucent e-ink display that would be placed on top of the traditional LCD or OLED screen on an iPad. The top screen would allow users to see past it, so that video content in full color could be displayed on the screen below. And of course, atop all that would be a touch panel, allowing users to interact with the device.



    Apparently apple doesn't understand why Amazon hasn't put in a backlight or touchscreen on their kindle: It screws around with readability. The text on the screen is right there without any glare or interference or distortion due to glass.



    Unless apple managed to break the laws of physics this screen will suck. They can have a static non powered image to save energy, but that won't meet the goal of readability.



    The kindle does what it is meant to do best: be an e-reader, that's it. It neither attempts to be an ipad or tablet in any meaningful form.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 34 of 47
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Menno View Post


    So they need to have a higher res than a real book, a bigger size than a real book... just to compete with a real book?



    The Kindle3's Screen has crisper text than most printed paperbacks, and the size of the page is comparable to a mass market paperback. The Kindle exists for Text based content, not HTML or scanned PDF's. Those arn't even Ebooks in the traditional sense.



    What the hell "traditional sense" are you talking about? Call Project Gutenberg or Google Books or the Internet Archive and tell them their Ebooks aren't Ebooks?until you can change their mind, they are.



    And 300 or 600 dpi is much lower resolution than a real book?they range from 1200 for regular novel-type books to over 2400 for slick color-illustrated books. I was trying to give them a break. A normal octavo book is nearly 6" x 9" in page size?maybe 5.5" x 8.5" after trimming?they could cut some off the margins and get down to 5 x 8, I suppose, but the tiny, gray-on-gray display of the Kindle doesn't begin to do the job.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 35 of 47
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by sprockkets View Post


    The kindle does what it is meant to do best: be an e-reader, that's it. It neither attempts to be an ipad or tablet in any meaningful form.



    Your claims that Amazon will not make an device that varies from a simple eInk eReader has been marked.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 36 of 47
    sprockketssprockkets Posts: 796member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by solipsism View Post


    Your claims that Amazon will not make an device that varies from a simple eInk eReader has been marked.



    Then it wouldn't be a kindle/ereader
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 37 of 47
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by sprockkets View Post


    Then it wouldn't be a kindle/ereader



    Oh, so now you are saying they will make a new tablet that doesn?t use eInk, but will drop the popular and ubiquitous Kindle branding while at the same time artificially disallow it from being an eBook reader.



    Good luck with all that.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 38 of 47
    sprockketssprockkets Posts: 796member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Mac-sochist View Post


    And 300 or 600 dpi is much lower resolution than a real book?they range from 1200 for regular novel-type books to over 2400 for slick color-illustrated books. I was trying to give them a break. A normal octavo book is nearly 6" x 9" in page size?maybe 5.5" x 8.5" after trimming?they could cut some off the margins and get down to 5 x 8, I suppose, but the tiny, gray-on-gray display of the Kindle doesn't begin to do the job.



    2400 dpi? Have you looked closely at any printed material???



    Plain text at 600 dpi black and white is perfect.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 39 of 47
    sprockketssprockkets Posts: 796member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by solipsism View Post


    Oh, so now you are saying they will make a new tablet that doesn?t use eInk, but will drop the popular and ubiquitous Kindle branding while at the same time artificially disallow it from being an eBook reader.



    Good luck with all that.



    Stop putting shit into my mouth.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 40 of 47
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by sprockkets View Post


    2400 dpi? Have you looked closely at any printed material???



    Plain text at 600 dpi black and white is perfect.



    2540 dpi would equal 100 lines/mm?about the best photographic film can do?and fine rotogravure printing can reproduce that exactly (they quote 2400, though). But of course, that's a small part of the publishing industry. I said 600 dpi was fine for an e-book reader. Of course, half-tone illustrations are going to be pretty bad?it really should be 1200 for that. There is more to books than plaintext, you know.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
Sign In or Register to comment.