Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ask HN: Why are e-ink note-taking devices so expensive compared to iPads?

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 276 posts

Re: Ask HN: Why are e-ink note-taking devices so expensive compared to iPads?

#211

Post by girzel »

Cthulhu_ wrote: post #42
d3ckard wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let me help you - iPad is the ultimate content consumption device. It’s by far my favorite electronic device and by far the most used. I work on my computer, I communicate on my phone, but I relax on my iPad. Internet browsing, shopping, watching shorter videos (or even longer ones when cooking), sometimes playing games, reading books. Thanks for the recommendation for Remarkable 2, considering buying one for a while…

I have heard of some using the ipad pro as a drawing tablet, in which case it competes with e.g. Wacom, whose prices for their display-drawing-tablets are on par with ipads.

My daughter is in art school. She was considering a Wacom tablet, then did her research and bought an iPad pro instead. She seems thrilled with the choice.

Re: Ask HN: Why are e-ink note-taking devices so expensive compared to iPads?

#214

Post by zerocrates »

8ytecoder wrote: post #175
m-ee wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can also make things tough on competitors by filing a new patent that’s different enough from the original to get approved, but close enough to the original that it would be difficult to use the older patent without infringing on the new one.

Evergreening. US patent system has no provision to ban this practice. India, for example, requires the patent to be substantially different from the original. It’s the same trick used by drug manufacturers.

I've never quite gotten the problem with evergreening. The story is, a drug company seeing their patent expiration come up, makes some small improvement and patents that, getting them a new term. So far I'm following along.

But the narrative is, this locks out generics somehow. The new patent can't cover the subject matter of the old patent, as its automatically prior art, so only the improvements are covered by the new patent. If the "improvements" are so minor as to be irrelevant then I don't see how this is a real impediment to a generic. If on the other hand there's a significant improvement, it seems like that's really something that should be getting patent protection.

I just feel like there's always a step missing in the usual simple descriptions of evergreening I see. Is this all just tied in with something like doctors writing brand-name prescriptions, and the brand name just gets these minor pointless "improvements," but enough to diverges away from what the generic is so it can't be easily substituted?

Re: Ask HN: Why are e-ink note-taking devices so expensive compared to iPads?

#215

Post by stocknoob »

dpritchett wrote: post #155
nojito wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I used to have this problem, but I set up my ipad with parental control features so that I am unable to distract myself.

What stops you from unlocking the parental controls? If that’s not a recurring issue for you then you may not have an executive function disorder.

Have a friend/spouse/hated rival set the parental control code.

Re: Ask HN: Why are e-ink note-taking devices so expensive compared to iPads?

#216

Post by ChuckMcM »

weberer wrote: post #178
ChuckMcM wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

FWIW, I believe this has been debunked. Volume (when there is a net margin) always equates to greater profit until market saturation. Veblen goods rarely work for niche markets but can work for commodity markets (see cars and watches for examples).

Then why are there diamond cartels?

You aren't serious right? I mean there is a whole article on DeBeers (https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1982/02/have-yo...).

Re: Ask HN: Why are e-ink note-taking devices so expensive compared to iPads?

#217

Post by purplecats »

mywittyname wrote: post #205
iso8859-1 wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why can't a Chinese company clone their product and kill them?

They could easily clone & kill the technology itself. The problem comes from the fact that e-ink is worthless unless it is attached to a device with really strong vendor support. And any vendor worth a damn doesn't want to be the target of a billion dollar lawsuit. So the choice is between an overpriced device from a major player, or a cheap device with next to no support from a no-name vendor.

I'll take the second, as long as there are no hazards. I think the hacker community could build something usable.

Re: Ask HN: Why are e-ink note-taking devices so expensive compared to iPads?

#218

Post by RantyDave »

throwaway4485we wrote: post #14

Throaway to not get sued. E-ink, the company, holds the patents of the pigment core tech that makes "paper-like" displays possible and strongarms the display manufacturers and the users of their displays to absolute silence. Any research project or startup that comes up with a better alternative technology gets bought out or buried by their lawyers ASAP. E-ink don't make the display themselves, they make the e-ink fi…

I've done a little work with e-ink displays. My God, is that stuff a pain in the arse or what.

Re: Ask HN: Why are e-ink note-taking devices so expensive compared to iPads?

#219

Post by jounker »

GekkePrutser wrote: post #174
mottosso wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can see what you mean but on the other hand; are they really, though? If they hadn't come up with the technology and written the patents in the first place, we wouldn't even be here talking about it.

True, but there should be mandatory tech licensing at least so they can't just suffocate progress.

Why? It’s the payoff of a limited monopoly that justifies the investment in the research. Without that incentive progress might be even further restricted.

Re: Ask HN: Why are e-ink note-taking devices so expensive compared to iPads?

#220

Post by pid_0 »

1shooner wrote: post #118
wernercd wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

crying about a word is reactionary... especially when you are getting offended for other people who haven't asked for your help.

I don't think anyone is crying about it. Here's a simple thought experiment: would you use that word while sitting at dinner with a developmentally disabled child and his parents?

No simply because it was _deemed_ socially unacceptable. It has nothing to do with retard actually being used as a slur against people with mental disabilities.
Post reply on HN