Quote:
Originally Posted by Barty
I don't know much about toms, but they're a pretty big site, not exactly random blogger.
|
Well, random like Engadget or Anandtech or Techcrunch or ZDnet or CNET Art Technica...or half a dozen other tech sites. And as opposed to someone like Walt Mossberg or David Pogue.
Quote:
Sure they could have just made that up, but why? Wouldn't eink just say "wait a sec we never told them that. That's a total lie". Or at least say they were misquoted, or the person saying it was misinformed.
It's easy to spread misinformation on the net, but it's also easy to get correction. You don't need to trust a particular site, just the system's ability for self correction.
Yes companies make electronics of different grades (not necessarily on purpose; the manufacturing process doesn't guarantee the same quality at all times) and it's not something they would trumpet. Doesn't mean that's what happened here. But you can't blithely dismiss it.
|
I'm not blithely dismissing it. I'm dismissing it after careful reflection.
Particularly because it is only one data point, because we don't really know the context of it, and it seems to contradict what we know about e-ink screens on e-readers.
To be concrete, I should state that I do not believe that there are different grades of Pearl screens. I know that there are different grades of e-ink screens - Pearl vs. non-Pearl, for example. And the e-ink used in flexible displays or watches or phones may be a different grade from that used in e-readers, not to mention Pearl e-ink readers. But I don't believe that there are different grades of Pearl screens used in e-ink readers.
(And this appears to be supported by the fact that many people are reporting that their K4 Buttons have better screens than their K3 Keyboards.)