Pixel Qi netbook display replacement kit on sale

[Marseille]

Originally Posted by HarryT

What, as a matter of interest, is the cost of the netbooks into which one can put this $275 screen?

My Acer Aspire One cost me about $270 in late 2008, though the retail was closer to $500 at the time. Now that model retails around $280 and if you're a bargain hunter, you can probably do better.

Not only is $275 the DIY cost, it comes with the sucker fee... err, the early adopter premium. There's no way I bite at that cost (of course I never pay retail for anything), however, if PQ ever gets into a high volume product, even the DIY cost should come down. They aren't going to do special runs for us, just tack on a few extra thousand screens to an order. The bigger the commercial orders, the better we all fare.

A swivel netbook with some bezel buttons or trackpad (for page turning) would be better though. Either way, I love that they kept their promise to DIYers, because one wonders if there will ever be a commercial PQ product for us.

I guess it's worth it if you have a particular need for a daylight-readable screen, but it seems awfully expensive otherwise.

Keep in mind there are also battery savings to be had in non epaper mode. It can recycle some light indoors as well, though I don't know how easy it would be to get the backlight between the typical minimum and fully off on a netbook that wasn't predesigned with those kinds of settings. Flat out turning off the backlight is a common enough setting, but finer control not so much.

I get about 5 hours off my 6 cell battery (was 5.5 when the battery was new) with the screen at the firmware minimum backlight. If I could get another hour or so, that would be a big deal to me. If I used a 3 cell, it would be an even bigger deal.

[MikeFromHC]

Originally Posted by David Marseilles

(of course I never pay retail for anything), however, if PQ ever gets into a high volume product, even the DIY cost should come down. They aren't going to do special runs for us, just tack on a few extra thousand screens to an order. The bigger the commercial orders, the better we all fare.

Retail price: The price tourists pay.

Bigger commercial orders will mean lower prices both because of volume and improved production models. Their business model how ever does not require building a one hundred million dollar plant to produce the screens.
I suspect the difference between screens today and a year down the road will not be as great as with most other products and she implied that the OLPC price will get much closer to $100.00 using the Pixel Qi.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by David Marseilles

of course I never pay retail for anything

Do you mean that literally? That there is not one thing that you ever pay retail price for? Not petrol, or electricity, or food? Or was there a bit of hyperbole in that statement?

[Papi]

Something very unclear to me is (sorry for the newbee question) : how does the PixelQi compare to the E-ink technology in terms of ease of reading ? Because it seems to me the PixelQi is more or less an ordinary LCD screen which backlight you can disable. So that leads to another question : what exactly makes the E-Ink screen more easy to the eye than a regular LCD ?

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by Papi

what exactly makes the E-Ink screen more easy to the eye than a regular LCD ?

The fact that it doesn't emit light. It's just like reading from a piece of (rather grey) paper. Quality with current eInk screens is rather better than newsprint - perhaps comparable to a rather cheaply-printed paperback.

[Papi]

Thanks for the answer...I thought there was something else like whiter background, or the display technology involved. But it's rather good news, it seems then a tablet PC with PixelQI kind of screen could be a good regular PC, and a good e-Reader too, there doesn't seem to be any drawback there...Seems there's not much future for E-Ink devices.

[HansTWN]

Actually, nobody has ever used the Pixel Qi and reported back here. My take is that it is a compromise solution that offers a so-so B&W reading screen and a rather poor color screen. I would be happy if someone can tell me otherwise. Still, an interesting idea.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by Papi

Seems there's not much future for E-Ink devices.

I certainly wouldn't say that. The key benefit of an eInk screen is the fact that it only uses power when it's changing the displayed image - it uses no power at all to maintain a static image. It's therefore perfect for a bookreader, where the same image is on display for long periods of time, with only an occasional change. Such devices can run for weeks with a small battery when using an eInk screen.

[ThomasMc]

I've yet to actually see one of these screens, so I cannot tell if it suffers the same surface reflectivity problems of other LCD screens. High contrast in bright light with low power usage is all good and well, but I can turn up the backlighting and get good contrast with my Nokia, and yet still the reflections on the surface make it as annoying as a politician to use outdoors. E-ink screens have a matte surface with almost NO surface reflectivity.

[LDBoblo]

Originally Posted by ThomasMc

I've yet to actually see one of these screens, so I cannot tell if it suffers the same surface reflectivity problems of other LCD screens. High contrast in bright light with low power usage is all good and well, but I can turn up the backlighting and get good contrast with my Nokia, and yet still the reflections on the surface make it as annoying as a politician to use outdoors. E-ink screens have a matte surface with almost NO surface reflectivity.

Almost any glass surface can take a matte finish, if the manufacturer opts for it. Pixel Qi appears to be more interested in matte finishes than most of the tablet makers, who are hurrying themselves to make bad iPad clones.

[Shaggy]

Originally Posted by HansTWN

Actually, nobody has ever used the Pixel Qi and reported back here. My take is that it is a compromise solution that offers a so-so B&W reading screen and a rather poor color screen. I would be happy if someone can tell me otherwise. Still, an interesting idea.

There were interviews with Pixel Qi staff where they state that the contrast in reflective mode is lower than eInk.

You're right though, "normal" people haven't really seen these in real life yet. It's hard to tell how good/bad they are from press reports.

[Shaggy]

Originally Posted by HarryT

I certainly wouldn't say that. The key benefit of an eInk screen is the fact that it only uses power when it's changing the displayed image - it uses no power at all to maintain a static image. It's therefore perfect for a bookreader, where the same image is on display for long periods of time, with only an occasional change. Such devices can run for weeks with a small battery when using an eInk screen.

Pixel Qi power usage is lower than LCD, but still higher than eInk. Whether or not that's important to you is a personal choice though. I'd be more concerned with the lower contrast compared to eInk, than the higher power. But that's just me.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by Shaggy

I'd be more concerned with the lower contrast compared to eInk, than the higher power. But that's just me.

If that is indeed the case, then it would certainly concern me, too. Unfortunately I've not yet had the opportunity to see one of these screens for real; I look forward to doing so.

[olis]

Originally Posted by Shaggy

There were interviews with Pixel Qi staff where they state that the contrast in reflective mode is lower than eInk.

You're right though, "normal" people haven't really seen these in real life yet. It's hard to tell how good/bad they are from press reports.

Maybe this picture can help:

[Shaggy]

Originally Posted by olis

Maybe this picture can help:

I've never seen a Pixel Qi in person. However, I have seen lots of eInk, and I've never seen one with as poor of a contrast as the Kindle in that photo.

That's why it's hard to really tell anything from just pictures.

I have no idea what the contrast levels really are, but I do know that Pixel Qi have said themselves that it's lower than eInk. Not sure why they would say that if it weren't true. I would assume they know more about their own screen than I do.