It would appear that the aforementioned Engadget article got Ms. Jepsen's attention:
Quote:
It seems a comment that I made at the Magazine Innovation Summit in NYC this week should be clarified:
While we are supplying screens for tablets (and ebooks, and netbooks too!) and are starting production shortly, including supplying limited volumes earlier than our official mass production start – we can’t say when these products will be announced and sold retail.
Sorry not to be able to reveal more, but our customers: the netbook, ebook and tablet makers really need to announce their products on their schedules.
|
For those interested, she also posted this:
Quote:
New Subject – Battery Life Standards
While I have you I wonder how you all feel about MobileMark? This is the standard that sets battery life measurements with screen turned down to 27% brightness or 60 nits (max brightness is usually 220 nits). A nit is a unit of brightness. This from the latin “nitare” which means “to shine”, as opposed to the German origin of the nit – from the egg of a parasitic insect, usually a louse.
In office lighting a piece of paper that reflects 60 nits is quite readable. Our screens with good office lighting also reflect 60 nits or more – I measured 120 nits in our offices on Friday. This with the backlight off. The exact reflectance measurement depends very much on the room lighting.
A normal LCD screen is “washed-out” by the office lighting since it can’t use the room lighting to show the image. The backlight is what creates the brightness (nits) on a normal LCD screen. The backlight has to be cranked up higher because it competes with the room lighting. So it’s hard to see a normal LCD screen at 60 nits of brightness because 60 or more nits of office lighting can also be reflecting off it to obliterate the screen image viewability. This is for matte reflection screens. There are also “glare-type” screens. These screens look shiny. The user sees their own reflection in them – no matter how beautiful you are this can be a problem: Its distracting and hard to read because of all the reflections that complete for attention with the screen image.
Back to battery life measurement standards:
MobileMark seems to (according to our laptop making customers) require that we also crank the backlight up for the power measurements to the same level as other screens that aren’t reflective and infact hard to read even at 60 nits in roomlight – this even though with no backlight the screen can exceed 60 nits of brightness without any “wash-out” or annoying glare.
Does this make sense?
The current standard says that screens at 60 nits are readable because paper is, but in office lighting 60 nit standard LCD screens are hard to read. Our screens at 0 backlight nits, but reflecting the ambient office light (or sunlight) are very readable. And they are must lower power, but the standard for measuring power appears not to consider this.
|
http://www.pixelqi.com/blog1