×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Asus DR-570 E-Reader To Bring OLED Display

Soulskill posted more than 4 years ago | from the oled-tech-is-trouble-for-my-bank-account dept.

Handhelds 70

MojoKid writes "Reportedly, Asus will be introducing the DR-570 color eReader by the end of 2010, but it won't be just another one in the crowd. In fact, it just might be a game-changer. The reader will supposedly have a 6" screen, but rather than using e-ink like every other reader out there, this one will utilize a color OLED screen. Word is the unit will last a whopping 122 hours on a full charge. It should also be able to run Flash applications, download books over 3G to Wi-Fi, and most likely surf the web, unlike any other reader out there." Asus will be rolling out two other ebook reader models this year as well.

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

70 comments

FP (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30832444)

First bitches!

vaga222 (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30832458)

122 hours on full charge? Really?

Does anyone have any information to back this up? OLED screen power requirements etc?

O RLY? (4, Interesting)

Mr_Silver (213637) | more than 4 years ago | (#30832590)

In fact, it just might be a game-changer.

Okay...

The reader will supposedly have a 6" screen, but rather than using e-ink like every other reader out there, this one will utilize a color OLED screen.

According to Wikipedia [wikipedia.org]: " OLEDs typically produce only around 200 nits of light leading to poor readability in bright ambient light, such as outdoors "

They're proposing that an OLED E-Reader which cannot be read properly in sunlight will be "game changing". Forgive me for being not quite so optomistic.

Re:O RLY? (5, Interesting)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 4 years ago | (#30832832)

I saw this a few days ago, and it sounds like a nice tablet machine. If it's hackable then I'd be very interested in one, especially if I can use it with a Bluetooth keyboard. As an eBook reader, it sounds pretty poor.

Of course, that's assuming that it just has an OLED display. One thing I've been hoping for for a while is a hybrid with eInk under transparent OLED. You'd designate different regions of the screen to the different displays, so you could have colour images and videos in boxes on a text page. For something like a web page, most of the text would be rendered on the eInk display, but videos and images would use the OLED, unless you were in low-power mode, then videos would be disabled and images would be converted to greyscale. Touch a button and it would make the eInk black under the image and use the OLED to show the picture.

Two Words (4, Informative)

Arthur Grumbine (1086397) | more than 4 years ago | (#30835578)

Pixel Qi [liliputing.com]
With the ability to alternate between a black-and-white as-readable-in-direct-light-as-eInk mode and a standard color LCD mode, both with fast (normal LCD) refresh rates, and cost to manufacture on par with current LCD displays, this technology is the future of tablets (which will subsume the eReader market). And the first product, the Notion Ink Adam, is coming out this year.

Emissive vs passive (1)

jmorris42 (1458) | more than 4 years ago | (#30836922)

> Pixel Qi

Exactly. I got a good laugh out of that claimed 122 hours of runtime. Not with the screen showing anything it won't. Yes OLED has some important advantages over LCD but not that great. Unless it is going to have a huge ass battery pack sticking out current battery tech won't light up the screen for a hundred hours. Can't avoid the reality that emitting light consumes power. Of course there are ways to cheat the spec. Only light a small percentage of the pixels at less than full brightness and you might get that battery life but that is basically a rigged demo.

The new tradeoff, use typefaces with less 'ink' to gain battery life and leave the screen black in a throwback to old school terminals. Nah. And last I heard OLED still has horrible problems with burn lifetime where colors age at different rates.

Meanwhile Pixel Qi will be able to do eBook mode with black type on a light page and still get good a battery life.

Re:Emissive vs passive (2, Insightful)

Carnildo (712617) | more than 4 years ago | (#30837664)

Exactly. I got a good laugh out of that claimed 122 hours of runtime. Not with the screen showing anything it won't. Yes OLED has some important advantages over LCD but not that great. Unless it is going to have a huge ass battery pack sticking out current battery tech won't light up the screen for a hundred hours. Can't avoid the reality that emitting light consumes power. Of course there are ways to cheat the spec. Only light a small percentage of the pixels at less than full brightness and you might get that battery life but that is basically a rigged demo.

It's an ebook reader. If the default color scheme is grey text on black (think pre-Windows monitor), then yes, only a small percentage of the pixels will be lit at less than full brightness. Since that's the normal operating mode of the screen, I wouldn't call it a "rigged demo".

Re:Emissive vs passive (1)

hierophanta (1345511) | more than 4 years ago | (#30847978)

> Pixel Qi

Can't avoid the reality that emitting light consumes power.

Thats true - but why must it emit light? - using reflective technology you can achieve significantly less power needs. as well as being able to read in sun light - it is also the most natural way of looking at anything (not just video screens)
Case in point: the gameboy --its Display spec was : "Reflective LCD 160 × 144 pixels"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Game_Boy#Technical_specifications [wikipedia.org]
of course - it would be best to have back lighting for when you are in the dark too

Re:O RLY? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30843950)

They have to develop an OLED display the can be nearly 100% transparent, current ones are only 40% transparent, which means it absorbs too much light to make an e-ink display underneath it useful.

Re:O RLY? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30833666)

BS. Have you ever seen a kindle in bright light? You can't read shit. Even indoors if there is any sort of glare from a light shining directly on it you can't read it. The same is true for *ANY* display in direct sunlight outdoors.

Re:O RLY? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30833980)

OLEDs typically produce only around 200 nits of light leading to poor readability

Well. duuuh! Have you seen the Kindle producing any light at all? There you go!

Re:O RLY? (1)

Phyrexicaid (1176935) | more than 4 years ago | (#30842380)

BS. Have you ever seen a kindle in bright light? You can't read shit. Even indoors if there is any sort of glare from a light shining directly on it you can't read it. The same is true for *ANY* display in direct sunlight outdoors.

As a Kindle owner, I call BS. I can read outdoors, and in brightly lit rooms. Yes, if you're shining a bright light directly onto the screen then it won't be readable. But you can still shine light onto the screen to read it, they even sell a number of clip on lights for this purpose.

"optomistic"? (1)

Tetsujin (103070) | more than 4 years ago | (#30834066)

They're proposing that an OLED E-Reader which cannot be read properly in sunlight will be "game changing". Forgive me for being not quite so optomistic.

I'm trying to figure out whether that's a clever pun (since we are talking about visibility in different light conditions) or just a typo...

Re:"optomistic"? (1)

Mr_Silver (213637) | more than 4 years ago | (#30834618)

Sorry, spelling mistake. On the upside it has made me realise I'd forgotten to install the English dictionary for Firefox! Oops.

Re:"optomistic"? (1)

Tetsujin (103070) | more than 4 years ago | (#30834726)

Sorry, spelling mistake. On the upside it has made me realise I'd forgotten to install the English dictionary for Firefox! Oops.

Dang. I'd started to like the "clever pun" theory. :)

Missing the E-ink point. (4, Interesting)

onion2k (203094) | more than 4 years ago | (#30832642)

The point about e-ink is that it's passive. It doesn't emit light. That's what makes it very easy to read for extended periods. Throw that away and you might as well go back to reading books on your laptop.

Maybe... (2, Interesting)

Primitive Pete (1703346) | more than 4 years ago | (#30832764)

I agree with your point about the passivity of e-ink (and I'm a kindle user), but I think it is also important to note the distinction between people who read, and people who look at the pictures (say, in Elle). There's probably room in the market for both products, and they may not experience too much conflict in user communities.

Re:Missing the E-ink point. (1)

rehtonAesoohC (954490) | more than 4 years ago | (#30833030)

Well, that and the screen doesn't have to refresh. I absolutely love reading books on my Nook, and I have found that I tear through e-books much faster than paperbacks. I know for a fact that if I had to read on an LCD or OLED screen even, I wouldn't be able to read for extended periods of time, and I would just go back to reading real books...

Re:Missing the E-ink point. (3, Informative)

vlm (69642) | more than 4 years ago | (#30833340)

Well, that and the screen doesn't have to refresh.

LCDs dont refresh. Please let that very tired meme die. Next meme up to bat, "e-ink refresh rate".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Refresh_rate#Liquid_crystal_displays [wikipedia.org]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liquid_crystal_display [wikipedia.org]

"Refresh rate: The number of times per second in which the monitor draws the data it is being given. Since activated LCD pixels do not flash on/off between frames, LCD monitors exhibit no refresh-induced flicker, no matter how low the refresh rate."

Sure that was an appeal to authority, quoting wikipedia. But lets think about it, a CRT flickers because an electron beam sweeps a fast decay phosphor. LCDs don't have a "sweeping electron beam" or a rapid decay phosphor. I suppose you could simulate a flickering CRT using an LCD by updating the entire screen at 120 Hz and alternating data and a black field.

If your eyes hurt looking an "old fashioned" LCD but feel great looking at a "new expensive" e-ink, then you probably have audiophile-itis, easily cured by following solutions:

1) Green marker around the perimeter of the LCD

2) Install the LCD in a $3000 brushed aluminum enclosure

3) Use monster cables instead of cheap interconnect cables.

Alternately your eyes might hurt when you look at a LCD screen because your eyes are screwed up. See an eye doctor before you go completely blind.

Re:Missing the E-ink point. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30833520)

The sarcasm at the end was truly unwarranted.
There is a difference between looking at the object that emits light and the one that reflects it.

Re:Missing the E-ink point. (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30833604)

There is a difference between looking at the object that emits light and the one that reflects it.

For further reference, see: staring at the sun; staring at the moon.

Re:Missing the E-ink point. (2, Informative)

shadowrat (1069614) | more than 4 years ago | (#30833840)

I see a lot of people talk about this difference. What is the difference between looking at an object reflecting light, and an object that is emitting light of the same intensity?

I was an art student, so i had color theory. I have a good understanding of additive and subtractive color systems. It's been my understanding that you can create a certain color either through reflective or emissive means, but ultimately your eyes are receiving a certain nm of light at a certain intensity, it shouldn't really matter where that light was first (maybe overly simplistic. but i'm not certain how much scattering of light effects your eye-feel of what you see. i'm aware of the mechanics, but still think it has more to do with how other stuff in the environment looks than your comfort in looking at something).

with a light meter and a controlled environment, you could perform an experiment to see if people feel there is a difference between reading a kindle, or an lcd emitting the same intensity of light. I imagine with the right equipment you could measure the light and find it exactly the same.

I have performed a different experiment though. Look at a reflection of the sun, it's not much better than looking at the light source.

am i right? is this griping about lcd screens really griping about how we can't yet make a device that is crisp and clear without pumping way more photons than our eyes want?

Re:Missing the E-ink point. (2, Informative)

Tetsujin (103070) | more than 4 years ago | (#30834274)

I see a lot of people talk about this difference. What is the difference between looking at an object reflecting light, and an object that is emitting light of the same intensity?

Well, that's the trick. With a photosensor an LCD screen can ramp up its display brightness to fit the ambient lighting - and ramp it back down again if it gets dark... But LCD screens often can't get bright enough to do well in sunlight, while a reflective screen will be reflecting some amount of light comparable to the ambient light.

I sort of suspect the OLED screen won't be as visible in bright light as the E-ink - but I haven't seen it, so...

I was an art student, so i had color theory. I have a good understanding of additive and subtractive color systems. It's been my understanding that you can create a certain color either through reflective or emissive means, but ultimately your eyes are receiving a certain nm of light at a certain intensity

Just want to correct something:

Light can be made up of one or more wavelengths of light. Purple, for instance, is a combination of light from the two ends of the visible spectrum - as opposed to violet, which is short-wavelength light. The different types of cones in our eyes respond to different, overlapping ranges of wavelengths. So if we saw true yellow light, it would trigger the red and green cones, because both types of cones respond to yellow light (but to a lesser degree than they would respond to red or green) - this is why the primary color system works. If we see light that contains red and green wavelengths, it's the same to us as if we'd seen actual yellow light.

Re:Missing the E-ink point. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30835934)

Sounds right to me... the only other difference has to do with polarization -- the polarity of received reflected light will be significantly different from the polarity of source emitted light.

I wonder if anyone has done studies on how polarity affects human reading...

Re:Missing the E-ink point. (4, Funny)

ipX (197591) | more than 4 years ago | (#30833812)

LCDs dont refresh. Please let that very tired meme die.

Er, yes they do. You've misunderstood the actually quite explicit wording of the wiki article. They don't flicker due to refresh, but they sure tear/judder/blur due to refresh. Do some acid and/or shrooms and tell me you don't notice the diff between 60Hz and 120Hz. xD

However, this is not directly relevant to an e-reader, unless it is being used for video.

3) Use monster cables instead of cheap interconnect cables.

No, it's Denon [amazon.com]. Get ur references straight. :P

/flamebait

Re:Missing the E-ink point. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30834002)

Of course they refresh. They just don't flicker. If they didn't refresh, they would have an update rate rated in Hz. I guess the meme of the ignorant Slashdot poster that doesn't check his facts is still alive and well.

Re:Missing the E-ink point. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30834428)

I, for one, welcome our new ignorant... Nah, can't do it.

Re:Missing the E-ink point. (1)

Bakkster (1529253) | more than 4 years ago | (#30834610)

Alternately your eyes might hurt when you look at a LCD screen because your eyes are screwed up. See an eye doctor before you go completely blind.

You're right that it's not caused by a refresh rate. What is causing it is that CRT/LCD/OLED screens emit light, while eInk reflects it. Doesn't mean there's not something wrong with your eyes (astigmatism or glaucoma causing blurring or halos, for example), but the emitted light is the reason doctors suggest you take frequent breaks when looking at a screen (TV, computer monitor, etc) for a long period of time.

Re:Missing the E-ink point. (1)

ceoyoyo (59147) | more than 4 years ago | (#30836570)

Adjust the brightness of your screen. It doesn't matter whether the light is emitted by your LCD or reflected by your e-ink, so long as it is done so in a reasonable ratio to the intensity of the ambient light. Light is light.

Reflected light automatically adjusts itself to the ambient. An LCD screen can do this as well, but requires a sensor. Failing that, you can use the backlight control, often labelled as "brightness" to adjust it manually.

Re:Missing the E-ink point. (1)

adolf (21054) | more than 4 years ago | (#30841758)

Just because LCD monitors don't refresh like a CRT does, doesn't make them perfect.

I had a Viewsonic VG930M 19" LCD, which was an absolutely lousy monitor. Certain colors and shades would be very obviously and visibly noisy, due to the dithering used to approximate colors which the display was incapable of producing. (This is mentioned in your linked Wikipedia article on LCDs, down under the Drawbacks [wikipedia.org] heading.)

For a demonstration of this and some other problems with these displays, head over to this handy LCD test page [lagom.nl]. All of the images there are static, but depending on the display, some of them will flicker and do weird things to such an extent that you'll swear it's an oddly-smooth animated GIF concocted to con you into thinking your display is shit.

My fast, newish Asus TN-panel display does OK on most of that page. My somewhat slower, and far prettier (and more expensive!) IPS-panel NEC does a better job on some, but not all of it. Meanwhile, some of the stuff there hurt to look at with the aforementioned Viewsonic. (For reference, all monitors connected with DVI, all attached to the same video card, on the same PC, and driven at their native resolution.)

In conclusion, let me just say that under not-so-uncommon circumstances, perfectly normal LCD displays can and will flicker. Indeed, it's not a refresh rate issue. But just because folks sometimes use the wrong verbiage to describe a problem doesn't mean that they're not experiencing one at all, nor does it always indicate that they're suffering from audiophile-itis.

Re:Missing the E-ink point. (1)

sowth (748135) | more than 4 years ago | (#30848124)

The flicker on LCDs is apparently because they use pulse-width modulation to vary the output level of the backlight in a power efficient manner. Yet the frequency is hideously low, so you can see it flicker. I am not sure why they don't use frequencies in the kHz instead of Hz range. The electronics should be able to handle it easily.

Re:Missing the E-ink point. (1)

adolf (21054) | more than 4 years ago | (#30854016)

There's that problem, too. And it's a dumb problem to have: The inverter driving the backlight tubes actually becomes cheaper to produce, the higher the frequency is.

But please do go visit the LCD test page I previously linked before you start with absolute statements like "the flicker." There's a few things that they often get wrong -- sometimes, very, very wrong -- and you'll be able to see some of it there with your own eyes.

Re:Missing the E-ink point. (1)

vlm (69642) | more than 4 years ago | (#30833410)

The point about e-ink is that it's passive. It doesn't emit light. That's what makes it very easy to read for extended periods.

No, that makes it harder to read. One of the primary advantages of eink is low power consumption and that goes away with a backlight. Therefore marketing pushes the crazy idea that its easier to read something thats all dim.

Anyone who knows anything about photography knows its easier to focus on a bright light due to smaller pupil size.

Its just endlessly repeated marketing BS.

Re:Missing the E-ink point. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30842876)

It is amusing how little you know of what you callously rant.

Re:Missing the E-ink point. (1)

mdwh2 (535323) | more than 4 years ago | (#30839534)

That and the battery life - I presume your laptop doesn't do 122 hours.

Features, not bugs (2, Funny)

Monkeedude1212 (1560403) | more than 4 years ago | (#30832750)

"It should also be able to run Flash applications, download books over 3G to Wi-Fi, and most likely surf the web, unlike any other reader out there."

So given enough time I can catch some nasty Malware - with no proper way to remove it besides opening it up and ruining the warranty?

Re:Features, not bugs (1)

Beezlebub33 (1220368) | more than 4 years ago | (#30832806)

What, exactly, is the difference between an e-book that is able to run flash apps and surf the web, and a tablet pc?

The lines are definitely being blurred here.

Re:Features, not bugs (1)

Monkeedude1212 (1560403) | more than 4 years ago | (#30833362)

Depending on the vendor, I can pop open a tablet PC, use the hard drive as a slave drive, clean it off, put it back in, and still have my warranty.

OLED? (1)

bmecoli (963615) | more than 4 years ago | (#30832818)

Yeah and it'll probably be priced WAY above the competition. Yeah this'll take off like a lead weight.

Reportedly (4, Funny)

dangitman (862676) | more than 4 years ago | (#30832858)

Reportedly, company X will introduce Product Y, which will make sex-bots obsolete. Not only will it make sex-bots obsolete, it will run for 2,000 hours on a few drops of water-based lubricant. World hunger will be solved by Product Y, which will also be able to read Excel spreadsheets and shoot deadly laser bolts from its nipples. Analysts are excited to see beta versions of Product Y, and would gladly give their first-born children for a glimpse at the device.

but... (1)

JustNiz (692889) | more than 4 years ago | (#30832900)

I thought the WHOLE POINT of an e-book reader is that e-ink displays are easier on the eyes for long periods than other display technologies.
Otherwise jeez just use a tablet PC.

Re:but... (2, Interesting)

shutdown -p now (807394) | more than 4 years ago | (#30833156)

I thought the WHOLE POINT of an e-book reader is that e-ink displays are easier on the eyes for long periods than other display technologies.

Not really, there's also the very long battery life. Which of those two is more important depends on who you ask, though.

Re:but... (1)

aztracker1 (702135) | more than 4 years ago | (#30833926)

I for one will go for the battery life and color over eInk. Though I've been using a netbook for about 2 years now, and plan on switching out for a low-power 12", not so much for the screen size, as the Atom is just a tad bit too slow. If it can't do flash reasonably, then web surfing suffers, if it can't display 720p video, or downsized 1080p, then my media suffers. All around, other than email, music and some browsing I don't use my netbook so much at all.

hmm (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30833018)

I like static e-ink screen rather than having a glowing page flashed at my eyes 100 times a second, but that's just me...

Reality check (4, Informative)

McSnickered (67307) | more than 4 years ago | (#30833140)

At the bottom of the article is the following update that might put things in a more realistic perspective:

----

Update - 1/18/10 - 10:25PM EST:

This just came in from our contacts at Asus here in the US. It looks like things are a bit premature at this point (of course) but it does appear that Asus will be making a major play in this arena in the near future.

"As for the status of the unit, we do have plans to bring a series of innovative products into this market sector. All details about the product(s) are still to be finalized with the goals of outstanding responsiveness and battery life being of prime importance for us to ensure a great end user experience. The mass production schedule is still under discussion as is pricing, availability, and channel selections. However, based on our history with mobile products, the digital reader series will be cost competitive with other solutions while offering a wealth of features.

ASUS believes that content and applications are the keys to success in the market sector. Once we have a concrete software and application plan, we will disclose additional information to you."

----

download books over 3G to Wi-Fi? (1)

camperdave (969942) | more than 4 years ago | (#30833262)

Word is the unit will... download books over 3G to Wi-Fi

Does this mean that the unit can act as a cellular tether/wireless access point? Sweet!

...Or should they change the word "to" to "or"?

Seriously (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30833302)

Does it run Linux?

not good enough (1)

hort_wort (1401963) | more than 4 years ago | (#30833446)

Wake me up when they get to handheld 3d porn. I need a refresh rate of at least 120 Hz, right? Do OLEDs even have non-glowy refresh rates suitable for 3d? (Legitimate question, not sarcasm.)

Re:not good enough (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30833862)

Forget handheld 3D porn, what you need is augmented reality 3D porn via display glasses.

Re:not good enough (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30833918)

Forget handheld 3D porn, what you need is augmented reality 3D porn via display glasses.

Noooooo, what you need is a woman (well, you're an ac; hell, could be a man, or a pig-elephant hybrid)

Re:not good enough (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30838048)

or a pig-elephant hybrid

Trying to find your mom a date?

Slate... (1)

Ralz (1634999) | more than 4 years ago | (#30833494)

Hmmm, I wonder what the price will be. It will be fairly similar to a slate if it has web-browsing etc. but with less functionality, so depending on its cost you might just be better off getting a cheap slate computer.

Re:Slate... (1)

Steve Max (1235710) | more than 4 years ago | (#30833678)

If a cheap slate computer's battery can last for 5 days of usage, I agree. If I have to recharge my book after a few hours, no.

You'll probably have to pick either battery life or features. And if the iPhone and the netbook craze told us something, it's that features don't always win over the market.

Re:Slate... (1)

Ralz (1634999) | more than 4 years ago | (#30834036)

I find the 122 hour battery life a bit hard to swallow, I'll believe it when I see it.

I'd be more than happy if a slate computer with a decent feature set had a battery life of about 6 hours to be honest.

It would make no difference to me if the battery life on my e-book was 122 hours or 122 minutes, because I'm not the sort of person who reads books for 10 consecutive hours a day for 2 weeks without being able to get to a power outlet.

Re:Slate... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30834614)

I'd be happy with a slate computer that had 5 hours of battery life after 2 years. I bought a new laptop 2 years ago. The first few months, I could use it for over 8 hours doing actual work. Then slowly it went downhill. Now it barely makes an hour on a full charge.

Which Books? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30834658)

The point of an e-reader is of course to read books. But what books? Both the Amazon Kindle and Sony's E-book have dedicated stores wrapped up tightly in DRM because book publishers are afraid of piracy. I know there are non-DRMed books out there but nothing I want to read. Where will I get the latest installment of the sci-fi series I've been reading? Will ASUS have store equivalent to Sony or Amazon?

Apple will be first (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30834852)

I predict Apple has kept the iSlate super-secret because it's not just a tablet PC, it's a color e-reader with multi-touch support and weeks-long battery life (when not used for video or wireless).

We know the technology is there, and Apple only releases new product lines to be game-changers of existing product categories. What could be game-changing about a simple tablet PC? Many other are offering them now. A highly usable full-color e-reader in early 2010, on the other hand...

Fujitsu already beat them (1)

mdwh2 (535323) | more than 4 years ago | (#30839060)

The Fujitsu FLEPia is already released, last year in fact:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fujitsu_FLEPia [wikipedia.org]
http://ezinearticles.com/?Fujitsu-Flepia-E-Reader-Review&id=3326541 [ezinearticles.com]
http://www.technologyreview.com/computing/22332/?a=f [technologyreview.com]

It has 40-50 hours battery life, so yes, it is reasonable to consider this as an e-reader (as opposed to most handheld devices that only have a few hours of battery life).

I found this with a trivial Google search. Although it's sad that from reading Slashdot, I'd have no idea of it's release (I can't find any stories for it?), yet for the Apple iVaporware, we've already had endless stories about just rumours, and if the thing is actually ever released, no doubt we'll get daily stories on it like Apple's phone. Bottom line - this site is good for Apple rumours, but don't rely on it for "news for nerds", or geek stuff that matters in general.

Of course, I predict that you will redefine the category so that it doesn't include this device, but makes Apple "first".

Re:Apple will be first (1)

sowth (748135) | more than 4 years ago | (#30847538)

How is a tablet pc not an e-reader??? If you install a pdf viewer on a computer, you have an "e-reader."

resolution? (1)

charlener (837709) | more than 4 years ago | (#30835130)

So, I recall one of the main e-ink perks being the "print-like" sharpness. Is this something OLED (or LED, for that matter) can achieve? That for me would be the deal-breaker.

Asus and Google (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30843350)

What do Asus and Google have in common? They are not scared to show the market what is possible.
I respect both companies for that.

Tim Breu

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...