Ereader screens are about to get a big upgrade

[ottischwenk]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

Why do you insist on getting it oh so wrong? You think we are talking about the top of the screen when we are talking about the substrate that's UNDER the display.

Im Writing about the Module and assembly, not about a part of it.
I don't see the substrate, but what the EInk layer provides, with each layer above it degrading the image quality depending on the material.

[koboy]

Originally Posted by ottischwenk

Im Writing about the Module and assembly, not about a part of it.
I don't see the substrate, but what the EInk layer provides, with each layer above it degrading the image quality depending on the material.

if the glass substrate breaks and the ereader is still under warranty it isn't covered, i want it to be a plastic substrate for that reason alone. i'm happy to sacrifice as you say (degrading the image quality) i won't buy a new ereader unless it's got a plastic substrate. of course other opinions are available it's each to their own


best wishes koboy

[DNSB]

Originally Posted by ottischwenk

Because an outer layer of plastic is relatively cloudy and sensitive to scratches.
And if you take a layer of glass there, it will be almost as heavy again.
The main difference in weight is not in the module, but in the assembly and protection.

Ottischwenk, perhaps you could try read what everyone else is writing? A Mobius screen has a plastic substrate. The layers in front of the eInk display have nothing to do with the substrate. A Mobius substrate neither implies nor requires a plastic layer on the front of the display module.

[rcentros]

I don't really care about the glass substrate. I've never broken one. Out of the 50 or so eReaders I've bought used only two had broken substrates (and they came in two collections of "as is" readers from Shop Goodwill). But I AM interested in a clearer screen with more contrast. It looks like these new screens are going to be a really big jump in quality.

[ottischwenk]

Originally Posted by DNSB

A Mobius screen has a plastic substrate. The layers in front of the eInk display have nothing to do with the substrate. A Mobius substrate neither implies nor requires a plastic layer on the front of the display module.

To be flexible, the top layer must not be a glass layer - it must be made of plastic, and this makes the image diffuse
So it does have something to do with it.

A Mobius module with an easily breakable (glass) outer surface is useless - the screen breaks just as easily as one with a normal glass module.

[rkomar]

Sony's 13" PDF reader with the Moebius screen was extremely light (350g) for its size because the case was thin and floppy. It did not have to be strong enough to keep the screen from bending. The same is true of the Onyx Max products. My old PB902 with a 10" glass substrate screen weighs 530g, mostly because the case is made of rigid steel to keep it from flexing and breaking the substrate. A 13" ereader with a glass substrate would weigh at least twice as much as my old 902. That is why all 13" ereaders are built with Moebius screens now, so that the weight of the case can be kept to a minimum.

[ottischwenk]

Originally Posted by rkomar

Sony's 13" PDF reader with the Moebius screen was extremely light (350g) for its size because the case was thin and floppy.

It also lacks the light layer and the module is unprotected and easily scratched when writing.
Therefore, it also needs a protective film, which cannot be applied without bubbles and reduces the contrast.
It is light, but that's about it.

[koboy]

it's in the ereader manufacturer's interests to keep using a glass substrate for obvious reasons. a cynical point of view? perhaps. is it true? perhaps.

best wishes koboy

[rkomar]

I expect that displays with a glass substrate have a higher production yield than those with plastic substrates. Perhaps the plastic substrates can warp during production, meaning that many have to be thrown away. That would make the ones with plastic substrates more expensive. I know that some complained about the Sony 13" displays being a bit lumpy, which you never see with glass substrate displays.

[koboy]

less breakages with a plastic substrate = less new ereader's bought.

best wishes koboy

[Prestidigitweeze]

Originally Posted by rcentros

I don't really care about the glass substrate. I've never broken one.

That has been my experience, too. My first e-reader was a Kindle Keyboard; my second, a Sony PRS-350. The batteries might die, but every screen has remained intact. And I used to travel from state to state doing readings using a PRS-950.

[Quoth]

Originally Posted by rkomar

I expect that displays with a glass substrate have a higher production yield than those with plastic substrates.

They are also likely better quality and more durable if not cracked. Some later ereaders have a better support of chassis. Glass is stable and more perfect as a substrate than plastic. Only sapphire is better. Though for cooling a diamond substrate is even better. It's technically possible with artificial diamond.

Plastics degrade, can be porous, can warp, can contaminate contents etc. Most HDDs now use glass with a magnetic coating rather than aluminium. Plastic is simply a cheap material for larger sizes, or if you want a roll-up display.

The title should be "Ereader screens to get a small incremental improvement".
The Press Release is an advert. The claims are overblown. Cost difference vs complete ereader will be marginal and the contrast-brightness will be somewhere between the original Aura HD H2O with IR (no touch layer) and the Paper White 3 or Kobo Libra (similar brightness and quality screens with touch).

Capacitive touch needs a transparent metallised patterned layer, traditionally tin, under the top surface. It's inherently low resolution which is why PDAs (1990s) and Smart Phones (1998-2007) used resistive as it's very high resolution for a handwriting stylus. Capacitive is as old as Resistive (1980s) but was out of favour till Tile GUIs replaced WIMP GUIs on phones and gadgets. Trolltech tiles, then iPhone (GUI bought in from Fingerworks), iPad and Zune in that order. Google bought in Android too.

Composite or non-touch hires screens now often use the Waycom system, which is behind the panel. Proper Waycom systems power the stylus from the panel behind the screen allowing use without a battery, pressure, buttons and even angle from electronics in the pen. There are a few composite capacitive and resistive screens, but they really need LCD or OLED as there are extra layers. Passive pointy stick stylus.

A third type of screen with the sensor behind the screen uses a pen-stylus with a battery in it.

Fourth option is a miniature pen shaped mouse. Which was the original aim in Xerox in 1970s, but they couldn't miniaturise it so the mouse was born for the WIMP GUI. I'd call it a pointing-pebble, not a mouse as it has no fur, no eyes, no ears, no mouth. The wireless ones don't even have a tail!
I developed a pen in 1989 and the pen also had a microphone and earpiece to work as a cordless handset for a phone, but also it had a patterned 3mm ball with an optical sensor to work as a mouse. Logitech later had the marble track-ball that was basically an upside down optical mouse with a ball on top.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by rkomar

I expect that displays with a glass substrate have a higher production yield than those with plastic substrates. Perhaps the plastic substrates can warp during production, meaning that many have to be thrown away. That would make the ones with plastic substrates more expensive. I know that some complained about the Sony 13" displays being a bit lumpy, which you never see with glass substrate displays.

I've never read about 10.3" or 8" Mobious screens being lumpy.

[ottischwenk]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

I've never read about 10.3" or 8" Mobious screens being lumpy.

Then you have not been able to compare them with glass modules.

[frahse]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

https://www.techradar.com/news/eread...BT=94351463061

I am stilll waiting.