The reason this can do video is because it doesn't work the same way as e-ink. One of the main features of e-ink is that it can maintain an image with no power. This is not the case for these displays. The power usage man not be as high as LCDs (mainly because this technology is not using backlighting or very little, much like a transreflective lcd in a watch).

Interestingly enough, this is not currently available according to their site. It is mentioned nowhere. Also, the Press release is dated Wednesday May 19th, which is tomorrow...

If they release ths with some sort of Windows Mobile/ Palm Pre streaming software, usefullness goes up 500% and I just might be in.

The reason this us so much better than the Segway is that it is so much smaller.

Unlike the segway, this could easily fit in a trunk or even a large locker. I be interested to know the distance this thing get on a charge. The battery is not very big and it needs to power a one kilowatt engine. Also, it might be interesting to pair this with that Samsung fuel cell battery featured a little while ago. That way, a recharge would only require a little liquid. I don't know if the fuel cell could support that kind of wattage though. This is the most interesting Segway type device I have seen so far, including the Segway itself.

Considering the cost of such a device itself, and the fact that it requires some sort of central server that monitors power usage and networks it to the device, there are much more effective uses of money in regards to saving power. Not to mention the fact that the kind of person who is going to buy this system is much more likely to already be attempting to conserve energy and thus need it less. This tries to force lower energy use instead of informing about energy use. A better use of technology would simply to have a lcd on the swich that reads out the total current watts used by the house.

Caffeinated bacon? Baconated grapefruit? ADMIRAL Crunch??

Aw man, I wish I thought of that.

shiznit, that's creepy

4ms is most likely the gray-to-gray response time (the time it takes for a pixel to go from one shade of gray to a different shade of gray). If a LCD has a response time of 4ms, it by definition CANNOT display more than 250 images per second, so either the given response time is wrong or the refresh rate is bogus.

If you look at the actual paper, you'll notice the total claimed power savings is about 35mW. If such a savings was realized, this might improve the standby life of the phone (when the screen is off and the CPU usage is low). However the power usage of the screen backlight, and of the CPU usage during actual usage of the phone the saved 35mW will be relatively insignificant. Also, if i read the paper correctly, with the proposed power savings comes a 60% reduction in range. In no way could this technique ever result in a 12x reduction on total power usage of a 12x increase in battery life.

so ... sad ...

Oh Phoenix, you treated us well ...