Hacker News Reader

Comment by coldtea | Hacker News Reader

Well, we do have retina ipads (and other tablets).

e-ink I find just a gimmick -- there is no scientific research that shows it being any better than a typical monitor for the eyes (Amazon also retracted such statements IIRC). The only real benefit was resolution (which retina/hi-dpi solved) and reading in the sun (which e-ink retains as an advantage).

Sure, one reflects light and the other has a light source embedded. But a photon is a photon in both cases (and you can blind yourself with a white paper too, if you hold it at the right angle to the sun) -- and you can set the tablet display at the desired, equivalent to reflectef light, brightness.

View on HN

It may be gimmicky to you, but I cannot read an entire book in a sitting or two (as I often do) on any kind of non e-ink monitor and that includes tablets. I can easily do this on a Kindle or other e-ink device. So, for me, e-ink is no gimmick, it is an essential requirement for prolonged reading.

Well, FWIW, I for one can read a whole books, actually lots of them from both iBooks and iOS's Kindle app (read on a tablet. Heck, even on an iPhone). And don't care particularly for e-ink (I also have a kindle I don't use much).

If you can find some specific scientific argument why e-ink is "an essential requirement" (besides personal choice) then it's just cargo cult.

I listed fairly accurately were e-ink is better, namely reading in sunlight. And battery life, which I forgot.

For reading inside, it's advantages of yore, like resolution have been matched by hi-dpi screens. The only other advantage is better default contrast, which is a configurable setting on a tablet.

> If you can find some specific scientific argument why e-ink is "an essential requirement" (besides personal choice) then it's just cargo cult.

That's not how science works, and your comments are abrasive and offensive for no good reason. Things exist before scientists can prove them, and that's why research is done.

Although a quick Google search led me to find a paper backing your argument, I find you way too quick to dismiss other readers as doing "cargo cult". Why not believe them when they say they feel less strain?

>That's not how science works, and your comments are abrasive and offensive for no good reason. Things exist before scientists can prove them, and that's why research is done.

Research WAS done though. And didn't find much in advantage.

>Why not believe them when they say they feel less strain?

Because that's not how science works either. Subjective feelings are a dime a dozen. Users of homeopathic "drugs" also "feel less strain" but they're just drinking water. People can be led to believe (and "feel") anything by marketing, religion, snake oil merchants, etc.

Off the top of my head there are 2 major differences between e-ink and non e-ink displays that could potentially explain differences in comfort level for prolonged use:

- Non e-ink displays have a refresh rate, therefore continuous "activity" on the screen. People can have different sensitivities to this.

- Non e-ink displays tend to have higher contrast and/or brightness. This would normally be considered an advantage, but again perhaps not for prolonged use.

I don't need scientific papers to tell me I find e-ink more comfortable or not, it becomes very quickly apparent when I try to read a book on a tablet. Obviously you have a different perception, that does not invalidate mine.

I am not sure if either of the two effects you listed are behind this. I think the most notable issues include:

1. Less brightness as measured in nits. Emmissive displays are often tuned to much higher brightness than normal objects around us including reflective displays like E-ink.

2. Reflective displays and paper often have significantly lower front-surface reflection than LCDs/OLED displays. Add touch-screen and it gets ruined beyond repairs.

The first one is easy to tune by reducing brightness levels. However (A) that makes the second one worse as the brightness of the displayed content reduces but the brightness of reflection does not, and (B) displays are often too bright even at their lowest brightness levels allowed. Put a white paper in the front of white background on the screen, and you'll see what I mean.

>I don't need scientific papers to tell me I find e-ink more comfortable or not, it becomes very quickly apparent when I try to read a book on a tablet.

Well, without science to back it up, it's mostly good ole superstition. Subjective feeling doesn't say much (that's why placebo work too). The same things ("I don't need science to back this up, I know I feel better with it") are also said for "magnetic bracelets", homeopathy, and tons of similar things.

Use of the term "cargo cult" is cargo cult.

Nice try, but no.

The word has a defined meaning/usage.

Taking marketing claims for technical superiorit with regards to readability as gospel without any scientific evidence of their validity (and even evidence to them being nothing much) qualifies.

You would be right, but my visual cortex actually has an elisp hook that trims marketing text and imagery. So, in this case, my comment was borne out of purely personal, first-hand experience. Furthermore, my original comment's 'wish' was not an attempt to apply opinion-constraints upon others. My aim was to garner karma from individuals who might share the same sentiment as I.

>Furthermore, my original comment's 'wish' was not an attempt to apply opinion-constraints upon others.

You say it like it's a bad thing.

Isn't trying to get people to agree to some objective/scientific fact an attempt to "apply opinion-constraints"?

As long as there is no violence or legal restrictions involved (e.g you don't force anyone by anything else than your arguments) then I'm all for applying opinion constaints on that nature.

Reflexes on displays are tiring, some people even get headaches from that. I don't know any tablet with non-reflective display but e-ink readers.

The battery life on devices with e-ink lasts significantly longer.

Completely agree! I can't finish books in one sitting on my laptop (my eyes get tired quickly), but it is easy on my Kindle paperwhite.

the thing I really liked about my ereader was the battery life and the size/weight of it. I don't think it weighed as much as my iphone, even. But really, the battery life was the biggest thing.

When I was on a cruise, I read something like four or five books on it and only got halfway through the battery life. I could have plugged it in at night, but it's nice to be able to just forget about it.

Ereaders are also a great option when you're hiking/camping. If I ever go back on the appalachian trail, I'm def bringing an ereader with me.

Anecdotally, they feel more comfortable to me to read long books, but that's really just comparing it to an ipad, which is way heavier, and part of that is probably subconsciously buying into the old info on eye strain.

Even if there's no scientific research, e-ink doesn't seem a gimmick to me. I find it a pain to read on a laptop, but find a kindle almost as good as a real book. My eyes simply tire a lot faster with an LCD.

As I said, laptops don't have the e-ink resolution. And depending on what you read, it might not even have the same contrast.

So, unless you adjust the brightness and contrast appropriately and have a hi-DPI laptop, e-ink will come on top for reading. There's also the convenience in holding the reader vs using the laptop to read.

So cannot really compare it to a common laptop. To actually compare like to like, compare an e-ink reader with a hi-dpi ("retina") tablet, with the brightness/contrast configured appropriately.

I don't think it's about resolution. I'm comparing a 15'' 1920x1080 laptop screen to my 2nd Gen Kindle. I think it's about brightness. Light-emitting screens make it harder on the eyes to read books. An iPad's screen feels similarly uncomfortable to me. The main benefit of e-ink is that it doesn't emit light and therefore feels almost like a paper book.

Agreed about the ergonomics: it's more comfortable to hold a kindle than a laptop. However, I'm not sure I could replicate the experience with a tablet: I'd have to lower brightness a lot, increase contrast, and shine a light on it, at which point LCDs stop being comfortable to read.

While I totally agree that brightness is a very important factor, there is another very significant one, front surface reflection. See more in my comment here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8124039

However, in my experience, resolution matters too. I increased the font-size on my monitor and saw a clear impact on readability.

> photon is a photon in both cases

With backlit LCDs you are getting fluorescent light, whereas with e-ink you can choose to have reflected daylight or incandescent ... i.e. broad spectrum sources. Definitely different on my eyes.

It's the refresh rate / responsiveness that kills the experience.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com