New Color E-Reader Tech To Challenge E-Ink Dominance 199
Technology Review reports from the Consumer Elecronics Show in Las Vegas that potential e-reader competitors to E-Ink are everywhere. The current market leader in e-book displays is greyscale-only, and it takes a long time to change the display ("turn the page"), so video applications are not possible. E-Ink says they will have a color display shipping by late next year, but it will be dimmer than the current greyscale and its response time will still be too slow for video. The wannabe competitors — Pixel Qi, Qualcomm MEMS Technologies, Liquavista, and Kent Displays — all do color and some of them can do video (Pixel Qi, Qualcomm, Liquavista), and some of them (Pixel Qi, Kent) are shipping now.
Power? (Score:5, Interesting)
The big draw of E-Ink is that it only uses power when doing a page change. Do the color versions mentioned in TFA do that as well? If so, welcome. If not, nice try but fail.
Re:Power? (Score:5, Interesting)
The big draw of E-Ink is that it only uses power when doing a page change.
This was my understanding as well. So maybe someone who owns a Kindle or a Nook can answer me something that has bugged me for a while: Why on earth do these things appear to have screensavers? By changing the image when the machine is idle, doesn't a screensaver actually drain the battery where normally there would be no drain at all? Does an e-ink screen really need to be "saved" (i.e. will it burn out/burn in)?
As for the competitors, they are all designed to use very little power. At least one functions in a dual mode, where it can either be an e-ink type monochrome screen or a backlit color screen.
Here's another article [economist.com], from The Economist.
Re:Power? (Score:5, Informative)
Why on earth do these things appear to have screensavers?
Kindle does not have an animated screensaver, it just displays some static artwork such as a photograph of a famous author. It's only one refresh when it goes to sleep and one more when you wake it up.
Re: (Score:2)
Please tell me you can disable that feature.
Re:Power? (Score:4, Interesting)
No, it cannot be disabled. I wish it could be, but it's not a big deal.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Why on earth do these things appear to have screensavers?
The Kindle does display an image, usually of a famous author, when it's turned off. While displaying that image does use some power, it's a negligible amount considering how many page turns the thing gets on a single charge. And it looks pretty cool too.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
The Kindle does display an image, usually of a famous author, when it's turned off
Hopefully they'd avoid using an image of George Orwell.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
My senior year, when my sister was in10th grade, she nearly got expelled because when she asked her English teacher if it were true that paper burns at 451F, the teacher said "why don't you try it and find out?" -- so, she stuck her $5 school-issued paperback in the ove
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Changing to the image and then back to the text does use some power though, which I think is what the GP meant.
Re: (Score:2)
No it definitely doesn’t. I think he just meant that there are animated screen savers.
Read again, yes it does (Score:2)
No it definitely doesn't.
Are you saying it doesn't take any power whatsoever to change the screen state?
Because the OP was saying (in a way that I grant was hard to parse) that it's only two page transitions to do the "screen saver" - once to display the author page, once to restore the text.
That most certainly DOES draw power to perform, though it is a small amount and the OP noted that he actually likes that (not having the device I'm not sure why that would be preferable to just having the text you were
Re: (Score:2)
I suppose it could create a notification on unused screen space instead (like the battery indicator). I fail it see why it matters either way, there would still have be to be two screen changes: just one would be the current full screen change
Re: (Score:2)
If it only uses power when changing the screen why does it need a sleep mode? That seems like a contradiction.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't know the exact differences between 'off' and 'sleep' (some say off == sleep) and 'normal' but I know that sleep at least disables all of the buttons except for the power switch and turns of the wireless. I assume it does something like 'hibernate' (ram->flash, everything else off) or 'sleep' (keeps ram powered, mostly everything else off) on
Re: (Score:2)
If it only uses power when changing the screen why does it need a sleep mode? That seems like a contradiction.
The screen doesn't need any power while it's static. However, the electronics 'listening' for a butten push DO need a trickle of power, so if you're going to take a nap or put it away for a while, you can extend battery life by shutting it down.
Re: (Score:2)
The screensaver is a static image- it only appears when you put it to sleep, and doesn't change until you wake it up and put it to sleep again. Because eInk isn't a CRT and doesn't actually NEED a screensaver, it's more of a pretty keylock screen than a screensaver.
Re: (Score:2)
Perhaps so that people who glance at your device when it's lying on the table won't be able to know what you're reading? You may not want people to know how far along you are in your novel [valpo.edu].
Re: (Score:2)
The screensavers are pointless, my Sony 505 does not have one. And yes they drain the battery.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't know if it's possible to actually burn-in an e-ink display or not... I'm thinking probably not, but that's just a guess.
O
Re: (Score:2)
With the latest Kindle 2 firmware, I can get almost 2 weeks of heavy reading on a charge (with the wireless turned off for most of that time). Thus displaying the "screensavers" really doesn't impact the usability.
Re: (Score:2)
"Neat" has nothing to do with it. When the Kindle has been idle for a while it displays what people here are calling a screen saver. Except it's not a screen saver. It's really just a way of the Kindle letting you know that you have to unlock it (just a key press combination, not a security code) to start reading. Being in this mode stops the Kindle from doing things when the buttons are accidentally pressed, thereby saving your spot.
Re: (Score:2)
"Neat" has nothing to do with it. When the Kindle has been idle for a while it displays what people here are calling a screen saver. Except it's not a screen saver. It's really just a way of the Kindle letting you know that you have to unlock it (just a key press combination, not a security code) to start reading. Being in this mode stops the Kindle from doing things when the buttons are accidentally pressed, thereby saving your spot.
What if you're just a really slow reader, though...? It seems vaguely annoying to have to press a button occasionally just to prevent it from going into a sleep mode, especially given there's no power saving from the sleep mode at all (is there a "nop" button?).
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Also as a quick screen lock - in case you're reading something someone else might find embarassing. One push, and poof, incriminating text is gone.
Of course, if the person you're hiding the text from pushes the power button...
But I suppose the other aspect is to pretend you "closed the book" by showing you a "cover"...
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
I honestly don't know why this isn't the default setting. I actually downloaded the Nook user manual just to see if it was possible to use the cover art (which they already have downloaded, for the CoverFlow-like browsing) as the screen saver, but, no.
I mean, how can I use my Nook to pick up chicks if I can't subtly cue them in to the fact that I'm reading Twilight?
Re: (Score:2)
I think its just cuz well...you have to display something when power is off. You don't want to leave the page where it is, that would be confusing when you pick it up again. You could blank it out, but, that requires power to change the screen, so why not just put up an image?
Its not like its a real win any way, as long as the user knows at a glance what "off" looks like.
Re:Power? (Score:5, Informative)
If you did RTFA, on the first page you'd see:
"Switching from the backlit mode, to the reflective one drops the display's power consumption from 2.5 Watts to 0.5 Watts. This is for a refresh rate of 60 Hz--fast enough to display video. Pixel Qi claims that using software to put the display into an e-reader mode--suitable for reading text, where the screen might only update ten times a second--could drop the power consumption to as low as 100 milliwatts."
For the IMOD:
"The height of the air gap between the plates determines the color of light that is reflected from the IMOD. When a voltage is applied, the plates are drawn together by electrostatic forces and the element goes black. When the voltage is removed, the plates separate and color is reflected off the IMOD. A single pixel is made up of several IMODs; adjusting the height of each affects the overall color of the pixel. The plates stay in place, using almost no energy, until the color needs to change again. A plate only has to move a few hundred nanometers to change color and can do it in tens of microseconds--fast enough to show video."
Liquavista:
"The LCD devices are based on a technique called electrowetting, in which a voltage is used to modify the surface tension of colored oil on a solid substrate. In the absence of a voltage, the oil forms a film over the substrate and is visible to the viewer. When a voltage is applied, the pixel becomes transparent. By controlling the voltage of each pixel independently, a picture can be displayed. Unlike E Ink's technology, electrowetting pixels can be switched in a few milliseconds, making them suitable for showing video."
What the article doesn't say, which is easiest on the eyes. My bets are still on e-ink.
Recently I tried this "Libre" LCD-based e-reader, and my eyes were bleeding, it was that horrible, or maybe I'm spoiled by real e-ink, and no, it's not Kindle.
Re:Power? (Score:5, Informative)
Color/video/refresh: The LCD, hands down. E-ink doesn't even rate.
Monochrome/text/reading: Both are a little "greyer" than one would like. E-ink has worse blacks; but a somewhat brighter background(under standard illuminated room conditions). LCD has nicer blacks; but a slightly darker background unless the ambient light is quite bright.
I'd say that E-ink was modestly better in medium light, by virtue of its brighter background; but worse in low light since there is no way to backlight it just a bit. In full sunlight, either was highly readable; but E-ink suffered from its usual slow refresh issues.
Mod parent up, comparision E-ink/OLPC (Score:2)
Re:Power? (Score:5, Interesting)
I'm curious about the reason they are holding back the release of color screens and waited for a punch from the competitors. I had it in my hands, so I know it existed way longer than the first Sony reader came to the market.
This is before they took that off of their website [archive.org]
Re: (Score:2)
A typical problem with displays is that many newly developed display types have very limited life times. Sometimes as short as days or a few changes, deteriorating fast. I can imagine that such a colour version had a short life time, maybe in the order of 100 changes. That's probably good enough for a prototype display to show off, but not for consumer applications.
As another commenter points out the pixel size may have been an issue. Again this is something that makes it sound to me like nice prototype, b
Re: (Score:2)
E-Ink charges a fortune per display, the single most expensive part (about 100$ for a 7 inch reader) is the display, and since they have a monopoly or still have one, that is not bound to change, they probably are withholding the color one for exactly that reason.
Re: (Score:2)
thing is that unless the system fully powers down between page turns (and even then may bleed some purely from the imperfection in transistors), there is still a cpu in the background, idling and waiting for user input.
the biggest power draw in displays are more often backlight, then maintaining a static image, unless one is using CRT or similar where one continually repaints the pixels.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
from what i can tell, the standby on the next series of intel atom (N4**, iirc) will be comparable to ARM based products.
Re: (Score:2)
The big draw of E-Ink is that it only uses power when doing a page change. Do the color versions mentioned in TFA do that as well? If so, welcome. If not, nice try but fail.
That is a big part of it... But readability is also a huge bonus with e-ink. The fact of the matter is that a backlight is harder on the eyes than simple reflected light. Most of the ereaders advertise that they're as readable as paper books - largely because of the lack of backlight.
Do not want. (Score:5, Insightful)
The beauty of grayscale eink is that it's very close to paper - making it easy to read for long periods of time. However, the transition time on the Kindle or other grayscale eink devices is long enough to be annoying. Making these transitions longer will decrease my satisfaction in them, making the display dimmer will make them worthless to me.
If I wanted color, I'd hit an iPod touch, tablet PC, or laptop.
Keep It Simple Stupid.
Re: (Score:2)
If I wanted color, I'd hit an iPod touch, tablet PC, or laptop.
You must be one of those "I want my phone to be just phone" people.
But there's no turning back. Color eInk screens were already demoed, they just aren't production-ready... yet. But they will be. Remember, eInk tech is still in its infancy - the first device that shipped with a screen more advanced than N-segment indicator was Sony Librie, and that was in 2004! We've already got much better contrast since then, and - while it may be hard for people who only saw the current generation of readers to comprehen
Re:Do not want. (Score:4, Informative)
A book with illustrations in color.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Can you explain to me (and I suspect all the rest of us) what a "color book" is?
When you reach kindergarten, some of the books they give you are not printed in color. Instead, the illustrations are just done in solid lines, with nothing filled in. The idea is that you can use your crayons to fill in the color areas yourself. At first this seems counter-intuitive and time-consuming, but it's actually enjoyable once you get the hang of it.
Re: (Score:2)
Thing is, I can't recall last time I read a book that needed 'colour'
You must not have been exposed to very many books in your lifetime, then.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Except... it's not at all close to paper. I've had a Kindle for a year and it's my main reading device, and the fact that the "paper" is about 30% gray, not even *close* to white, is the thing that bugs me the most. Of course the blacks are nowhere near as black as print either, so the overall contrast level is tiny compared to paper. I can easily read a paper book in light levels that are way too low to read my Kindle2. The main way it's "very close to paper" is that it's illuminated by ambient light.
(
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You've been able to buy 120" displays for a couple of years now, though they will probably never be sold at your local BB for two obvious reasons: they're too damn big to fit through most people's doors, and they're too damn expensive. Pixel Qi and Mirasol are definitely imminent, no need to get all cynical about those.
Re: (Score:2)
The transition time on my Sony 300 is less than a second - about the same as physically turning a page.
Same with my Cybook. It takes an instant to wake up fully and get everything sorted, but the actual screen redraw is fine for it's purpose. Obviously, it's never going to be fast enough for the drama queens who simply must have instant screen refresh, and none of that beastly flashing as the display zeros. Personally, I have developed the habit of pressing the next page button when I'm half ways through the last sentence, and it is not disruptive at all. Blink and you'll miss it.
Re: (Score:2)
i suspect that we still do not have computer systems that can adapt silently and correctly in the same way as the human mind can.
what your asking for is more like a proto-ai secretary, that will continually evaluate what your doing and observing.
microsoft have been experimenting with systems like that, based around bayesian math, iirc. Software that can for instance create a calendar entry automatically based on the content of a email.
sadly, the only thing we have seen in product form so far was clippy...
Don't limit the perception of those screens! (Score:5, Insightful)
We see in the summary "e-reader", "e-book"...ignoring that those screens (well, at least Pixel Qi one, that I'm sure of) are great also as replacements for screens in netbooks (remember commercials of those depicting them on the beach, in the park or bright cafe?); generally any highly portable device.
Those are the screens which were supposed to be in place all along. Finally we can have them. Who cares about e-book readers?
Re: (Score:2)
Absolutely! A lot of these e-readers are running Linux of some flavor such as Android, and I remember reading news about both the Nook and the Kindle having been rooted.
Something that would pretty much instantly open my wallet would be if one of these could be setup with a driver to connect it to a computer and used as an external display. To compensate for the slow refresh, maybe every time a certain key combo was pressed, the contents of the window with focus would be mirrored onto the e-ink display.
I d
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Never mind that dead tree format has indeed its advantages (price of e-books is ridiculous; without the possibility of libraries, lending and easy sale/buying of used books - and I don't have much problem carrying two or three, with great battery time)
Consider a netbook (preferably with ARM cpu)...with Pixel Qi screen...in the form of a convertible tablet. What do you have in one of the modes? Oh, right, e-book reader.
Yes, those screens getting into the e-ink ballpark: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oawX3we [youtube.com]
flickering with e-ink (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Actually the flicking is a thing of getting used to, at first you are annoyed after a while you wont notice anymore, the bigger problem is the contrast, or lack thereof, paper quality is a lie, the contrast you get is more along the lines of 100 year old newspaper with aging ink.
Still good enough, but the media was writing garbage on global scale about the contrast, it does not even come close to a real book.
Re: (Score:2)
However, higher contrast and something even close to a true black would be really really nice. I wouldn't mind being able to read hardcover quality ink without the weight and size of a ha
I love my kindle (Score:5, Interesting)
I'd prefer higher contrast (Score:5, Interesting)
Real book page turn times (Score:5, Insightful)
Seems like people are really bitching that e-readers can't be used for video. My question is why did you buy an e-READER if you wanted to watch VIDEO? You should have bought a laptop.
Re:Real book page turn times (Score:5, Insightful)
You just expressed a view that is completely lost of marketing fools who see features features features as the only way to sell units. This is why every ebook reader also has an mp3 player in it.
Re:Real book page turn times (Score:4, Insightful)
Oh I thought that was because I usually listen to music while reading and the two were a natural fit for sitting on an airplane listening to music while reading.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
RRRrripp.
that's the sound of your argument overextending.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
This is why every ebook reader also has an mp3 player in it.
No, every eBook reader has an mp3 player in it because every manufacturer wants audio feedback that doesn't sound like an alarm clock being murdered. If you're going to [therefore] skip the bit-banging speaker interface and even FM synthesis and move along to some real audio, it barely costs more to install a codec capable of handling the audio output part; and decoding mp3 is such a trivial task compared to [say] displaying a PDF in a timely fashion that it doesn't even bear mentioning in terms of CPU time
Re: (Score:2)
is also the type of person who already has a phone that plays MP3s, and an MP3 player if they want one.
MP3 player is the digital clock of the new millennium. Not even a decade ago, every single freaking kitchen appliance manufactured contained a digital clock. microwave, dishwasher, outdoor thermometer, cooking thermometer, stove, coffee maker, toaster oven, popcorn maker, waffle iron, fridge, stand mixer, all must contain cheap digital clocks. I don't remember the exact breakdown, but I do remember over one dozen clocks in my kitchen. All set to different times. I taped over most of them with electrica
Re: (Score:2)
Newsflash, not everyone has the same mix of devices (either at home or portable versions).. Thus to the person with the iphone, and a 17" macbook pro, feature phones look stupid and braindead, netbooks make no sense at all, and having any sort of desktop computer at all seems so ancient an idea.. Change the devices around a bit.. and the guy with a moto razr, and a netbook.. cant comprehend why anyone would bother with an iphone or a high end winmobile device ..
This is not really the point. You're talking
Re: (Score:2)
Whilst I agree that different people have different needs:
Thus to the person with the iphone, and a 17" macbook pro, feature phones look stupid and braindead
To a person with an Iphone, phones look stupid? The Iphone is a phone, just another phone, the distinction between "smart" phone and "feature" phone is rather arbitrary and a matter of opinion.
The OP was talking about different kinds of products - ebook reader versus mp3 player, perhaps another analogy might be camera versus phone, e.g., the person wit
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
First: why should new technology aspire to be no better than old technology? What's wrong with having or wanting a faster/instant refresh?
Second: the delay on an e-reader is probably more noticeable because you're waiting for it. If you're turning the page of a book, you have something to do to keep you busy until it's done, so it doesn't matter if it takes a while. If your only interaction with the device is to press a "next page" button, you have nothing to do except wait for the display to refresh. Time
Re: (Score:2)
Look, we're talking about the time it takes to TURN A BLOODY PAGE. It's not a significant l
Re: (Score:2)
Page refresh isn't an issue when you linearly read a book, but if you just want to have a quick glance at what happened a dozens pages back, than refresh quickly becomes a major problem, as there isn't a way you can quickly quickly through pages.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't understand these complaints about the response times for the screens on e-readers.
Its not a problem as long as you're happy with a dedicated device for "page-by-page" reading of traditional books.
My question is why did you buy an e-READER if you wanted to watch VIDEO?
Put that the other way round: why would you want to buy an e-reader if your media player lets you read books and watch video?
Currently, the answer to that is that e-ink (a) is nicer to read than a backlit display and (b) offers vastly better battery life.
You should have bought a laptop.
...and the most interesting thing about these new screens (if they deliver) is that they could be used in laptops, smartphones and "slates", e
Because I need to browse... (Score:2)
I want to browse, at least when not reading literature. Also, I want a full A4 with note taking for browsing code (my own and others).
It's not only about video (Score:2)
It's not only about video. If you have any user interface a bit more complex than a few buttons around the device you'll need a touchscreen. And with a touchscreen you NEED visual feedback. E-ink is just too slow for that. Even simple things like scrolling through lists totally sucks with e-ink.
Have a look at the Plastic Logic [youtube.com]
Re: (Score:2)
The e-readers seem to do a good job at displaying text with low eye strain. However it comes at a heafty price tag for a single function device. It's like asking why people needed smart phones when two way pagers, PDAs, and simple cell phones already existed.
Re: (Score:2)
I got a nook for the holidays.
Had it at work last week, someone noticed it and asked what it was. I told them it was an ereader, for reading books. They then asked if it could play video too. They looked slightly confused when I indicated that it was just for books.
I think there are two major problems with ereaders right now
Re: (Score:2)
You're aware that there exists a device that is designed for such a purpose, yes? It's called a laptop. You might as well bitch about the small screen size or lack of a full keyboard on your internet-enabled phone. The e-ink is designed to be easy to read, it looks almost like actual paper. Much easier on the eyes than a monitor. It's designed for READING, not for video, not for internet, not for making your coffee in the morning, etc.
As for flippin
We don't need e-ink (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If you're up for wasting some time hacking the software that power those digital picture frames, you'll get pretty close. Maybe not $20, but I spotted a couple on Amazon in the $30-50 range. It would be a bit large and unwieldy (not to mention not even remotely portable, given that they're not battery-powered) but at a vague conceptual level, it's not that far off the mark.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:We don't need e-ink (Score:4, Insightful)
e-ink is to book readers what monster cables are to cables, if monster cables were the only cables you could buy anywhere with no lower priced competition.
But Monster Cables don't have any advantages over cheaper cables. Electronic Ink displays do have advantages over other types of display.
This is price fixing.
I don't think you know what "price fixing" means.
Once someone starts selling a fairly priced LCD alternative, it's all over for the e-ink people as their overpriced gadgets will only be bought by hardcore textophiles.
So, how can it be "price fixing" if somebody could just make an LCD-based alternative and take over the market? Price fixing implies collusion among industry players not to allow such competition. But in reality, there are lots of different companies competing for this market with different technology. There's not an agreement among them to fix prices.
I also know that a paperback book sized LCD device could be mass manufactured and sold for $19.99
Well, why don't you produce such a device, take over the market, and become wealthy for life, then?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
At first it's slightly easier to read than an LCD but if you want to sit down for a few hours to read it it'll save you one hell of a headache.
What is wrong with you slashdotters? Not so much you individually, but in general? Every week we have the required slashvertisement for e-ink based displays, and the astroturfers come out and post unbelievable claims about humans eyes being physically unable to gaze upon LCDs, like they're a medusa's head made of silicon.
It would be laughable if read on time.com or something, but its even worse here. Come on, this is slashdot. Supposedly we all spend 16 hours a day gazing into our L C D computer screens
Um, people did. (Score:3, Informative)
Go on eBay and you can pick up greyscale LCD e-book readers for well under $100, sometimes under $50.
Thing is, they suck. You don't want to read 1,000 pages with a backlight, nor can you sustain a battery for 1,000 pages with a backlight.
Maybe there's a place for both (Score:2)
I find it a little hard to believe that the screens can consume less power than e-Ink, but if they consume les
MIssing the point. (Score:2, Insightful)
The problem here is that people are forgetting that the entire purpose of these gadgets is for reading books. How many books that are read by adults have significant amounts of color in them? Almost zero have pictures...let alone color pictures. Furthermore, video (while cool) has nothing whatever to do with reading books.
I got a Kindle for Xmas - the older one with the smaller display.
It uses very, VERY little power (I've read about 3000 pages on it - and it still hasn't needed to be recharged) - which
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Magazine sales are vastly higher than book sales, and I think ebook reader vendors realize this. Plus there has been sort of a race to color by everyone for publicity's sake.
The display technology used in the Kindle hasn't changed much in the last 5 years, it has only gotten cheap. (so instead of insanely expensive it is simply costly now)
ps- I'm glad you like the Kindle, I certainly enjoyed making it. And I still use one of my prototype Kindle 2 units every day.
Re: (Score:2)
I've studied some BIO a couple years ago and remembering it helping immensely as well.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The problem here is that people are forgetting that the entire purpose of these gadgets is for reading books
Not necessarily. The purpose of the e-ink tech is to be a low-power-usage display. However, there's drawbacks (limited/no colors, poor refresh time) that have forced it to be stuffed in to the niche of being a display for books. If/when the technologies improves, it can be used to display other things.
All of those things are what matters for an actual book reader...not color or video.
Other uses for this improved tech aren't going to somehow mean everyone stops using it to read books. All it does is expand the market, which in turn will probably mean more funding for better e-book reade
Sunlight laptop (Score:5, Insightful)
A silly idea (Score:2)
I've whined before about there being no OLED-over-e-Ink displays. I did a little looking back and of course this was discussed before, there would just not be enough light; e-Ink so far has mediocre contrast and OLED is only partly transparent. But what if you could make two OLED layers back-to-back? One of them faces the page and is there to light it in dark conditions. The other is printed over the backlight layer but faces the other direction and provides video. Either way, e-Ink still needs a contrast b
I hate e-paper (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
You should be sorry, because this IS big time news.
http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/09/qualcomm-mirasol-display-video-hands-on-in-glorious-1080p/ [engadget.com]
'Nuff said!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
The Liquavista [liquavista.com] stuff looks more interesting though -- in particular, it doesn't need separate pixels for RGB.
(The Liquavista website is not nearly as slick as the mirasol site tho; it looks like the researchers also did the web design...)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, spreading information, shining a light on your dark mind. Perish the thought!
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
That might be fine if you love format restricted, DRM'd up the ass proprietary devices, but not so good if you don't.
Re: (Score:2)
Aye. Well this is a race with many dogs, that is going to be hotly contested. Also you know that b/w eInk style displays are only a transitional technology and that color and improved versions are fast on their way; it only makes sense not to tie one's company to a single dog.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
My real Kindle is easier on the eyes than my iPhone Kindle. And the iPhone battery MIGHT last for 2-3 days if I'm NOT using it as an ereader. The Kindle battery easily lasts a week, maybe twice that if I turned off the wireless.
I DO read on the iPhone on the road, but at home I prefer the Kindle.
Re:Why not just a labtop? (Score:4, Insightful)
(sigh) clearly Slashdot geeks don't read much.
1. You can't easily carry a laptop around with you for six or seven days in a variety of non-office circumstances. Laptops are heavy and fragile.
2. You have to charge a laptop often. You can't pick up War and Peace and read it cover-to-cover on battery power on a laptop.
3. Laptops are obtrusive or not allowed in many circumstances.
4. WHILE READING, laptops require that they sit on your lap or a desk. ebook readers can be read in ANY POSITION.
5. The user interface of a laptop imposes all kinds of extra work; ebook reader you just open and read, no navigation of user interface.
I'm a serious reader. I've probably read 50-100k pages on my Kindle 1. I've had a personal laptop since the late '80s. I never read a single document on a laptop longer than about 50 pages. If I had to do that, I'd just buy the book. Since acquiring Kindle, I only buy academic books in printed form. For all other reading (newspapers, magazines, novels, non-academic nonfiction) I just buy it on Kindle. Easy impulse buy, easy, flexibile tool for reading. I charge maybe once or twice a week. I can carry my Kindle in a tiny messenger bag, wherever I go.