×

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!

Color E-Book Displays Coming From E Ink Next Year

Soulskill posted more than 4 years ago | from the new-spectrum-of-displays dept.

Displays 219

waderoush writes "E Ink, which makes the monochrome electrophoretic screens used in the Amazon Kindle, the Barnes & Noble Nook, the Sony Reader line, and other e-readers, is gearing up to supply manufacturers with the first color versions of its displays by early next year, according to an Xconomy interview with T.H. Peng, a vice president with Taiwan's Prime View International, which bought E Ink last year. Peng argues that E Ink has nothing to fear from the e-book apps on the Apple iPad and other devices with color LCDs, which, in his view, produce more eye strain and aren't as suitable for digital reading. Nonetheless, the company says its first color screens in 2011 will have newspaper-quality color, followed within a couple of years by improved versions that can handle magazine-style content."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

219 comments

Cool, I'll wait for the magazine quality ones. (3, Interesting)

2obvious4u (871996) | more than 4 years ago | (#31484394)

Yeah, I bought a palm pilot and then one month later they announced the color version. I'm not getting bit by that again. I'll just wait for the color this time.

Re:Cool, I'll wait for the magazine quality ones. (3, Insightful)

91degrees (207121) | more than 4 years ago | (#31484540)

Yes, early adopters often get shafted. Rapid obsolescence is one of the costs of the bleeding edge.

Re:Cool, I'll wait for the magazine quality ones. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31484898)

Rapid obsolescence is the foundation of the consumer economy since post WW2

there fixed it for you.

Re:Cool, I'll wait for the magazine quality ones. (2, Insightful)

Vanderhoth (1582661) | more than 4 years ago | (#31484982)

That being said, if it wasn't for early adopters, who end up getting screwed, I don't think some technologies would have taken off.

DVDs for example might not have been, or have gotten, as big as they are now if it wasn't for the people that went out and spent thousands of dollars on the original players and hundreds on the original DVDs.

Some companies use early adopters as their statistics to either continue or discontinue production of a product.

Re:Cool, I'll wait for the magazine quality ones. (2, Interesting)

vlm (69642) | more than 4 years ago | (#31485700)

DVDs for example might not have been, or have gotten, as big as they are now if it wasn't for the people that went out and spent thousands of dollars on the original players and hundreds on the original DVDs.

DVDs were substantially better than VCR tapes.

On the other hand, e-ink vs LCD, a big "eh".

Eh no? (3, Insightful)

SmallFurryCreature (593017) | more than 4 years ago | (#31485644)

He was a LATE adaptor. If he had bought his palm pilot at the beginning, then he would have had one for a long time before the color version.

And if you buy an E-ink device now, you are also a late adaptor. Bleeding edge was passed long ago.

Re:Cool, I'll wait for the magazine quality ones. (2, Insightful)

Belial6 (794905) | more than 4 years ago | (#31485782)

There is also the problem of some technologies always being bleeding edge. CPUs being the most obvious example. If you waited until CPUs stopped becoming obsolete in a few years, you might just now be considering your first computer. Display screens...Not so much of a problem. Although, that will depend on how much they scale. If the manufacture scales as well as CPUs have...

You can skip the black and white while waiting for color.
You can skip newspaper quality color waiting for magazine quality color.
You can skip the single screen magazine quality color waiting for the dual screen clam shell color.
You can skip the clam shell screens waiting for the six screen 'book'.
You can skip the six page screen waiting for the 12 page book.
You can skip the 12 first gen book waiting for the book that has sub 5ms refresh times.

If there is ~18 months between releases, you could be looking at another decade before you get any kind of e-book reader.

I don't think that most people have really thought out what they will do with this kind of tech. Books have been their selling point because it was the best that the tech could do in it's crude state. Future e-ink will be as similar to the Kindal as the Vic-20 is to Windows 7 connected to the internet.

Even before they work on refresh rates, magazine quality color will wipe out the much of the non-"fine" art industry. When you can buy a poster size sheet of this, and it can maintain a poster quality picture without using any electricity, people will start reconsidering buying print. When you can buy a poster sized sheet for $50, you will see people considering it for use as wallpaper. When you can get this quality with sub 5ms refresh times, you will not only see people wallpapering with it, you will see it replacing TVs and computer monitors. Why bother mounting a fixed size TV to your wall when any or all of your walls can become TVs dynamically.

I don't know how well this tech will scale in size and price, but I would suggest treating it like any other tech. If it does what you want at a price you are happy with, buy it now, and accept that things will bet better and cheaper in the future.

Re:Cool, I'll wait for the magazine quality ones. (1)

Chris_Stankowitz (612232) | more than 4 years ago | (#31485174)

Yeah, I bought a palm pilot and then one month later they announced the color version. I'm not getting bit by that again. I'll just wait for the color this time.

You were bitten by your own ignorance, not by being am early adopter... there was no announcement and subsequent release of the color palm one moth after the B&W Palm. It was easily 10 - 12 months. That said, early adopters know the price they pay for being at the front of the line.

CS-

Re:Cool, I'll wait for the magazine quality ones. (1)

AvitarX (172628) | more than 4 years ago | (#31485468)

I want e-ink digital photo frames.

Hopefully it will not be long until we can get that in magazine quality.

Bendable (2, Interesting)

tsa (15680) | more than 4 years ago | (#31484410)

A few years ago I saw a demonstration by Philips on TV of a bendable e-ink screen. I think bendability is more important than colour. If the screen is bendable it can behave more like a real book.

Bendable E-Ink Screens Already Exist (1)

Senjutsu (614542) | more than 4 years ago | (#31484478)

Unfortunately the bendable screen doesn't solve the non-bendable motherboard, CPU, battery, and case problems..

Re:Bendable E-Ink Screens Already Exist (1)

snooo53 (663796) | more than 4 years ago | (#31484648)

I don't see the problem. Books have a spine that isn't bendable; all they have to do is put the electronics in a rigid part of the device and let the rest be flexible.

Re:Bendable E-Ink Screens Already Exist (1)

tsa (15680) | more than 4 years ago | (#31484778)

Exactly. Or you print the electronics on the other side of the screen. The only thing you can't make bendable is the holder for the memory card (and the memory card itself of course). An e-book that behaves like a book is so much nicer than the ones that are for sale now!

Re:Bendable (2, Insightful)

calibre-not-output (1736770) | more than 4 years ago | (#31484508)

If they make an e-ink screen that smells like an old book, I'll buy it.

Re:Bendable (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31484672)

How about I buy one and shove some old musty paper in it and sell it for twice the price?

Re:Bendable (3, Insightful)

Ephemeriis (315124) | more than 4 years ago | (#31485748)

A few years ago I saw a demonstration by Philips on TV of a bendable e-ink screen. I think bendability is more important than colour. If the screen is bendable it can behave more like a real book.

I'm not sure how much I care about the ability to bend my books.

Yes, paper bends... As I turn a page it bends... But bendability isn't really something fundamental to the function of a book. A book's primary purpose is the display of information.

I mean... Is a magazine somehow better than a 500 page novel just because it's more bendable?

Are hardcover books somehow inferior to paperbacks, simply because they're less bendable?

I have a nook, and I read plenty of books on it. And I have never, ever found myself thinking you know what would make this ereader perfect? If I could just bend it...

I've got a better idea (5, Insightful)

Pojut (1027544) | more than 4 years ago | (#31484426)

How about you first find a better process for making monochrome e-ink displays so the devices that use them aren't ridiculously priced?

Re:I've got a better idea (1)

grahamsz (150076) | more than 4 years ago | (#31484476)

I have a feeling that increasing their desirability will increase their market share and that will inevitably reduce the price.

Re:I've got a better idea (3, Insightful)

Monkeedude1212 (1560403) | more than 4 years ago | (#31484480)

No one makes money on Niche products by making them less expensive. They could find a way to cut a dollar off production costs and they'd still charge you an arm and a leg.

Re:I've got a better idea (0)

lwsimon (724555) | more than 4 years ago | (#31484542)

This.

There is a science to optimizing cost vs. production costs vs. demand. For niche product, the consumer's cost is going to be high.

I hope eInk stay profitable, though - I think that color eInk displays with be very nice in a few years.

Re:I've got a better idea (4, Insightful)

Pojut (1027544) | more than 4 years ago | (#31484620)

There is a science to optimizing cost vs. production costs vs. demand. For niche product, the consumer's cost is going to be high.

That's just it though...the only reason why it is such a niche product is because they are prohibitively expensive.

If the readers dropped down to $150 average for a GOOD one instead of a no-name bad one, I would buy an e-reader tomorrow. I doubt I'm the only person who doesn't own one just because of cost.

Re:I've got a better idea (1)

maxume (22995) | more than 4 years ago | (#31484726)

The Sony Reader Pocket goes for about $170-$180.

Not exactly no name, but it does have a smaller screen and such.

Re:I've got a better idea (1)

Pojut (1027544) | more than 4 years ago | (#31484764)

Eh...that's still a little too much.

I know that making such a big deal over $20-$30 sounds stupid, but when you consider e-books are running $5-$15 each...

Re:I've got a better idea (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31484906)

And when they're $125-150, you'll sit there demanding that they be $100 instead. Some people can never be pleased, and you very clearly seem to be one of them.

Re:I've got a better idea (1)

Pojut (1027544) | more than 4 years ago | (#31484938)

And when they're $125-150, you'll sit there demanding that they be $100 instead. Some people can never be pleased, and you very clearly seem to be one of them.

How do you figure? I already said that if there was a name-brand version that didn't suck priced at $150, I would go out tomorrow and buy one...as in, within 24 hours from now.

Re:I've got a better idea (1)

TheMidget (512188) | more than 4 years ago | (#31485510)

The Sony Reader Pocket ... Not exactly no name,

You're right. That's not "no name", but rather "bad name". But I think what GP wanted was "good name".

Re:I've got a better idea (3, Informative)

hanabal (717731) | more than 4 years ago | (#31485704)

interestingly enough. I recently did quite a bit of research into readers as my wife wanted one and the Sony one came out on top. The clearest screens and the best at reading open formats such as txt and PDF. I know /. is big on compatibility and openness so I thought I'd throw it out that at the moment Sony is the best. Sure you can get features like wifi and reading webpages on things like the kindle, but in terms of reading e-books, the Sony reader line is top notch

Re:I've got a better idea (2, Insightful)

grahamsz (150076) | more than 4 years ago | (#31484786)

Probably the same reason you didn't have a computer until the mid 80s.

Re:I've got a better idea (0)

Pojut (1027544) | more than 4 years ago | (#31484852)

Well...I mean, I personally didn't have a computer until the '88 because I was born in '84 :-) Ah, the days of playing Bop 'N Wrestle on my Commodore 64...

Re:I've got a better idea (0)

Eponymous Coward (6097) | more than 4 years ago | (#31484972)

Cripes. Now that makes me feel old. People born in the mid '80's reminiscing about the good ol' days of computers. Thanks.

Re:I've got a better idea (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31485114)

I was born in '83, and got my first real computer in '85 (Prior to that I had a commodore 64)... Your point?

Re:I've got a better idea (1)

SnarfQuest (469614) | more than 4 years ago | (#31485334)

I bought my first laptop if '69. Now I have one bolted to the side of my wheelchair. ...

Hint: Joke?

How is the kindle prohibitively expensive? (1)

Shivetya (243324) | more than 4 years ago | (#31485006)

Whats wrong, no Apple logo?

Seriously, its under $500, does what it does very very well.

3G jacks up its cost, probably not as much as Apple will hit iPad users for it, but it is no small part of the price. Let alone many people will piss away more money in frivolous purchases they cannot recall than on something like this.

I know people who would bitch at $150 yet will pay that in two months for the phones. Go figure. Its relative. The e-readers are niche products because people haven't seen a need for them. If the books were cheaper on the readers by a good amount than what you pay for the paper versions people might jump, but that option may be out the window as Apple seems willing to throw the consumer under the bus and have publishers set what price they want.

Re:How is the kindle prohibitively expensive? (1)

demonlapin (527802) | more than 4 years ago | (#31485662)

Books are already cheaper on Kindle than paper, often by a fair amount. The problem is that right now e-Ink screens are really good only for continuous text streams without graphics. Now, for that one purpose, they're fantastic. I love my Kindle. But I would have had a lot of trouble justifying the cost if I were a casual reader (5-6 books/year).

Why improve mono, just replace with color ... (5, Insightful)

perpenso (1613749) | more than 4 years ago | (#31484888)

How about you first find a better process for making monochrome e-ink displays so the devices that use them aren't ridiculously priced?

Why? Mono is probably a dead end technology. It may be better to get to color as quickly as possible and then concentrate on process improvements. A color Kindle would be a much better commercial product. It is difficult to imagine textbooks moving to electronic media without color. Regarding the possibility of reduced eye strain with mono, perhaps a reader app on a color device could choose to only show black and white for pure text content.

--
Perpenso Calc [perpenso.com] for iPhone and iPod touch, scientific and bill/tip calculator, fractions, complex numbers, RPN

Re:Why improve mono, just replace with color ... (1)

Pojut (1027544) | more than 4 years ago | (#31485038)

Chances are the availability of color devices will drive the selling price of the monochrome ones after they are on the market for a little bit anyway...but I think they would watch the market grow a lot faster if the price of entry wasn't as high as it is. At this stage in the technology's life though, you may be right about it being pointless to invest further in monochrome displays.

Still, I know they are trying, and I know the market is doing decently well despite the high prices, but when you consider the rest of the components that make up an e-reader, the e-ink display is obviously where the bulk of the price comes from.

Re:Why improve mono, just replace with color ... (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31485130)

Why? Mono is probably a dead end technology. It may be better to get to color as quickly as possible and then concentrate on process improvements. A color Kindle would be a much better commercial product. It is difficult to imagine textbooks moving to electronic media without color.

I'm sure black text on white background will look so much better on color screen!
Really now, you forget what *ebook* readers are meant for.

Re:Why improve mono, just replace with color ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31485452)

What about comic books? Really now, you forget what a *display* is meant for.

Re:I've got a better idea (1)

IronChef (164482) | more than 4 years ago | (#31485734)

The new slightly smaller Sony reader is only $200. While that isn't so cheap that forgetting it on the bus would be painless, it's not ridiculously expensive either.

IMHO, YMMV.

Apple could offer a model with eink screen ... (3, Insightful)

perpenso (1613749) | more than 4 years ago | (#31484518)

Peng argues that E Ink has nothing to fear from the e-book apps on the Apple iPad and other devices with color LCDs, which, in his view, produce more eye strain and aren't as suitable for digital reading.

E Ink certainly has less to fear from Apple since E Ink could sell their screens to Apple just like they sell to Amazon, Sony, etc. If the eye strain issue becomes a concern Apple could simply offer an iPad version, or a new product derived from iPad that is more focused as an eReader and not a gaming/multimedia platform, with an E Ink screen. I think it is premature to say that Amazon and Sony has nothing to fear.

--
Perpenso Calc [perpenso.com] for iPhone and iPod touch, scientific and bill/tip calculator, fractions, complex numbers, RPN

Re:Apple could offer a model with eink screen ... (1, Funny)

symes (835608) | more than 4 years ago | (#31484728)

An Apple version of E ink? You mean iEink? That sounds wrong, like pain or something

Re:Apple could offer a model with eink screen ... (3, Funny)

gartogg (317481) | more than 4 years ago | (#31485096)

Old Mcdonald had an Ebook reader, E-I-E-I-Ink
And on that Ebook reader were overpriced books, E-I-E-I-who the hell cares.

Re:Apple could offer a model with eink screen ... (1)

vlm (69642) | more than 4 years ago | (#31485786)

E Ink certainly has less to fear from Apple since E Ink could sell their screens to Apple

Perpenso Calc for iPhone and iPod touch, scientific and bill/tip calculator, fractions, complex numbers, RPN

Oh the irony, oh the irony. E-ink display would kill your app. Nice app, gotta love a RPN calculator, but using your "20 digit precision" I don't want to go click / one second while the screen flashes a couple times / click / delay / click / delay on an eink display.

Heck, I could probably add and subtract in my head faster than your calculator could update a slow eink display.

haha (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31484624)

yes I also agree!! hahaha

http://www.movies2009.info

I predict in the next version (4, Funny)

Orga (1720130) | more than 4 years ago | (#31484654)

We'll be able to physically feel and turn the pages of these color books. Makes notes in the margin and who knows, with advances on the DRM front be able to actually pass these books onto our children!

Re:I predict in the next version (2, Informative)

Shados (741919) | more than 4 years ago | (#31485072)

I know you're joking, but taking notes in the margins has been there for a bit. Some of sony's e-readers have touchscreen display (which sucked in their first incarnation, but are better now), and let you annotate books at will.

Re:I predict in the next version (1, Insightful)

TheMidget (512188) | more than 4 years ago | (#31485550)

Yes, and with DRM, your notes will be gone as well, when they decide to pull the book.

Re:I predict in the next version (1)

Vanderhoth (1582661) | more than 4 years ago | (#31485102)

with advances on the DRM front be able to actually pass these books onto our children!

Now you're just dreaming!! Don't be so greedy! jk ;)

Still not convinced about e-ink (3, Interesting)

Space cowboy (13680) | more than 4 years ago | (#31484660)

Am I the only one who *doesn't* get eye-strain reading text on LCD's hour after hour ?

I'm beginning to wonder whether the difference is actually Mac vs PC and the font rendering [codinghorror.com] technologies. I use a Mac all day, reading text on LCDs, and it doesn't bother me in the slightest. Perhaps it's because the fonts look nicer (yeah, I know, it's an opinion, not a fact) to my eye on the Mac. I've lost count of the number of times I've spent days poring over PDFs and somehow managed to not notice this 'eye strain' that LCDs apparently cause. I actually *prefer* to read documents on the screen rather than printed out on paper...

I'm also pretty convinced I'd get a lot more wound up over the slow refresh of the e-ink displays than the supposed eyestrain from LCDs...

Simon.

Re:Still not convinced about e-ink (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31484798)

Yes, fanboy, your Mac is sooooo fabulous it magically does away with eye strain from the LCD. Maybe you don't get eye strain because of all practice crossing your eyes while your nose is in Steve Jobs' butt.

Re:Still not convinced about e-ink (5, Insightful)

buruonbrails (1247370) | more than 4 years ago | (#31484868)

Just read from E-Ink screen to feel the difference. I was skeptical about E-Ink too before having tried it out. It looks almost exactly like the real paper. So, now I can't imagine using LCD for prolonged reading when you can use E-Ink device or (even better!) good old paper book.

By the way, another key advantage of E-Ink is energy consumption: it doesn't use battery when static, and uses quite a small amount of energy to redraw the page. Due to this feature, eBooks can run for weeks or even months on a single charge.

Re:Still not convinced about e-ink (1)

Piranhaa (672441) | more than 4 years ago | (#31485342)

By the way, another key advantage of E-Ink is energy consumption: it doesn't use battery when static, and uses quite a small amount of energy to redraw the page. Due to this feature, eBooks can run for weeks or even months on a single charge.

As much as I'd like to back this up, it's not entirely true. The "screen" doesn't use any energy in a static state and requires very little power to redraw. However, the device itself stays in a "standby" state and does use (very little) power 24/7.

I have a Sony PRS-505 and absolutely love it. It does drop to half power if I turn it off for 2-3 weeks (there's a REAL way to turn it off, but it takes too long to boot), but that is still much better than the HOURS battery life that the iPad, laptops, and netbooks get. It's simply comparing apples to oranges.

Re:Still not convinced about e-ink (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31485580)

I have a Sony PRS-505 and absolutely love it. It does drop to half power if I turn it off for 2-3 weeks (there's a REAL way to turn it off, but it takes too long to boot), but that is still much better than the HOURS battery life that the iPad, laptops, and netbooks get.

The very low consumption of E-Ink displays is certainly very appealing. On the other hand, the iPad's battery is supposed to last 30 days in standby mode (if you are to believe what was said in the keynote where it was presented), and it comes out of standby mode in a second or so like any iPhone or iPod touch.

Of course you can't read the screen while it's in standby mode (unlike E-Ink), but since you are not going to be using the device 24/7 this does compensate at least partially since you may not need to charge it every single day.

Re:Still not convinced about e-ink (1)

buruonbrails (1247370) | more than 4 years ago | (#31485628)

When speaking about power consumption, I was referring to the screen. As for overall power consumption, right you are: most of the eBook readers have Linux within, and this beast has a well-known appetite for power.

Re:Still not convinced about e-ink (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31485366)

Just read from E-Ink screen to feel the difference. I was skeptical about E-Ink too before having tried it out. It looks almost exactly like the real paper. So, now I can't imagine using LCD for prolonged reading when you can use E-Ink device or (even better!) good old paper book.

You make a good point about trying an E-Ink screen for himself. But he did say:

I actually *prefer* to read documents on the screen rather than printed out on paper...

So if E-Ink "looks almost exactly like real paper" and he "actually prefers to read documents on the screen rather than printed out on paper" I don't see how he is going to "get it" if he tries an E-Ink screen.

Re:Still not convinced about e-ink (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31485444)

By the way, another key advantage of E-Ink is energy consumption: it doesn't use battery when static, and uses quite a small amount of energy to redraw the page. Due to this feature, eBooks can run for weeks or even months on a single charge.

Another benefit of this feature is that it can take weeks or even months to render a single video.

Re:Still not convinced about e-ink (1)

TheMidget (512188) | more than 4 years ago | (#31485766)

By the way, another key advantage of E-Ink is energy consumption: it doesn't use battery when static, and uses quite a small amount of energy to redraw the page. Due to this feature, eBooks can run for weeks or even months on a single charge.

This technology would be perfect for digital picture frames. Anybody aware of any e-ink based picture frames?

Re:Still not convinced about e-ink (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31484916)

The joy of e-ink is that there is no refresh rate to keep a single page on the screen, its just a single refresh for every page of your book. The DPI is very high for e-ink displays so it's very easy on the eyes. E-ink displays don't shine light, they only reflect light much like real books. It's completely different than LCD or CRT or any other display that must refresh the screen even when it isn't changing and has to emit light.

Re:Still not convinced about e-ink (4, Insightful)

MozeeToby (1163751) | more than 4 years ago | (#31485068)

After an hour? No. After 12 hours a day, 5 days a week? Yes. If I've been sitting in front of a computer screen for several hours and close my eyes I can feel the muscles unwinding. It's not something I'm conciously away of until I look away from the screen, but the muscles of and around my eyes are constantly tense when reading off a monitor.

As for the refresh rate of e-ink, for me it is almost exactly equal to the time it takes my eyes to travel from the bottom to the top of the page. The only time I notice it is if I need to go back/forward several pages, then the slow refresh is frustrating since you have to wait for a page to display before you can move to the next one.

Re:Still not convinced about e-ink (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31485216)

After an hour? No. After 12 hours a day, 5 days a week? Yes. If I've been sitting in front of a computer screen for several hours and close my eyes I can feel the muscles unwinding. (...)

The GP didn't say "after an hour". He said:

Am I the only one who *doesn't* get eye-strain reading text on LCD's hour after hour ?
(...)
I use a Mac all day, reading text on LCDs, and it doesn't bother me in the slightest.
(...)
I've lost count of the number of times I've spent days poring over PDFs and somehow managed to not notice this 'eye strain' that LCDs apparently cause. I actually *prefer* to read documents on the screen rather than printed out on paper...

But nevertheless in your reply you decided to ignore pretty much everything he said.

Re:Still not convinced about e-ink (1)

broken_chaos (1188549) | more than 4 years ago | (#31485692)

The only time I notice it is if I need to go back/forward several pages, then the slow refresh is frustrating since you have to wait for a page to display before you can move to the next one.

On some readers (definitely Sony, dunno about others), press-and-hold on the back/forward buttons will make it start going through pages without doing a full page refresh.

Re:Still not convinced about e-ink (1)

CastrTroy (595695) | more than 4 years ago | (#31485180)

I a programmer, so naturally, I spend all day looking at the computer. My eyes don't get tired looking at an LCD all day long. I really don't get it either. I've ready plenty of books on my laptop. No problems there either. Oh, and I use a PC, so I don't think it's the font thing.

Re:Still not convinced about e-ink (1)

nextekcarl (1402899) | more than 4 years ago | (#31485396)

Same with me on both Windows and Linux machines. The only thing that really stops me is the portability factor.

Re:Still not convinced about e-ink (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31485238)

Two words: Power consumption.

Seriously, regardless of eyestrain (and LCDs do cause eyestrain, I use them 10-12 hours per day), this alone is why eInk readers won't be displace by netbooks. I actually love my netbook, it does just fine for reading in a pinch, but it's crap for it in lieu of an eInk display. Yeah, I'd make sure I really wanted to read a lot on the go before I plunked down 300 bucks for one, but don't pretend your netbook is a viable replacement for someone who does have a need to read a lot on the go, it's not.

Re:Still not convinced about e-ink (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31485270)

Perhaps you are still young ?
As for myself, I could always see the refresh rate on CRT displays when it was under 70-75Hz, while other people claimed they see no difference. Therefore, it might be that some people aren't actually as bothered as others are by the displays.

Re:Still not convinced about e-ink (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31485648)

Mac Fanboy Defense Force Assemble!

The actual cost is still more important. but... (3, Insightful)

Caue (909322) | more than 4 years ago | (#31484722)

The reasons I love printed books are still overseen by the manufacturers: lendability, durability, exchangability, highlightexability, pencilnoteability, trashability (when I simply don't enjoy the book, like reading dan brown for the first time.. urgh.)

Comics (3, Interesting)

Kenshin (43036) | more than 4 years ago | (#31484750)

This is now the ideal platform for comics. If content is moved to this format, you won't have to deal with horrible collectors if you want to read back issues.

Comics? C'Mon! This is Porn's Entre to the Market (1)

RobotRunAmok (595286) | more than 4 years ago | (#31484890)

From the VHS player forward, the establishment of a new medium relied upon how well it handled pornography: what it looked like on the device, what was available for it, how anonymous the purchase/distribution could be.

Adoption of E-books like the Kindle has been slow to catch fire NOT because people could not read Batman on them...

Re:Comics? C'Mon! This is Porn's Entre to the Mark (1)

snowraver1 (1052510) | more than 4 years ago | (#31485018)

Not true. Beta failed because of VHS was cheaper. HD-DVD failed because of the PS3 blueray penetration. .gif failed because of licensing. DVD didn't really have any competition...

Re:Comics? C'Mon! This is Porn's Entre to the Mark (1)

2obvious4u (871996) | more than 4 years ago | (#31485116)

DVD didn't really have any competition...

So VCD and Divx weren't competition to DVD?

Re:Comics? C'Mon! This is Porn's Entre to the Mark (1)

RapmasterT (787426) | more than 4 years ago | (#31485652)

DVD didn't really have any competition...

So VCD and Divx weren't competition to DVD?

that's not a real question, is it?

Re:Comics? C'Mon! This is Porn's Entre to the Mark (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31485278)

Cheap, penetration, are you sure you're not talking about porn?

Re:Comics? C'Mon! This is Porn's Entre to the Mark (1)

Yvan256 (722131) | more than 4 years ago | (#31485772)

I think one more reason why VHS won over Beta is the fact that a VHS tape could hold more hours of video.

PS3 Blu-ray penetration. I see what you did there.

GIF failed because of licensing? GIF failed?! In my universe, this event never happened. PNG still can't replace GIFs for animations because MNG failed to catch on.

Re:Comics? C'Mon! This is Porn's Entre to the Mark (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31485412)

VHS didn't beat Betamax because of porn. That is a myth that needs to die. VHS beat Beat because it had a less restrictive license and could record more than an hour. Before the idiots come out: Yes, originally Beta could only record for an hour. Yes, I know some of you kids have Beta tapes longer than an hour. In later revisions, they made the tapes longer and thinner and slowed the speed down to increase the recording time, but by then it was already to late. VHS was entrenched.

Re:Comics (1)

Vanderhoth (1582661) | more than 4 years ago | (#31485228)

I doubt you'd ever see comics (DC and Marvel style) move to a digital format. Part of their appeal and value is that over time only limited copies survive. The chance to be the owner of the fist superman for example would loose its value if it was a digital version that can be infinity copied. I completely understand where you're coming from, I believe comics are written to be read and for someone to buy and original copy, seal it up and lock it away where no one can ever see it again is a real crime in my mind.

I think I'll create a comic about a super hero that goes around "rescuing" comics from evil collectors.

Re:Comics (1)

Vanderhoth (1582661) | more than 4 years ago | (#31485256)

Sorry for the spelling mistakes. I clicked preview and nothing happened. I clicked it a second time and the post was made.

Re:Comics (1)

Yvan256 (722131) | more than 4 years ago | (#31485728)

If content is moved to this format, you won't have to deal with horrible collectors if you want to read back issues.

Worst. Comment. Ever. - Comic Book Guy.

Slackers!!!!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31485036)

We want it and we want it NOW. Hopefully a competitor will rise just to spite you.

But how does it work? (1)

d1r3lnd (1743112) | more than 4 years ago | (#31485118)

As I understand, monochrome e-ink displays are a bunch of tiny spheres, with one white hemisphere and one black hemisphere - so how the hell does the color version work? C/W M/W Y/W K/W spheres? What's the resolution going to look like? Sounds like it might be good for reproducing Roy Lichetenstein's oeuvre... Seriously, how do you have color e-ink and have it remain e-ink? I'll wait until they explain how it works before I make plans to buy any devices that use it.

Another Reason to wait (2, Interesting)

TrippTDF (513419) | more than 4 years ago | (#31485242)

There is obviously going to be some class of device that is part ereader, part computer and part media center, but, just as the smartphone market too years to take shape, the accepted version of this device is still years away, so don't waste your money on an iPad or Kindle just yet... wait for the market to mature.

Eye strain my hair ass (5, Interesting)

RapmasterT (787426) | more than 4 years ago | (#31485308)

"Peng argues that E Ink has nothing to fear from the e-book apps on the Apple iPad and other devices with color LCDs, which, in his view, produce more eye strain and aren't as suitable for digital reading. "

LCD's aren't suitable for digital reading? You mean the LCD's I read off of 10 hours a day at work are completely unacceptable for reading now? I have a Kindle which uses the wonderful to read e-ink display and the low contrast, washed out grey text on lighter grey background, with no backlighting, slow page draws, and previous page ghosting, is NOT a superior reading experience to a decent LCD. Not even close. To claim otherwise is just bald faced LYING.

I do a LOT of ebook reading on my iphone, and on my kindle, so I actually do know the difference. e-ink displays excel in battery life and that is the ONLY category they are better than modern LCD

Re:Eye strain my hair ass (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31485460)

Yes, people with a different opinion than you are lying.

Re:Eye strain my hair ass (3, Funny)

RapmasterT (787426) | more than 4 years ago | (#31485670)

Yes, people with a different opinion than you are lying.

Yes, thank you for agreeing.

Re:Eye strain my hair ass (1)

ravenscar (1662985) | more than 4 years ago | (#31485586)

Unless you're reading on the beach in the sun. Or in low light situations where a glowing screen can be a strain. I'm going to guess that the 10 hours a day you spend looking at an LCD do not include such activities. The hour or two a day you may spend reading a book might. What the world really needs is a display that is both e-ink and LCD with users given the option to choose the display type based upon content.

Re:Eye strain my hair ass (1)

RapmasterT (787426) | more than 4 years ago | (#31485742)

Unless you're reading on the beach in the sun. Or in low light situations where a glowing screen can be a strain. I'm going to guess that the 10 hours a day you spend looking at an LCD do not include such activities. The hour or two a day you may spend reading a book might.

Try reading a kindle in the dark. Now try reading it with the clip on book light they want you to use, constantly adjusting the position because of glare is not a great experience.

And I'm not sure how much you paid for an LCD that doesn't have adjustable brightness, but it was probably too much. When I read on my iphone at night, I use the inverted screen (white txt on black) and it's not only very nice at night, it works well in bright sunlight too.

I don't understand why people don't just TRY these things instead of parroting this nonsense about LCD's being no good for reading.

optimize for speed first, please (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31485542)

first try to optimize them for speed please... i want to be able to *scroll* text... and not wait between 0.5 and 1 second on every page flip.

What market for this? (1)

SnarfQuest (469614) | more than 4 years ago | (#31485602)

What's the market for color e-ink? It's not really suitble for a laptop because it is too slow. The cursor wouldn't move well, you cannot watch video, video games would be painful. As a control panel on some device, there are a lot more cheaper solutions, and you'd need to have some reason for an expensive color display on your coffee machine. You might be able to put a curved display on something, but since they aren't doing this with the B&W version, why would the do it with color? So, you're probably limited to e-book type of uses.

Normal mass market books are plain black and white, so color is only necessary if you have some speciality book with pictures. So, you're mostly looking at textbooks, comic books, and magazines. Textbooks cost the same, or more, for electronic instead of printed versions, and you cannot write in the margins, so there isn't going to be a large demand by students. Comic book readers aren't likely to spend an extra $400, which would probably be better spent on 200 or so more comics that could eventually be resold by some ancester. The only other option would be for porn, but the abuse of the device would be awful.

So, unless the price is about the same as the black and white version, it's not likely to have a very large market.

Newpaper Color? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31485632)

the company says its first color screens in 2011 will have newspaper-quality color,

So, in other words, they will suck balls. Hard.

Hmm, low power digital picture frames. (1)

Drethon (1445051) | more than 4 years ago | (#31485756)

Low frame rate on those things so power use would be almost negligible. I wonder if you could almost power something like that with solar panels from the florescent lights in my building (no clue how much power you can capture from those).
Load More 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...