Re:Ask HN: What tech were you convinced would take the world...
by marcosdumay on Friday November 17, 2017 @08:23AM
(#15721731)
E-ink isn't good enough for any of those yet.
I don't know how much research is ongoing into it, and I do think it's underutilized (I can't understand why smart watches use LCDs), but there are many breakthroughs before we can get those things you mention.
I still expect it to get all over the world, eventually.
Re:Ask HN: What tech were you convinced would take the world...
by mcphage on Friday November 17, 2017 @02:18PM
(#15725101)
> I can't understand why smart watches use LCDs
Refresh rate. If all a smart watch did was be a watch, it would be sufficient, but there would be no reason for it to exist. Once you want it to do non-watch things, you need a better refresh rate.
Re:Ask HN: What tech were you convinced would take the world...
by marcosdumay on Saturday November 18, 2017 @10:21AM
(#15729267)
Ok, I don't know all that a watch is expected to do because I don't own one. But AFAIK, messages, fitness tracking, and remote controls do not need anything above what some e-paper can get you.
Now (after some time to think) I do think it's mostly a design restriction. Nobody was able to make an e-paper watch look futuristic and expensive.
Imagine reading news above your sink while doing the dishes.
Imagine the entire walls constructed with e-ink displays in your home and being able to change the wallpapers in your living room depending on what's currently in your mind.
All of those could have a "read-only" mode until you push a button, they would use pretty much no electricity, and would ideally be water-proof.
Instead, what I have right now, is an e-book reader. Which is nice and all. I'm often sending articles to my Kindle (kudos https://p2k.co/) and all sorts of things, but I had much higher hopes from e-ink technology (and still kind of do). The hope of having my home filled with e-ink displays is much greater than having a home filled with sensors.