I saw this recurring theme on HN that electrophoretic panels were expensive due to patents and evil misdeeds by that most evil corporation called E-Corp.
I thought, hey, I work in this bloody display industry myself where everything is about volume, volume and more volume, and I hangout with their guys at conferences and events, and I've never heard such a thing as them using patents to attack other industry players. Are they really attacking people and hurting customers that want to use their technology as alleged?
So I asked a simple question each time I saw that claim that E Ink uses patents to attack startups or similar claims. What's the evidence?
And guess what. Now it turns back to people like you who ask what is my evidence that there's no evil misdeeds. And to which I just feign shock, oh no, it must be true then, since a lack of evidence for them being innocent of the alllegations must mean they are guilty.
So we're left back at square 1. I hope people with a smarter mind than mine can arrive at whatever the correct conclusions are.
Could you please tell a bit more about the volume-side of story? Somehow I feel that E-ink is at this weird point on the cost/volume curve because it is a fundamentally flawed display technology: monochrome or a couple of dull colors at best, very slow refresh rate (with ghosting/leftover on partial refresh).
LCD/OLED displays were also very expensive initially, but because they're so much appealing universally, loads of money got poured into the industry to make them better and cheaper (mostly due to volume demand).
There's no such amount of money/interest in making E-ink better and cheaper :(
I mean, as long as they have patents they don’t need to “attack” others. A patent is enough on its own to prevent others from innovating. That’s the function of a patent after all!
robinsoh|4 years ago
I saw this recurring theme on HN that electrophoretic panels were expensive due to patents and evil misdeeds by that most evil corporation called E-Corp.
I thought, hey, I work in this bloody display industry myself where everything is about volume, volume and more volume, and I hangout with their guys at conferences and events, and I've never heard such a thing as them using patents to attack other industry players. Are they really attacking people and hurting customers that want to use their technology as alleged?
So I asked a simple question each time I saw that claim that E Ink uses patents to attack startups or similar claims. What's the evidence?
And guess what. Now it turns back to people like you who ask what is my evidence that there's no evil misdeeds. And to which I just feign shock, oh no, it must be true then, since a lack of evidence for them being innocent of the alllegations must mean they are guilty.
So we're left back at square 1. I hope people with a smarter mind than mine can arrive at whatever the correct conclusions are.
riobard|4 years ago
LCD/OLED displays were also very expensive initially, but because they're so much appealing universally, loads of money got poured into the industry to make them better and cheaper (mostly due to volume demand).
There's no such amount of money/interest in making E-ink better and cheaper :(
TaylorAlexander|4 years ago