• @breadsmasher@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    201 year ago

    Any mention of the refresh rate? I didn’t see that in this article and thats usually the downside. Completely fine for books, comics etc but maybe not the best for a computer monitor

    • Nioxic
      link
      fedilink
      English
      211 year ago

      Its not on their website either

      It must be … bad.

      Its also 1750 bucks… lol

    • Eager Eagle
      link
      fedilink
      English
      91 year ago

      We can see it refreshing in the video, the “refresh rate” doesn’t look much better than an e-reader and the device is very expensive, but it’s the first of its kind. Honestly if it was the price of a regular OLED screen of 25" I’d consider buying it to code.

      • chiisanaA
        link
        41 year ago

        Second on if affordable, I’d buy it… and I don’t even code much anymore. For anything that doesn’t need to be rapidly refreshed (I.E just about anything that’s not watching/editing videos or playing games), this will be so much more comfortable for extended use!

    • nickwitha_k (he/him)
      link
      fedilink
      English
      41 year ago

      Sadly, the technology stagnated for quite some time. This along with the physical nature of how the displays function (moving the pigment particles closer and further from the viewing plane) makes high refresh rates unlikely.

      • @You999@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        21 year ago

        You can kinda cheat and get the refresh rate down to 300ms with partial refresh but that’s still one hundred times slower than a 30hz conventional display.