I was watching the video the other day, and my jaw dropped. Wenting is a display-technology beast. Watch his other videos too; he seems to be able to squeeze every last bit of possible performance out of every kind of display, and then some.
Wow, I'm glad to see that person is getting some more recognition for this work.
A claim in the video that I can't verify but makes economic/logistic sense is that the speed problem isn't the panels but the controllers. The current crop of controllers are optimized for low power, which fits the e-reader use case but that is not optimal for the interactive use case.
> A claim in the video that I can't verify but makes economic/logistic sense is that the speed problem isn't the panels but the controllers.
I don't understand the claim. It is lacking in specifics. Are they claiming that electrophoretic materials (meaning the panels) can actually switch (meaning move pigments) faster than say x.y micrometers per second? I don't think that is true. The article shows that what Wenting did ("binary transition") is pretty much the same as what companies like Dasung did. Instead of trying to have grayscale, it is faster to hit somewhat-black and somewhat-white and give the illusion of fast movement than actual fast movement.
> Are they claiming that electrophoretic materials (meaning the panels) can actually switch (meaning move pigments) faster than say x.y micrometers per second?
No, I think the claim is that the controllers are slower that what the panels can theoretically support.
> The current crop of controllers are optimized for low power, which fits the e-reader use case but that is not optimal for the interactive use case.
Why try to contort the technology for something it's not good at, instead of using a more appropriate technology like transflective LCDs? Eink isn't the only option for reflective displays. If you increase the power use of eink to get better refresh rates, I imagine you'd end up using more power than (and still end up with lower refresh rates than) an MIP display.
I don't understand the growth of the market as a whole for eink monitors, when tLCDs exist and are disappearing from the market.
I'm pretty sure e-ink has a much higher ceiling for reflectance than TLCDs/RLCDs, so you'll be able to use it comfortably without a frontlight in a lot more situations which could more than make up for increased power usage. I think they are also naturally better in terms of glare compared to any type of LCD.
Viewing angles are also fantastic compared to almost all T/R LCDs - they tend to be fairly directional. It's a great display tech for many things that don't need 60+fps.
And contrast ratio seems far higher to add on to the benefits. I want to like reflective displays, and there are many new ones lately too, but they just fall a bit short, especially if they try to do color
It isn't clear to me that eink's underlying display technology isn't good at the interactive computing use case so much as the implementations aren't optimized for it. There could be a position where more power than an eink reader is used but still far less than traditional active displays since unchanged pixels aren't driven.
E-readers are vertically integrated devices: the hardware, software, UI, and refresh behavior are all tailored around reading. E-ink tablets like reMarkable are similar, but optimized around writing and annotation.
A traditional monitor is much more general-purpose, so it doesn't get the same kind of end-to-end optimization for the display medium. I think there's room for an in-between category: a more interactive e-ink device where both the hardware and software are designed around the strengths and limits of the panel.
There's some related work happening in this direction:
Been casually following the ePaper/eInk device space for years now and Modos is one of the more exciting developments I've come across in the space. Seriously impressive.
That said, I'm curious what impact the increased refresh rate might have on a Carta panel's longevity. I assume the physical medium that allows each 'pixel' to be on/off has a certain tolerance after which the screen begins to degrade beyond a usable state.
Separately, I also want to understand more about how Wenting's approach differs (or not) from the flickering modern displays use to emit a picture, and, whether the direction actually addresses eye strain or reproduces the same issues (I'm assuming are) inherent in LCD/LED displays — i.e. it's the flickering that strains our eyes, not just light.
Maybe someone more versed than I am in this space would know. After 10+ years of computer work... my eyes hurt and I really want this to be a game changer.
In normal use, we don't expect fast refresh to significantly reduce an E Ink panel's lifetime.
The E Ink material itself is long-lived, the main stress is on the driving electronics and waveform behavior during refreshes. Our approach doesn't add extra refresh cycles, the display starts responding sooner, which improves perceived speed without adding extra refreshes.
So far, fast refresh hasn't been the dominant failure mode in our testing. Physical stress, bending, pressure, heat, and moisture are much larger risks.
On eye strain: E Ink is reflective and bistable, so a static image doesn't require continuously emitted light. Fast updates can still produce artifacts like flashing, dithering, or ghosting, but that's a different issue from a display that continuously flickers.
So I'd say this addresses an important part of the problem, though comfort will vary by person.
Also I recommend checking out the following resources:
Between this, the Daylight computer (I know it's RLCD), and some of the flagship Boox devices, I'm very excited for where alternative display technology is going in the next couple years. Displays that you can use outside and that drain the battery way slower open up so many possibilities for auxiliary devices. My ideal device would be an ultralight android tablet with a keyboard case and an outdoor display good enough to watch youtube on, that needs to be charged less than once per day. Hopefully this product is super successful and Modos move on to standalone devices next.
There are counter trends, like Garmin discontinuing their e-paper smartwatches. But hopefully that has more to do with that market being too narrow for viable alternatives, and not a fundamental issue with the economics of the displays themselves.
Bangle.js 2 is the only smartwatch I've kept since Pebble. It's definitely not a polished experience, so I can only recommend with pretty strong caveats, but it has the main things I want from a tool: notifications, long battery life, easily-visible screen in all conditions, and isn't a giant slab on my wrist that gets in the way.
Nothing else has satisfied that so far, after trying nearly a dozen. They've all had flaky connections, bad battery life, and/or screens that need me to shield from the sun sometimes. And the apps they require, holy crap are they bad. Gadgetbridge isn't shiny but it at least lets you control what you need.
I truly wish it was button-based though. Touchscreens on your wrist suck so bad.
I don't really mind having a touchscreen, it's the requiring use of it that bugs me.
And in some situations I much prefer it to be disabled, otherwise it reads phantom touches. (Bangle.js 2 has an option to ignore touches, though I forget the details. iirc until button press, or tapping a very small unlock button on the corner of the screen. Works well as a preventative measure, but I've never seen that on other watches)
A bit low when not in a relatively bright area (say a house during the day without lights on), but that's largely solved by the backlight or a small tilt to catch light better. And in direct sunlight it's excellent.
The display isn't as nice as Pebble Time (fewer colors, more directional, overall slightly dimmer) but it's more than functional enough. Transflective is obviously the right choice for watches, I don't know why everything else has gone for phone-like panels that are often unreadable and kill battery life.
As a defense of Garmin, even without reflective/transflective/whatever displays (which would be better in sunlight), they still manage decent battery life. I can easily go a full week without charging mine, or several days with a daily ~1hr activity which uses GPS. It's certainly nothing compared to the ~month I managed on my previous watch, but plugging it in during my shower every few days totally eliminates battery anxiety, so I'm satisfied.
Wait what? Do you have a source? I can't find anything about that, and I see the Instinct 3 is still being sold. Very disappointing if so, as that line has been the perfect pebble replacement for me.
Their flagship devices used to be split into two lines - Epix (AMOLED) or Fenix (MIP). The latest Fenixs (8 series) are AMOLED like the Epix, so you can't get MIP anymore in those lines. I can't speak to their other lines, frankly I've never understood their naming and what each line supposedly does.
> two-person startup is back fund-raising for Modos Flow, a 13.3-inch color e-paper monitor with a higher native resolution of 3,200 x 2,400, touch input, and a 60Hz refresh rate
I think the 600 dollar price is more than double the price of the same diplay as a mass-produced product it's a price for enthusiasts of the technology
and it's open source so nothing stops a bigger producer of copying the exact technology with institutional funding and manufacturing expertise
I wasted 2k on a color e-ink monitor that ended up being pretty much unusable. Reviews said as much but the risk was worth it to me for the chance to spend my days looking at something that doesn't feel like a screen. I believe it's an "if you build it they will come" thing especially for anyone working on a computer all day.
There is no mass market product with the same specifications. The closest equivalents from established companies are the Dasung Paperlike 13K and Bigme B13, both of which cost the same or more than the Modos.
I'd buy it but i want it in a laptop form or maybe tablet, or something. Being a monitor means the usefulness for me, ie being able to program outside, is kinda moot.
Yea it's definitely portable, it's just not a friendly formfactor for where my compute sits, where my keyboard sits, etc. If i'm in a chair at the part i'd need a literal lap-top, three components (keyboard, compute, monitor) without a frame connecting them would make that difficult.
It's in the same ballpark as reMarkable's Pro offerings or the Supernote Manta (each are $4-500). e-ink is expensive. I went with Supernnote for the repairability even if it cost a bit extra.
Last time I read about them (here in HN) somebody highlighted that the problem wasn’t to get them to function at a high refresh rate, the problem is they stop being energy effecient at that rate. Now I mostly skimmed the article but I couldn’t find any information regarding that.
I've seen these portable e-ink monitors available for nearly 10 years now, but this one seems to be the first that's responsive enough for general usage, which is a big step forward. Out of curiosity, if anyone here has one, what do you use it for? There must be something people are using them for if they've been a product niche for so long, but I can't think of what I would do with a standalone 13 inch e-ink monitor.
Not bad considering this is a niche specialty product and cutting edge. The price will come down if the demand and market grow. Assuming raw hardware costs stop rising
It never priced flexibly because the company that makes it kept a total stranglehold on the IP through patents and basically requires you to buy both the panel and the controller from them. I think it's actually quite a simple technology but I think it's tough for them to get the economies of scale they really need to be competitive as a display technology. I'm starting to see the older-style black and white eInk displays used as Electronic Shelf Labels more often now and I think it has to do with the patents finally expiring so you can buy the components from more than one supplier. The technology they're replacing, paper labels, costs thousands of dollars per week per store to update and more so when there are sale prices. The eInk displays cut most of those costs in favor of capital and then once in a blue moon battery replacements.
that is almost guaranteed an at-cost production figure for the limited run of kickstarter funded displays there isn't a production line producing these things - watch the youtube video this guy quit his job for over a year to build a passion project into a prototype
The stylus solution is provided by E Ink to us. E Ink made the switch from EMR to USI a few years ago, so most E Ink devices, including the Modos Flow are using USI now.
Although I can't find an authoritative source on it the indications do support that assumption that it is USI. Technically USI doesn't have to be bad, it just appears that quality control on the standard is bad (similarly to how USB cables often don't meet the spec and can cause troubles as a result).
Sure. But USI is bad unless the OEM goes out of their way to make it good, whereas EMR is good unless the OEM goes out of their way to make it bad. EMR is the better tech, and with patents expired, and numerous other benefits such as no batteries needed in the pen, it should be standard now.
I think this device isn’t so much about a pen. It seems like it could be a really nice typing or coding or reading display. Maybe a future model could improve on the pen
The thing is, to get a pen right, all that they have to do is license Wacom EMR/Samsung's S-Pen (Samsung owns a 40% stake in Wacom, hence using their stylus tech).
Styluses w/ batteries/capacitors were okay once upon a time, but Wacom EMR "just works" and makes my life simpler/nicer (I couldn't count how many styluses I have around my house/in my bags so as to allow me to use my Samsung Galaxy Book 3 Pro 360, Galaxy Note 10+, Kindle Scribe Coloursoft, and Wacom One display (attached to a MacBook).
EMR patents and design specs expired. It's free. China's tooling simply hasn't caught up, because the output doesn't have to feel or work good, it simply has to look good in a kickstarter. Conjecture: I feel like this is like half the reason styluses as a technology are dying; the other half is the untimely death of the resistive display.
Radio frequency/compatibility seems to be a consideration --- also, don't understate the importance of tooling/tolerances even w/ Wacom overseeing things, I've had to return name-brand/licensed styluses which would not work consistently across all of my devices.
As a fellow EMR stylus enjoyer, which one do you prefer the most? The thin one in the phones tends to be too small to use comfortably and the one that comes with the Galaxy Book/tablets is decent (but the Galaxy Book has very inconsistent support for the buttons). The Wacom One stylus used to be my favorite, but lately I've been enjoying using the Kindle Scribe stylus/the fat Staedler stylus (I think they're both very similar in usage experience).
My favourite stylus is the Staedtler Noris Digital Stylus which stands in for the classic #2 pencil quite nicely.
That said, these days, I mostly use the Premium Pen included w/ my first-gen Kindle Scribe, or a Wacom One stylus (where the Staedtler used to be, prompted by my chipping and cracking the screen on my GB3 and having to apply a screen protector --- the harder tip on the W1 being a better match).
The Staedtler Noris Jumbo is nice, but I wish it had a side switch. The pens bundled w/ my Samsung Galaxy Books (panic-bought a spare when the afore-mentioned screen incident happened) are fine, but I am annoyed that there's no silo (agree w/ Samsung being hobbled by their agreement w/ Wacom being annoying). Don't like the feel of the white Kindle Scribe Coloursoft stylus --- too rubbery.
My backup is a Lamy Safari Wacom EMR which I keep in my travel sling bag --- if I could justify a second, I'd probably EDC it and it would get promoted to favourite.
There are a few others which I've been meaning to try....
I think licensing anything from wacom or samsung is a big ask for a two person(?) project that's making a very small run of open source/open hardware devices
