Is the only thing stopping e-ink tablets/devices from becoming afforable because of the high rent/royalties for the patented e-ink technology?
I'm keen to use one because 1) i think over it's lifetime it will likely consume less energy than an LCD/OLED tablet, and 2) because it would be better for my eyes when i'm reading articles/research or books.
Eh? Are you talking about the RM2? Mine goes for a few weeks of occasional use without needing a charge. Is that what you’re seeing? It’s supposedly much, much better than RM1.
Oh I see, that makes more sense. I heard that RM1 was a great device, but with some v1 rough edges, and that a lot of that got smoothed out by RM2. And that jives with my experience, the RM2 feels very polished (some obvious feature improvements to be made especially in OCR and searchability, but the basic functionality works really well).
I really like it, don't get me wrong. It's just the e-ink led me (and maybe others) to suggest it would have herculean battery life when in fact it's about approximate to a conventinoal tablet.
I have been a bit disappointed as well, something like a couple of days to get to 50% battery. I do use it pretty heavily though, pretty much taking notes all day and reading an hour of two as well
> Great, it has expensive royalties and it betrays the user.
Your cell phone also sends out photons that can be spied on. Worse yet they're multicast so multiple parties can receive them at the same time.
Seriously though, this is an absurd concern, and I say that as someone who is very privacy minded if not actually paranoid.
I still don't trust that cell phones aren't sending back keywords picked up on the microphone, but I guarantee you that right now no one is listening to your digitizer's rf output, much less that the device itself is somehow "betraying the user" by exfiltrating anything over it.
Short range analog RF signal to detect where the pen is, not something containing digital information. Your toothbrush motor and charger probably has comparable level of RF radiation come out.
They do, but it should be noted that there have been reports of toothbrushes exfiltrating accelerometer data so toothbrushes are no longer a good example of an innocuous device.
Maybe letting health insurance companies know their client(s) aren't brushing their teeth "enough" (by some metric), thereby setting themselves up for increased dental costs?
Probably the same thing for people brushing their teeth too much?
I'm keen to use one because 1) i think over it's lifetime it will likely consume less energy than an LCD/OLED tablet, and 2) because it would be better for my eyes when i'm reading articles/research or books.