- cross-posted to:
- technology@lemmy.world
- technology@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- technology@lemmy.world
- technology@lemmy.world
Google recently open sourced Pebble and today, Repebble has put some of the watches up for preorder.
Google recently open sourced Pebble and today, Repebble has put some of the watches up for preorder.
The problem is that e-paper is a category of displays, and some companies label reflective LCDs as “e-paper”. Which is subjective (and I personally heavily disagree with that categorization, cause then LCD clocks and Gameboys have “e-paper” displays, too).
But in the comment I responded to it was said Pebble has “eink” display, which is categorically wrong, as that is a very specific proprietary technology, which is e-paper in traditional sense, like the ones in Kindles.
Your response says, “not epaper” which is categorically wrong. I assume you meant to say “eink”
As I mentioned earlier, whether a screen type is considered e-paper is subjective. And in my opinion, reflective LCD isn’t a type of e-paper. You may disagree, but it’s not “categorically” wrong.
Where exactly is that quote from? I had a look through the product page(s) and could only find e-paper being mentioned…
Quote is from Wikipedia. You can see it’s the case for both models here:
Besides, I own a Pebble Time watch and can tell you, it doesn’t perform like a typical e-paper. It has the bad viewing angles of LCD and screen goes blank when power is lost.
That quote is on under features on the article for the original Pebble, right? Might be that the Pebble 2 used a different screen; I can’t really find info on that though.
Regarding the Time, I think the product page for the new Time 2 specifically says how the curved screen lens on the Pebble Time wasn’t that good.
Edit: Found the quote under the Core 2 Time section
From the Verge article:
Ah I see