You'd save about 0.5 kwh a day in electricity, more if the AC is running. So I could see them becoming popular once the price comes down. People who run 2 monitors might be interested as well.
There may be, but some studies have shown there's little difference.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22762257/
Methods: Participants read for several hours on either e-Ink or LCD, and different measures of reading behaviour and visual strain were regularly recorded. These dependent measures included subjective (visual) fatigue, a letter search task, reading speed, oculomotor behaviour and the pupillary light reflex.
Results: Results suggested that reading on the two display types is very similar in terms of both subjective and objective measures.
That depends on the environment. Natural light fights against the functioning of light-emitting displays. Reflective displays cooperate with natural light.
You in the dark? Use OLED. Under the sun? Use EPD.
And you could read OLED at noon in the tropics under an umbrella (I know I did) - but I was exactly talking about optimal use.
--
A good scientist can file with a saw and saw with a file
~~~ Ben Franklin
A wise guy does not, unless necessary
~~~ We, here and now
HN is nth standard deviation sensitive. There is always market for some.
> additional lighting discounts any power savings
Not necessarily. Lighting today can cost fractions of watts, and on the other hands EPD can be energy costly - it depends on how many cell updates you are causing. So, the matter is probably less with energy consumption, and more about getting a better effect based on user and environment.
> This product is not for in-field use
Sure, it does not seem specific. But it can have its places. Be it some production site - maybe a quarry near the tropics -, be it personal - maybe you want to do some work in your garden...