More on TechnologyTell: Gadget News | Apple News
Amazon purchases touch-screen startup; on e-ink, LCD, and eyestrain
February 3, 2010 | 8:22 pm
|
By Chris Meadows
One fairly big news item to hit today involves Amazon’s purchase of Touchco, a 6-person startup company with a new multitouch-capable, completely transparent touch-screen overlay technology.
A number of the blogs and news sources linking this story remark on how this technology is capable of use with the current multi-color LCD technology that drives the iPhone, iPad, and other forthcoming tablet PCs. They speculate that Amazon may be planning to go head-to-head vs. the iPad and deliver a multimedia experience with its next iteration of Kindle.
However, it is worth noting there is no reason this overlay technology couldn’t still be used with e-ink displays, too, producing a touch-sensitive e-ink display much more readable than the glare-haunted Sony PRS-700 I reviewed last year. I have to question whether Amazon would have any interest in leaping from its core mission of providing a superior reading experience into realms where Apple is much more accomplished.
Speaking of touch-sensitive displays, Slashdot has a link to an Engadget story about Displax Interactive Systems, a company that has developed a film that can be applied to any surface to turn it into a touchscreen. Suddenly those Star Trek: The Next Generation control panels are looking a lot more plausible.
E-ink vs. Backlit LCD: The Eyestrain Factor
Meanwhile, a discussion over on the Yahoo E-Book Community Mailing List has been talking about the question of e-ink vs. backlit displays and eyestrain. A number of people have complained about backlit displays causing more eyestrain than e-ink, and whether or not that was really true.
[As] far as I can tell, there’s no medical or scientific evidence to support this frequently heard urban legend. Light is light, and your eyes can’t tell the difference between photons emitted from the screen and photons reflected from the screen.
I’d be happy to be informed that I’m wrong, if anyone has pointers to real studies on the subject.
And Brenna Lyons replied:
According to ophthalmologists, backlighting is not bad for the eyes UNLESS you are in a darkened room. With an appreciable amount of ambient light, they say it’s no worse than any other reading. In a darkened room, the single area of light is not good. They also highly suggest reading from a screen for vision impaired patients, since they say it’s EASIER on the eyes than the printed page. Just what I’ve heard from them. If they have studies to back it, I don’t have them.
On the other hand, I have seen a number of people claim to have tried reading from backlit-screen devices and experience eyestrain that they did not get from e-ink—but the glare from the touch-sensitive layer on the PRS-700 sometimes caused me more eyestrain than reading off my iPod Touch did!
And, of course, we all “read from backlit screens” a lot every day: our computer monitors. Maybe we don’t read novels on them, but we read e-mail, Facebook, websites, news, and otherwise spend a considerable amount of time in front of the screen—especially those of us who write as a hobby or for a living.
I suspect that to a certain extent it may be subjective. Just as some people are able to enjoy the 3D effects in movies such as Avatar while others get a blinding headache, some people may be more prone to eyestrain from LCDs than others. On the other hand, it might be they simply have the brightness adjusted incorrectly.
Regardless, this bodes well for the effectiveness of the iPad as an e-book reader, at least for those who do not find backlighting induces eyestrain. And of course, there are a number of non-backlit color display technologies on the way for those who do.
I’m still skeptical Jeff Bezos is going to want to throw e-ink over for that same kind of LCD just yet, however.
|
Related Posts:
Previous
SUBSCRIBE TO RSS
Comments:
Ivan Schwab, a professor of ophthalmology at UC Davis said to the LA Times:
The idea that computer screens cause eyestrain “is more hearsay and anecdotal,” he said. “I don’t think the screen is any more toxic to the eye.”
link here (page 2):
http://articles.latimes.com/2010/jan/29/business/la-fi-apple-books29-2010jan29?pg=2
Ivan Schwab does not know what he is talking about. I am very sensitive to being on the computer too long, the other day for about 4 uninterrupted hours, and my eyes burned for the rest of the day. I usually take breaks in between shorter sessions. Bully for Dr Schwab and his cast iron eyes. It does matter to some of us. I can read all day on my Kindle with no problem.
@Mary: it’s probably not the backlight that is causing your strain, but the refresh rate of your backlit screen. Although not usually noticeable, the rate in hertz of many monitors is a big factor in reading comfort on a backlit screen.
I do prefer the E-Ink display for long-form reading; but I’ll read on anything that has words.
I’m commenting because this post gave me a giggle of nostalgia. Back in the late 90′s, when I was actively hoping — with the RocketBook and the SoftBook — that e-reading would finally *do* something in the marketplace, I would hear people (computer-using professionals) whine, “oh. I could never read on a screen.” But really, if you’re on your computer, *that’s almost all you’re doing*.
I don’t get what I’d call ‘eyestrain’ from a backlit screen. But looking at a lit screen does wake me up as much as coffee or a hit of protein, and then mess up my sleep cycle. The effect of TV is not different.
Here’s a link to one gobbet of general research:
http://www.scientificblogging.com/news_releases/different_wavelengths_of_light_affect_circadian_rhythm
Of course, now I’m interested, so I’m going to dig some more.
@asphalt: Thanks!
There’s been a lot of work done on reading from paper versus reading from screens, and it all seems to show that a properly adjusted screen works as well as paper, with respect to eye strain. Of course, it’s only recently that “properly adjusted” has become widely available; refresh rate, font, typography, anti-aliasing, high-resolution, dark text on white background, and a high contrast between foreground and background colors are all important.
Mark – LCD screens don’t have a refresh. While it’s true that for old CRT screens it could be a factor, particularly in rooms with fluorescent lighting, it’s not really an issue anymore.
The majority of the eyestrain these days is simply because there’s either not enough ambient lighting and/or because the contrast (not brightness) and backlighting is set too high from the factory. By doing that, they get inflated contrast ratio specifications numbers, and the colors look “punchier”. When doing a proper calibration of a monitor, you usually aim for 100 nits (candela/m2) – monitors these days come with 300-400 nits as default sometimes.
I think eye strain is a personal thing. I know people that find trade paperback hard, because the paper is bright white but can read mass market, which is off white. It doesn’t usually bother me, but it does others. When I already have a headache, it bothers me, because my system is already compromised.
The old fashioned CRT screens are very bad on my eyes and have been directly attributed by my doctors for the fact that my glasses got more powerful over time. Once LCD screens came along, my eyes stabilized (I haven’t changed much at all in the years I’ve been working on LCD), and the headaches I had from working hours a day on the computer went away. I’ve used eInk screens for short periods of time (several hours). I don’t like the grayscale only, but are they any better or worse? Not for me, as far as I can tell.
Brenna