Beta
×

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!

Bridgestone Shows Off Ultra-Thin, Full-Color e-Paper

ScuttleMonkey posted about 7 years ago | from the magazines-of-the-future dept.

Displays 177

Bridgestone, the company which debuted the "world's thinnest" sheet of two-color e-paper last year, has turned around and delivered a new version which is capable of displaying over four thousand colors. "In case that wasn't enough, the company is also touting what it calls the "world's largest full color e-paper that is A3 size, which is equivalent to a 21.4-inch screen." As you'd expect, the latter is expected to be used solely for advertising and could hit the market as early as next year, while the former technology is set to be commercially available in 2009."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Don't make them too thin... (1)

Zymergy (803632) | about 7 years ago | (#21078757)

It could lead to Bridgestone being forced to have ANOTHER Recall due to blowouts! http://www.google.com/search?num=50&hl=en&safe=off&q=Bridgestone+recall&btnG=Search [google.com]

Now is everyone ready for 'digital paper' "DRM" ???

In other news... (-1, Troll)

megaditto (982598) | about 7 years ago | (#21078815)

[...]world's largest full color e-paper that is A3 size, which is equivalent to a 21.4-inch screen.
Why, that's almost large enough to wipe my fat ass!

Re:Don't make them too thin... (5, Funny)

hack slash (1064002) | about 7 years ago | (#21078821)

"Now is everyone ready for 'digital paper' "DRM" ???"

"This message will self erase in 5 seconds"

Re:Don't make them too thin... (1)

ChrisMP1 (1130781) | about 7 years ago | (#21079519)

By reading this Message, you agree to never reproduce it in any way; photographic, by photocopier, or pencil. You hereby waive your rights to 'fair use', and should you fail to comply with these terms, you may be subject to lawsuit. You may make no copies of the Message. Do not read the Message, since that implies making a copy of the Message into your memory.

Re:Don't make them too thin... (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#21079563)

By reading this Message, you agree to never reproduce it in any way; photographic, by photocopier, or pencil. You hereby waive your rights to 'fair use', and should you fail to comply with these terms, you may be subject to lawsuit. You may make no copies of the Message. Do not read the Message, since that implies making a copy of the Message into your memory.
Oops...

Re:Don't make them too thin... (2, Funny)

jollyreaper (513215) | about 7 years ago | (#21079523)

"Now is everyone ready for 'digital paper' "DRM" ???"

"This message will self erase in 5 seconds"
Power it with Sony batteries and it can explode like in Inspector Gadget. Poor Chief Quimby!

Re:Don't make them too thin... (1)

Dachannien (617929) | about 7 years ago | (#21080055)

"This message will self erase in 5 seconds"
At least we can rest assured that the Cone of Silence doesn't work.

Re:Don't make them too thin... (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#21078863)

You can't DRM digital paper because you can just photocopy it, right?

Plugging the analog hole (2, Informative)

tepples (727027) | about 7 years ago | (#21079093)

You can't DRM digital paper because you can just photocopy it, right?
To make high-quality analog reconversion more difficult, the manufacturer can have the e-paper display turn off while exposed to light that's as bright as a flatbed scanner's lamp.

Re:Plugging the analog hole (1)

The_Wilschon (782534) | about 7 years ago | (#21079137)

I thought one of the main selling points of e-paper was that you could read it just as well in bright sunlight as in normal interior lighting. Texas summer sun is probably brighter than a scanner's lamp.

Re:Plugging the analog hole (1)

pairo (519657) | about 7 years ago | (#21079271)

Eh, while that may or may not be true, there are differences in the spectrum of the two kinds of light that are a tad harder to 'fake'.

Re:Plugging the analog hole (2, Interesting)

Telvin_3d (855514) | about 7 years ago | (#21079239)

As I understand it, part of why everyone is so excited about e-paper is that the image remains on the page when the power is no longer being applied. So, the fail-proof way around ANY e-paper DRM is just take out the batteries before you photocopy/scan it.

Re:Plugging the analog hole (1)

blhack (921171) | about 7 years ago | (#21079505)

Not if they make the paper sensitive to high intensity light. Put a disclaimer on it that says "Don't put this into a photocopier, or expose it to high heat/light....

you put it in the xerox and it turns completely black and never works again because "the circuitry is so delicate".

IT worked for the box office industry.

Re:Plugging the analog hole (1)

mark-t (151149) | about 7 years ago | (#21080087)

As somebody else has pointed out already, natural sunlight is _FAR_ brighter than any scanner lamp.

Re:Plugging the analog hole (5, Funny)

TrnsltLife (779961) | about 7 years ago | (#21079251)

I thought you were going to say: Poke out people's eyes and make them install DRMed optic sensors. The Microsoft version would be ViziOrbs - Human Light Interface. And the Apple ones would be iBalls.

Re:Plugging the analog hole (2, Funny)

Belacgod (1103921) | about 7 years ago | (#21079279)

Geeks would just install FOSS Leyenux instead.

Re:Plugging the analog hole (4, Funny)

brusk (135896) | about 7 years ago | (#21080397)

REAL geeks use BSD (Bispherical Seeing Device).

Re:Plugging the analog hole (2, Interesting)

GroeFaZ (850443) | about 7 years ago | (#21079637)

That would require some form of brightness sensor that a)would drive up costs and b) could be easily defeated by just taping over the seonsor area. Covering the whole of the reading area with tiny sensors seems a little like overkill (not that this would ever have stopped DRM proponents, but still).

Re:Plugging the analog hole (2, Insightful)

COMICAGOGO (1055066) | about 7 years ago | (#21080109)

You could use just about any kind of halfway decent digital camera to take long exposures (when I say long I mean 1/5 of a second or so.) You get the same image as then scanner and there would be no way for the E-paper to tell what was soaking up all the photons that were reflected off of it.

Re:Plugging the analog hole (1)

YU Nicks NE Way (129084) | about 7 years ago | (#21080233)

A better solution would be to space the dots in order to generate a Moire pattern when the image is scanned or photographed.

Re:Plugging the analog hole (1)

MightyYar (622222) | about 7 years ago | (#21080665)

Of course, you would only get the moire pattern if the resolution of the scanner/copier was worse than the display...

Re:Plugging the analog hole (1)

YU Nicks NE Way (129084) | about 7 years ago | (#21080687)

Well, actually, if the resolution of the scanner/copier was not significantly greater than that of the display. But it's a good point, all the same.

Re:Don't make them too thin... (1)

insertwackynamehere (891357) | about 7 years ago | (#21079329)

I can burn and rip itunes music but quality is arguably lost in many cases. Likewise, if I want a perfect digital conversion I will have to hack away but if I'm content with a low quality bittorrent version then I can just photocopy it Im not sure if I'm being sarcastic or not :P

Re:Don't make them too thin... (1)

Mozk (844858) | about 7 years ago | (#21080025)

Heh, I get your point there, but most of the music I've gotten through torrents is at least 192 kbps CBR, usually 256-320 (CBR/VBR). Some FLAC too.
I do have experience with audio, and for me, 192 kbps sounds perfectly acceptable for normal listening. So you're either using a shitty tracker or looking for some obscure album, or you're a very strict audiophile. :P

Re:Don't make them too thin... (1)

MightyYar (622222) | about 7 years ago | (#21080673)

192? Luxury! I'm quite happy listening to Pandora all day, and that's only 128, I think.

Re:Don't make them too thin... (2, Interesting)

BlueParrot (965239) | about 7 years ago | (#21079391)

You can't DRM digital paper because you can just photocopy it, right?


You can do better than that. Use a lens to focus the thing into a high quality digital camera and you can capture a whole video stream ( this works for TFTs as well ). Only issue is to synchronise the camera to the paper's refresh rate, and this is fairly easy to do if you have good equipment.

Thing with DRM is that it can't work in a free society. The only way it could work would be if the government banned all recording equipment other than that controlled by the media industry (and the DMCA is certainly playing with the idea by banning you from distributing circumvention methods, given that a non-DRM-crippled digital camera is a perfectly decent circumvention method ). I just hope the media industry will fall apart due to its own incompetence before it comes to that.

Re:Don't make them too thin... (1)

COMICAGOGO (1055066) | about 7 years ago | (#21080183)

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but it was my understanding that e-paper couldn't handle video yet. So isn't the refresh rate one frame every time you hit the next page button? Makes it even easier to use the lens.

Re:Don't make them too thin... (1)

MadnessASAP (1052274) | about 7 years ago | (#21080313)

E-Paper doesn't have a refresh rate, it only changes what needs to be changed. In fact you can shut it off and take out the batteries and the image will still be there, which is why it's catching alot of attention for use in low power devices.

Re:Don't make them too thin... (1)

smallfries (601545) | about 7 years ago | (#21078969)

Blowouts are avoiding by keeping the product in vapor form prior to installation...

Fristy Posty (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#21078763)

whammo!

Two Words: Refresh Rates (2, Informative)

Serhei (1150661) | about 7 years ago | (#21078831)

As in, the fact that they aren't revealing them means that they aren't anything to write home about. Refresh rates are going to keep this technology confined to ebook readers and advertising posters. I want stuff like this [blogspot.com] .

Re:Two Words: Refresh Rates (4, Insightful)

pavon (30274) | about 7 years ago | (#21079147)

I would love to have an A3-sized e-reader for schematics. Having the ability to search my documents (where is R217?) without having to deal with the cumbersome laptops with small displays, would be great. I imagine a scroll with the batteries and processor in the center, or a folding book. Either way you would have the option of using it in A3 or A4 size depending on what you need to do. It wouldn't need a huge amount of memory, especially if it had WiFi. It wouldn't need a high a refresh rate or many colors - I could get by with monochrome, 16 colors would be nice, 256 would be exorbitant. Just high resolution PDF view and file browser and I'd be happy. Bonus points for excel documents.

Re:Two Words: Refresh Rates (3, Insightful)

jimmux (1096839) | about 7 years ago | (#21080253)

I like where you're going with this. A dual A3/A4 device would be incredibly useful in workplace, where most stuff is printed in A4 but you often need to go to A3 for diagrams (especially Gantt charts).

The beauty of ISO standard paper sizes [cam.ac.uk] is that each in the series is exactly half the size of the next largest - i.e. the long edge of A4 is the same length as the short edge of A3. Therefore, if you want an A4 display you unroll your scroll half way. If you want an A3 display then you unroll it all the way.

Re:Two Words: Refresh Rates (3, Interesting)

MightyYar (622222) | about 7 years ago | (#21080685)

Yeah, but just watch out for the older engineer with his red pencil.

Re:Two Words: Refresh Rates (2, Insightful)

BlueParrot (965239) | about 7 years ago | (#21079151)

As in, the fact that they aren't revealing them means that they aren't anything to write home about. Refresh rates are going to keep this technology confined to ebook readers and advertising posters.


I wouldn't bee too sure. While it will probably be a while before you get HD-video on these things at an affordable price ( 5 years ? ) you really don't need that much in order to browse the web. 5 frames a second would be more than enough to navigate static content, and 24 would be enough for simple animated stuff. Remember that these things don't flicker the same way a CRT does, so you only really need to worry about visual artefacts, like ghosting, which isn't too much of a concern for things that aren't video.

Re:Two Words: Refresh Rates (1)

smilindog2000 (907665) | about 7 years ago | (#21080127)

I very much enjoyed reading your blog entry about your info-pad idea [blogspot.com] . Here's my own idea, worth what you just paid for it: How about a low-tech device that operates as snazzy e-book reader on-the-cheap? E-book readers like Sony's crud are too expensive (though Sony's problem is stupid marketing - not their e-book price). They take cheap e-ink that could be used to paint huge signs, and they cover them with low-yield expensive thin-film transistors. It's a bastardized hybrid, like mating a man and an ape. Instead what if we made a very nice scrolling page device that opened like an old-fashioned window blind? As you pull out the page, the e-ink would run along a thin long write-head in the scroll that would write the image onto the page. If you focused on making the device a pleasure to play with just to open and close, it might sell well if coupled with free books and a reasonable e-book site. If you could get it to display color, then you could also use it as a portable photo album, which would just be too cool for words.

Re:Two Words: Refresh Rates (1)

Serhei (1150661) | about 7 years ago | (#21080275)

It's not my fucking blog entry! It's some other guy's! Yes he is sort of a genius! No he is not me! In fact, he probably makes ten times as much as I do! Seriously, why would you assume that a link to some guy's blog entry is self-promotion?

Re:Two Words: Refresh Rates (1)

Walt Dismal (534799) | about 7 years ago | (#21080331)

I beg to differ. Consider all the tree paper being used in photocopiers each year. What if a new system were put in place where a photocopier could output images to re-usable e-pages? So instead of throwing out the old memos, you recycle them in the machine. This could save huge amounts of money. Also consider fax machines. Though outdated by email, they are still used widely but are inundated by spam faxes. But if fax sheets were recyclable, this would reduce the amount of ink and paper thrown out. Bridgestone needs to make the technology available cheaply enough that it could spawn new industries. I've got a few ideas for new applications besides advertising, I'm sure other people will too.

Slightly better picture (5, Informative)

pavon (30274) | about 7 years ago | (#21078833)

Wow, the e-paper he is holding in that picture has a full 4,096 shades of brown. Perfect for Doom!

Seriously, Here is an article with a better picture [i4u.com] . Still not much contrast, but getting better.

Re:Slightly better picture (3, Funny)

matlhDam (149229) | about 7 years ago | (#21079033)

Wow, the e-paper he is holding in that picture has a full 4,096 shades of brown. Perfect for Doom!

"Are you thinking what I'm thinking, Steve?"
"Order the entire production run for our next Zune model! And bring me more chairs!"

Re:Slightly better picture (1)

ColGraff (454761) | about 7 years ago | (#21079777)

I think you mean Quake. :)

Ubuntu (1)

flyingfsck (986395) | about 7 years ago | (#21080265)

Four thousand shades of brown would make it perfect for an Ubuntu theme!

Ubuntu - the beige minivan of Linux - not quite good enough for anything...

Now about distortion... (4, Interesting)

Penguinisto (415985) | about 7 years ago | (#21078871)

...can you bend the critter (or at least build it as a wrap-around type screen), without optical distortion (or at least some sort of compensation against it by a GPU)? It would add one hell of a dimension to gaming, simulators, immersion-type entertainment, things like that.

I realize it's probably possible to do when building it, but it takes a pretty (relatively) hefty chunk of time to do anisotropic conversions of flat images (e.g. when creating image-based lighting maps for CG artwork raytracing and such), but if that could be fixed, a semi-spherical screen with the focal point being a person's head would be hella nice.

(of course, they'd still have to add about 15.9-something million colors in capability and perhaps a tighter resolution to it as well, but still... looks like it could go to some interesting places if they actually get it working).

/P

Re:Now about distortion... (2, Informative)

moogied (1175879) | about 7 years ago | (#21078949)

http://www.engadget.com/2006/06/01/bridgestones-super-thin-qr-lpd-e-paper/ [engadget.com] Seems pretty damned flexible to me?

Re:Now about distortion... (1)

moogied (1175879) | about 7 years ago | (#21079065)

Sorry guys, thats the OLD stuff.. The new stuff is the next gen of that, but I can't imagine them losing flexibility..

Wow - Amiga (2, Funny)

Nom du Keyboard (633989) | about 7 years ago | (#21078925)

which is capable of displaying over four thousand colors.

Wow, now we're up to Amiga range from 22 years ago.

Re:Wow - Amiga (1)

mikael (484) | about 7 years ago | (#21079061)

Well, in one year they have advanced from 8 color (1 bit RGB) to 4096 color (4 bits RGB). That's pretty good considering they have to create a high resolution flexible display A3 size. By next year, they probably will have 8-bit RGB, and in the future maybe even 16-bit channels, which would be good enough for photography. Just make sure the top of the display is glossy and it will look like a magazine.

Re:Wow - Amiga (1)

timeOday (582209) | about 7 years ago | (#21079939)

If the contrast is really as bad as it appears in the picture, bit depth is the least of their concerns.

Re:Wow - Amiga (1)

The Living Fractal (162153) | about 7 years ago | (#21080041)

Granted, Amigas *were* thin.. but I don't remember seeing an Amiga that was that thin.. And while we're at it let's compare a display to an entire computer...Apples, meet oranges.

4,096 colors! (-1, Redundant)

Toonol (1057698) | about 7 years ago | (#21078963)

That's as many as my Amiga!

Well, at least in HAM mode...

So... Dither (4, Insightful)

DumbSwede (521261) | about 7 years ago | (#21080137)

So many comments about the small color range, but really this isn't a problem if the dot pitch is small enough. Printed paper only has 8 colors (16 if you include black in CMYB). Back in the day with only 4-16 colors we dithered to get a better range of colors, the look was similar to old comic books and for much the same reason. With 4096 colors to choose from dithering is very subtle and hard to notice. My 1998 laptop monitor only had 4096 colors, but dithering made it look fine. It's unclear to me whether most LCDs even today have full true 24 bit color.

How many colors are we talking about? (1)

MR.Mic (937158) | about 7 years ago | (#21078985)

It's over four THOOOO0OOOOOOUSAND!!!

Bridgestone, huh? (4, Funny)

Trogre (513942) | about 7 years ago | (#21079031)

Not meaning to tread on their parade, but won't these people ever get tyred of re-inventing the wheel?

*rimshot*

Re:Bridgestone, huh? (1)

Zouden (232738) | about 7 years ago | (#21080443)

Surely you are skidding! I think this is a very bald move on their part.

Full-Color? (1)

DragonWriter (970822) | about 7 years ago | (#21079041)

4k colors -- 12-bit color -- is "Full-color"? Really?

Re:Full-Color? (1)

barwasp (1116567) | about 7 years ago | (#21079143)

yes

Re:Full-Color? (1)

springbox (853816) | about 7 years ago | (#21079159)

4k colors -- 12-bit color -- is "Full-color"? Really?

With dithering it's OVER NINE THOUSAND!!

Re:Full-Color? (2, Informative)

tepples (727027) | about 7 years ago | (#21079197)

4k colors -- 12-bit color -- is "Full-color"? Really?
Print is 4-bit (cyan, magenta, yellow, and black either on or off). The difference is halftoning. How much full color can you get out of a 12-bit display using appropriate dithering?

I'm Lovin It! (TM) (2, Interesting)

CODiNE (27417) | about 7 years ago | (#21079177)

Can't wait til these babies start rolling out as it'll seriously push the display market with some nice competition to increase pixel density and so on. Once people figure out how to hack these things it's going to seriously affect LCD prices. Wheee. Sadly that'll lead to DRM usage on them so people don't hijack their ads. Eh.

Re:I'm Lovin It! (TM) (1)

Skylinux (942824) | about 7 years ago | (#21079525)

I don't know, look at the picture in the article. The e-paper has the same problem early LCDs had, a very narrow viewing angle. Literally, nothing to see yet ;)

Re:I'm Lovin It! (TM) (1)

Constantine XVI (880691) | about 7 years ago | (#21079601)

We still have the long refresh rates (sometimes in seconds) to deal with.

Flexible? Color? (2, Interesting)

owlstead (636356) | about 7 years ago | (#21079193)

What I need is a rather thin (.5 mm is enough), black and white e-paper screen with high res and low power use, in an A4/letter format. This would save me hundreds of copies of paper. I'm willing to pay up to a grand for that. Why are these idiots always focusing on full color, bendable screens? I would consider them nice extras, nothing more.

Re:Flexible? Color? (1)

GroeFaZ (850443) | about 7 years ago | (#21079589)

Assuming you unstated unit of currency is a US dollar or something worth more per unit (not hard these days *cough*) AND "hundreds of copies" is no more than 1000, then I have to diagnose a merely tenuous grasp on Economics on your part. That, or you just love gadgets, which makes this your place then. Carry on.

Either way, to not embarass yourself, you should stop insulting people that satisfy a market subset that has more elements than {You}

Re:Flexible? Color? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#21079803)

They aren't satisfying any market yet, Bub, and better to walk before you run.

Re:Flexible? Color? (1)

patonw (747304) | about 7 years ago | (#21080287)

The iRex almost meets your specs: http://www.irextechnologies.com/ [irextechnologies.com]

I've considered getting one but my budget is a bit lower than yours. That, and I haven't heard anything positive or negative about it from end users yet.

Re:Flexible? Color? (1)

Danny Rathjens (8471) | about 7 years ago | (#21080713)

The iliad looks pretty cool. It runs linux, even. :) But it's pricer than a PS3. This german review of it includes a nifty video to get an idea of the refresh rate - and slow boot time.
http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=de&u=http://www.joachim-uhl.de/2007/10/09/review-iliad-2nd-edition-von-irex/&sa=X&oi=translate&resnum=5&ct=result&prev=/search%3Fq%3DiLiad%2B2nd%2BEdition%2Breview%2B-homer%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DG [google.com]

Re:Flexible? Color? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#21080541)

At .5mm, it had better be bendable. The current substrate for all these displays is currently glass, and at that thickness, the reliability of an un-reinforced glass sheet is not encouraging. What they're going towards is either a flexible metal or polymer substrate which can tolerate more abuse - but haven't been sufficiently developed. Right now they can piggyback off of the LCD manufacturing, but with the same mechanical drawbacks - just a little too much pressure and your ebook reader now needs to have the rather expensive screen replaced.

I agree on the color, but flexibility is a *must*.

if it's A3 in size... (1)

huckda (398277) | about 7 years ago | (#21079207)

it's colour! ;)

TACO (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#21079229)

Advertising Only? (1)

Thyrteen (1084963) | about 7 years ago | (#21079371)

Screw that, I'd want one hanging on my wall! Although I'd hate to see what it sets you back for a dynamic poster :) So far, the regular e-ink paper hasn't been too bad.

Colors (1)

Hao Wu (652581) | about 7 years ago | (#21079475)

4,096 colors is 1024 * 4.

The "1024" is predictable, but I wonder why 4-times that figure?

Re:Colors (2, Informative)

AnotherSteve (447030) | about 7 years ago | (#21079539)

I dunno. I haven't read the article or even just looked at the pictures. But I'm thinking that the answer to your question is "Cyan, Magenta, Yellow, Black."

Re:Colors (1)

prosys (727238) | about 7 years ago | (#21079699)

Really... you can't work out that its 12 bits wide, so that like... 4 bits of colour for red and four for blue and four for green... Boy what are they teaching in college these days...

Re:Colors (1)

droopycom (470921) | about 7 years ago | (#21079719)

They dont have 4096 colors devices in college anymore... remember the time when our device could only simultaneously display 16 color out of 4096 possible choice ?

But anyway, the article mention something about it being a 2 color device, so it might well be 6 bits per color.

Re:Colors (1)

ArTourter (991396) | about 7 years ago | (#21079587)

a guess: CMYK colour space?

seeing that the main target is the printing industry, it would make sense.

Re:Colors (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#21079693)

2^12=4,096. 12-bit color because of space-memory limitations?-)

Re:Colors (1)

seven7h (926826) | about 7 years ago | (#21079745)

I would guess it would be likely to be 3 colours, each with that can be set to 16 different levels (4 bit)

Re:Colors (2, Informative)

Feanturi (99866) | about 7 years ago | (#21079869)

It's not 1024*4. Although that is mathematically correct, it's not the correct way to interpret colour depth on a computer. 4096 in this instance is 16*16*16. There are 4096 colours available to the display because it is using a range of 16 values (4 bits) for each of the three channels, Red, Green, and Blue. 0 means none of that particular colour and 15 means the most intense shade of that colour. The three base RGB colours get combined with their various values of 0 to 15 to give new colours like shades of purple, or yellows, etc. When all three have the same value you get some shade of grey (black with all at 0, white with all at 15). Together all 3 colour channels use 12 binary bits (3 base colours * 4 bits for each) which gives you, in decimal numbers, 4096 different possible colours that can be expressed this way.

Re:Colors (1)

rossifer (581396) | about 7 years ago | (#21080249)

I suspect it's 4096 = 8 * 8 * 8 * 8. As in three bits of color depth for each of cyan, magenta, yellow, and black. At least, I hope the colorspace is CMYK.

For what? (1)

jours (663228) | about 7 years ago | (#21079493)

Maybe I'm missing something, but don't we already have a means of displaying digital documents? Can someone explain to me the point of distributing an "e-subscription" on "e-paper" when most people are spending more and more of their time on computers?

Novel, yes. Useful, I don't know...but I can buy more paper than I'll need in an entire year for $30 at Staples.

Re:For what? (2)

Constantine XVI (880691) | about 7 years ago | (#21079621)

Tell me, what would you rather look at: an LCD display, or something that is (for reading purposes) just like a sheet of paper? These are easier on your eyes, they're readable in sunlight, and consume less power (only on for changing pages)

Re:For what? (1)

jours (663228) | about 7 years ago | (#21080531)

Yeah, but real paper is easier yet on my eyes, also readable in sunlight and uses no power at all once it's printed.

Let's say an "e-paper tablet" comes on the market for...what...$500? I can buy 80,000 sheets of paper for the same price. I could use 50 sheets a day, every day, for FOUR YEARS and still come out ahead.

Re:For what? (1)

MadUndergrad (950779) | about 7 years ago | (#21080721)

Enjoy toting those 80,000 sheets of paper around with you.

Re:For what? (1)

belg4mit (152620) | about 7 years ago | (#21079769)

power consumption

Re:For what? (1)

ucblockhead (63650) | about 7 years ago | (#21080435)

Ever try to use an LCD screen in bright sunlight? Ever get annoyed at your PDA running out of batteries?

Re:For what? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#21080743)

Maybe I'm missing something, but don't we already have a means of displaying digital documents? Can someone explain to me the point of distributing an "e-subscription" on "e-paper" when most people are spending more and more of their time on computers?

I think a major use for e-paper will be mostly static or infrequently changing displays. That is it will be used for e-book displays, but also large sheets for advertising in stores, malls, on buses, and in bus and train stations. And for infrequently changing information like airplane departures and arrivals in airports or bus and train schedules.

Etch a Sketch (1)

WaterDamage (719017) | about 7 years ago | (#21079521)

I'm glad to hear that they're coming along nicely with eBook readers. The real question agony that I'm facing is a lack of eBook readers out in the public. I haven't seen much out there other than Sony with a $300 eBook reader that I may consider purchasing once it's released. I literally have hundreds of notes and eBooks in PDF format. I would love to carry it all with me and have the crispness of paper and not worry about battery life as compared to a laptop.

Now, only if I could only somehow rig my Etch-A-Sketch (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Etch_A_Sketch) to read SD Flash memory I'll be set.

Re:Etch a Sketch (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#21080271)

Sony's has been out for a while actually, the 2nd Generation one is about to be released. I just got the 1st Generation one for $50 with a deal from http://www.fatwallet.com/t/74/745156 [fatwallet.com]

That would be nice to have. (1)

Neanderthal Ninny (1153369) | about 7 years ago | (#21079733)

I already read newspaper in electronic form on my Palm V PDA using AvantGo. I would like something a little lighter and easier to handle compared to the Palm. Also I like to have color rather than the black and white screen of the Palm V.

Finally... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#21079783)

Someone thought of the trees!

Re:Finally... (4, Funny)

Z34107 (925136) | about 7 years ago | (#21079877)

Someone thought of the trees!

...and replaced them with horrible, toxic, non-renewable phosphorescent chemicals and heavy metals!

Re:Finally... (1)

ChrisMP1 (1130781) | about 7 years ago | (#21080277)

Horrible, toxic, non-renewable phosphorescent chemicals and heavy metals that are only used once, instead of once per page.

programmable clothes are coming! (4, Insightful)

victorvodka (597971) | about 7 years ago | (#21079867)

Make clothing from this material and see what it does to fashion! I'm a tech guy and shouldn't be allowing my brain to go here, but imagine: as with your dumb-ass you-paid-$2.99-for-what? ringtones, you'll be able to download patterns for your shirts, slacks and skirts! Hooked up to your cameraphone, hell, you could even be invisible!

I want affordable (1)

BlueHands (142945) | about 7 years ago | (#21080235)

The only readers out currently are way over priced. $300 is a bit too much for the feature set that the sony reader provides. This new tech is great but if the price is the same, or worse, the market is just going to take forever to develop and these things are just not gonna sell. I have craved epaper for over a decade now and I still can't quite justify spending $300. I have never seen anyone with one and i live in the valley.

I hope at some point drops into the reasonable range and I can enjoy the future i have been promised for a while.

Price and resolution? (1)

mark-t (151149) | about 7 years ago | (#21080283)

Because the last time I checked, color e-paper had a resolution of about 70dpi, and an A4-paper sized ebook reader using color epaper was about 2500 bucks. Since the article does not address either of these details, I have no reason to assume that their state of affairs is any different than what I've already known about. Both price and resolution need to be favorably improved by about a factor of 5 before I expect that they will be seriously considered as popular consumer-level devices.

Vejita what does the scouter say about it's power (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 years ago | (#21080409)

level? it's over 4000!!!
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?