Quote:
Originally Posted by rowe
|
And that's bogus science.
Quote:
|
The thought of equivalency at the 'same light level' ignores the reality of variable ambient light. A reflective display works in harmony with its environment. It does not compete with ambient light, it uses it as its primary source of illumination. The optional front light supplements this preserving a reflected-light experience unless it is the primary source of light.
|
Only true if ambient light is good enough to read with the front light off. The phrase "harmony with its environment" is a loaded and emotional phrase, not science. What is true is that the brightness and colour temperature match the ambient light perfectly on eink,
if the front light is off.
So, yes with no front light and good ambient light then eink is nicer. There is no eye strain at all on any decent resolution and contrast screen that has true matte surface. It happens that most eink have a matt surface and most everything else has a very shiny surface. Matt screens have been available for nearly 50 years, but cost more, because the headache inducing nature of the unconscious re-focusing on the reflection (typically x5 distance) causes eyestrain / headaches. This is known science. Not bogus woo-woo.