Screen alternatives

[gastan]

Just read the post about SiPix production in the News forum. That lead me to Nate's "The Digital Reader Blog", which lead me to the Nemoptic company website.

Seems that Nemoptic, a French company, has been developing screens for a while. They have a genuine A4 size screen (210mm X 297mm) either in production by a partner or production ready (the distinction isn't clear to me). It boasts 200 dpi, 8:1 contrast, and "a fast refreshing capability, without any blinking effect."



They also have a 5" color display either being producted or ready for production.

If these displays are available why aren't they being used? Why do all the ereaders seem to be using the same displays, in the same sizes, from the same manufacturers? How many other options are being ignored by the ereader manufacturers?

Based on my reading here at MR, it seems that there is a niche of pent up demand for A4 sized displays that would render full size pdf's and make newspaper/magazine reading much more convenient. I think that once that niche is met, word of mouth and market exposure would create an explosion of ereader acceptance in the business, academic, and tech worlds.

Thoughts?

[Solitaire1]

I think portability is one issue when it comes to screen sizes. Although my Palm PDA had a screen that was a bit too small for ebook reading, I was able to put it in my pocket for easy carrying. With the current general size of ebook readers (about the size of a hard back book), it can be easily carried in one hand. With a larger ereader like the one above, it is likely that it would have to be carried around in a carrier when not in use, much like a laptop computer.

That said, I would strongly welcome the above ereader. The size and screen resolution of my current ebook reader isn't really suitable for reading manga. An ereader with an A4 screen size would open up whole realm of books that I haven't been able to enjoy on my ebook reader.

[mr ploppy]

Do they really need to be portable? Weight would be important, unless you read sat up, but why would you need to carry it around?

[Lady Fitzgerald]

Originally Posted by mr ploppy

Do they really need to be portable? Weight would be important, unless you read sat up, but why would you need to carry it around?

Same reason I carry a book everywhere I go. Obviously, it wouldn't be for everyone.

[Clancy_s]

I need one I can carry around - for decades I've taken care never to be without a book, in case I have to wait around for something. Nowadays it's my ereader.

However I expect to have 2 devices eventually - a large one (A4 would be great) for home / work / textbooks and magazines and a small one for novels.

[Solitaire1]

Originally Posted by mr ploppy

Do they really need to be portable? Weight would be important, unless you read sat up, but why would you need to carry it around?

Originally Posted by Lady Fitzgerald

Same reason I carry a book everywhere I go. Obviously, it wouldn't be for everyone.

Originally Posted by Clancy_s

I need one I can carry around - for decades I've taken care never to be without a book, in case I have to wait around for something. Nowadays it's my ereader.

However I expect to have 2 devices eventually - a large one (A4 would be great) for home / work / textbooks and magazines and a small one for novels.

The above two comments are the same for me. I prefer to always have books with me at all times, and carrying one ebook reader loaded with hundreds of ebooks is much more practical than carrying a few physical books (pbooks). If I'm limited to one ebook reader I'd prefer one that I can easily carry with me, and my current ereader is the perfect size for this.

Occasionally I still carry around a few pbooks (mostly comic book trade paperbacks like "The Sinestro Corps War") that are not yet practical as an ebook. That's one of the reasons I'm looking forward to getting an ebook reader with a larger high-resolution (and I hope color) screen.

[gastan]

This seems to have evolved into another size discussion. I did not intend that when I first posted. I am wondering why, when there seem to be other display alternatives availabe, everything we see seems to come from one source ... PVI (or E Ink as they now call themselves) This particular company (http://www.nemoptic.com/) has a 5" color display ready for production, too. Why aren't we seeing it in readers?



What other companies are being ignored by the eReader manufacturers? What other interesting, new, or innovative
tech is ready for production but ignored by OEM's?

[Sweetpea]

There were a lot of readers promised at the first two quarters of 2010. None have arrived. Only the new DX, but that one wasn't even announced!

It makes you wonder if companies actually want to create readers, or that they're waiting to see what the big boys (Amazon, B&N, and even Apple) will do.

[petermillard]

How do you know they're being ignored? Maybe OEMs have had detailed discussions with this company, but decided that they weren't able to do business with them for whatever reason - the resolution too low or that the price was too high, or the tech too unproven, etc.. etc..

Pete

[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by gastan

I am wondering why, when there seem to be other display alternatives availabe, everything we see seems to come from one source ... PVI (or E Ink as they now call themselves) This particular company (http://www.nemoptic.com/) has a 5" color display ready for production, too. Why aren't we seeing it in readers?

Because of a crucial distinction:
Just because something is technically possible, that is, the technology to produce a working product exists, does not mean it can lead to a viable commercial product; one that can be safely, reliably, and consistently manufactured and sold at a competitive price.

Examples abound; any time you see a cool product that appears absurdly priced (say the Brother ebook reader) you'll likely find a tech that is solid on the physics side but uncompetitive on economics. I'll offer up just one:

SED HDTV displays: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surface...mitter_display

SED panels are really cool in concept; they are, in effect, flat CRTs. They have all of CRT's strengths and few of their weaknesses. They produce beautiful pictures. Canon and Toshiba, among others, developed a line of displays all the way up to announcing commercial delivery. Which got delayed and delayed and eventually cancelled. Why? Because while the SED panels were in gestation, LCD panels were shipping, and evolving, and ramping up economies of scale. One generation of LCDs paid for the next generation of better and *cheaper* products. Every time Canon and Toshiba hit a price point for their introductory price LCD (and plasma, to a lesser extent) would move the market to a lower price point. Eventually, Toshiba threw up their hands and moved on.

Economics matter. Economies of scale matter. Elsewhere I've annoyed some folks by pointig this out but the reality is that emerging industries like ebooks are *defined* and shaped by the first-movers and the early arrivers and by high-volume markets.

PVI got to market first; they set the rules, the expectations, the baselines (in performance and in economics) that would-be competitors need to match. They aren't guaranteed domination (or even survival) but if they keep on playing in the Red Queen's Race of tech product manufacture (you have to run as fast as you can just to stay where you are), they just might be able to under-price or out-perform (or both) any potential rivals.

Right now, check the comments in the SiPix thread: https://www.mobileread.com/forums/sho...ewpost&t=90705

I haven't seen a SiPix panel yet but it seems their product was intended to compete with *last year's* PVI products. Against this year's product, the economics and the performance may or not be there to yield a viable product. But to compete against an established product or tech you *have* to be either significantly better at a comparable price or significantly cheaper for comparable performance. Comparable performance at comparable price, on the other hand, only works if you are plug-compatible. (Let's not forget the matter of driver chips and support chips; single chip ebook readers are coming because the chip functions needed to build a PVI-based reader are a known quantity, market demand and pricing are known, and integrating them into a single chip design has an eager market waiting.)

We need look no further than Skiff (gone) and Que (on life support) for eReader tech that is technically viable but economically DOA, as of today. Between iPad and Nook's price cut, the benchmark price both were aiming for has (apparently) become uncompetitive. Their market, if it ever existed, evaporated.

The same may happen to Nemoptics.
Or it may not.
But just because a *technology* is deemed "production-ready" by its backers doesn't mean *products* based on it are *market-ready*.

We really don't know what changed to make Nooks at US$149 possible. Maybe PVI has gotten their manufacturing costs down to where they can give B&N (and Amazon, maybe Sony) enough of a volume discount to permit a decent profit at that price point (bad for PVI competitors) or maybe B&N (and Amazon) gets enough ebook revenue to afford lower margins on the hardware (bad for *their* competitors but not necessarily so for PVI competitors).

In product engineering, designers are usually aiming at moving targets. And unless they can correctly guess where the market will be when the product hits market, they can easily find themselves with an uncompetitive product on the hands. (Samsung's reader doesn't seem to be coming to the US after all.)

Does Nemoptics have a viable technology? Looks like it.
Can somebody build a competitive ebook reader that can survive in the market?
That, remains to be seen.

Life in the tech business is anything but easy. For every jackpot winner there are dozens of almost-winners.

[Solitaire1]

Originally Posted by petermillard

How do you know they're being ignored? Maybe OEMs have had detailed discussions with this company, but decided that they weren't able to do business with them for whatever reason - the resolution too low or that the price was too high, or the tech too unproven, etc.. etc..

Pete

One possibility is that this type of screen doesn't allow for adequate battery life, an issue that has long been a problem with portable electronics. No matter how great the screen is, a one hour of battery life would be a definite drawback.