Pixel Qi
company
Pixel Qi Corporation (pronounced Pixel "Chi") was an American company involved in the research of low-power computer display technology, based in San Bruno, California. It was founded by Mary Lou Jepsen, who was previously the chief technical officer of the One Laptop per Child project.
The company designed liquid crystal displays (LCDs) that can be largely manufactured using the existing manufacturing infrastructure for conventional LCDs. The advantage of Pixel Qi displays over conventional LCDs is mainly that they can be set to operate under transflective mode and reflective mode, improving eye-comfort, power usage, and visibility under bright ambient light.
By 2015, PixelQi's team and offices were unreachable, and the company is presumed defunct. The intellectual property is now owned by the original investor of Pixel Qi, while the right to manufacture Pixel Qi technology contractually rests with Tripuso Display Solutions.
Devices
The first commercial device to use a Pixel Qi display, ARM-based Adam tablet by Notion Ink, was released mid-January 2011.
Another tablet with a Pixel Qi display has been announced by Innoversal, named Lattice.;
Clover Systems has launched SunBook, a netbook with a Pixel Qi display.
The first ruggedized, MIL-SPEC tablet utilizing Pixel Qi, the Hydra-T3, was created by InHand Electronics, Inc. and launched Q1 of 2012.
The public source identifies “Pixel Qi” as company. This brief keeps that definition visible, then builds a research path around Pixel and company.
Why this record matters
A short description can identify a subject without explaining its stakes. For “Pixel Qi”, the useful work is to connect “company” to the records capable of establishing context and consequence.
Chronology, provenance and viewpoint should be read together before a broad social or political interpretation is accepted. The source revision retrieved here is dated Jun 16, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q1134375. 2 of 2 selected statements include explicit references; 0 carry qualifiers and 0 use preferred rank. The first chronological checks are 2015, 2011 and 2012.
Institutional narratives can privilege the records that survived while minimizing voices that were never formally collected. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Compare institutional narratives with records created by participants and affected communities. Dates and formal titles are useful anchors, but not substitutes for context.
- Event chronology
- Institutional context
- Locating named record creators
Contemporary correspondence, government or organizational records, oral histories and cited historical scholarship.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “Pixel Qi”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow Pixel Qi primary sources, Pixel Qi archive and Pixel research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Pixel Qi”?
- What chronology connects this entry to wider political or social change?
- Which voices are present, absent or mediated by the institution?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “Pixel Qi” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.