[Hellmark]

Originally Posted by DarkScribe

There will be many people just like you, one of my daughters has the same attitude. There will be many more who like a softer contrast - it is easier on the eyes for them if they tend to use the device for extended reading. Some people run their monitors or computer screens at maximum contrast, most - if survey results are accurate - prefer a less harsh contrast.

Contrast matters less if you are using indirect lighting. Most magazines are pure black on pure white, but how often do people complain? Not really ever. When direct lighting is used, such as with a back lit display, higher contrast levels can be to your advantage, so colors seem less washed out.

Originally Posted by DarkScribe

Yes. Google is your friend. (Well it is sometimes.)

You're the one trying to prove a point, so the burden lies with you. Why should someone who disagrees with you prove that you are right while they are wrong? I could claim that you write your posts in pink underwear, because it makes you feel smarter, but unless I try to back it up, it would be (and should be) labeled as bullshit.

Originally Posted by DarkScribe

Did I say or imply that? If you want to debate me, try to stick to what I actually say, not what you wish I had said.

Some pages, but as I use an eReader for reading what are basically mass produced novels, not Hi-Res art magazines, their resolution is effectively as good. If I want to look at something Hi-Res I will use my iPad or a MacBook with a Retina screen. If I want to just read a copy of Finnegan's Wake, the Kindle DX is little different to an original copy of the book.

You can split hairs all you like, you can nominate coffee table books with a resolution sharp enough to give you paper cuts from across the room. The issue that I am discussing is that unless ePaper has a massive improvement, not just an improvement that cannot be noticed by the average reader, it is not likely to start overnight queues in the street the night before release. The demographic who love eReaders is not the same demographic who can't wait for the latest smart phone or gaming device. Look at the sales figure demographics, look at the age demographic for eReaders. They are highly represented among Baby Boomers, not teenagers.

Resolution on eInk panels have been stagnet at about 200PPI since the pearl was introduced 2 years ago. The Triton color eInk display is also two years old now, with no real use or improvements. Even mass media paper back (MMPB), which is seen as some of the cheapest printed books from regular publishers, still are comparatively higher resolution. As it stands, eInk is "good enough" when compared to paper. For most people, who read the average 1 book a year (yes, the average person reads just one book a year), LCD is also good enough.

Originally Posted by DarkScribe

Take it up with the scientists involved in the research.

No one says that there are different forms of light photons, but there are different light frequencies, and different levels of transmission with very, very different effects on the human body. Some of the research claims that there are higher levels of UV light (A,B,&C) in light excited by an LCD or a LED screen than in light emitted from an incandescent or FL/CFL source. I don't know just how much effect this has, but I am not as dismissive of research as you appear to be.

If all that is too hard for you to grasp then I am afraid that I can't help. If you are truly interested in answers but not willing to do the research then I am afraid that I cannot help. If you cannot understand the science then I cannot help. If you are unwilling to accept that the research is valid then I cannot help.

Not very helpful - am I?

Most studies I've seen, the position and intensity of the light source had the biggest impact. If you're staring at the light source, as you do when reading on a modern LCD display, it strains the eyes much easier. When reading on paper or eInk, indirect lighting is required, and so the eyes aren't bombarded by as much light. Even still, with indirect lighting, if you have a brighter light, it will still cause issues.

Originally Posted by DarkScribe

Screen flash? I haven't experienced screen flash since the first versions of Sony and Kindle.

I have mentioned several times that I do not want or need better contrast, but I accept that many people would. It is like printing in darkroom days - some photographers use high contrast film, paper and technique, while others (often award winning) prefered a softer contrast.

The issue from the point of view of the manufacturers is how much of the market will really value new standards enough to dump what they have and upgrade. Some people will love everything new - just because it is new and for little other reason, but many, if they cant see a dramatic difference in a new screen will stick to what they have. I really don't believe that eReaders are like iPhones, most of the the people who own them don't have an obsession with "State of the Art". Look how many were calling for a colour eInk screen, yet when they released one, almost no one bought them.

There will be a steady increase in quality and functionality with eReaders, but to try to equate them to tablets with their annual high visibility model upgrades not realistic. The eInk Corporation hasn't gone on vacation, they are still fully involved in R&D but many of the changes over the next few years are unlikely to impress those who feed their ego rather than their needs with upgrades. You know the type, those who insist on saying in everyday speech "I have an iPhone 4s" rather than just saying "I have an iPhone".

For most people, LCDs are good enough. They don't do a lot of reading, and divide their time doing other things.

As far as the lack of output, have you seen any improvements at all? For instance, the PRS-T2 uses the same exact display as the PRS-T1, and the PRS-650. No other display is really available. Why aren't we seeing more Triton displays? Those were unveiled two years ago.

Originally Posted by CommonReader

I don't believe the argument that e-reader markets are saturated already. This may be true in markets like the US and Australia, yet even in Germany - one the biggest book markets globally - the e-book market is still in a rather early stage.
Additionally, there are substantial markets like Latin Amerika that haven't been really developed yet.
Yet e-ink reader are possibly endangered by cheap tablets flooding these markets before e-ink readers have even gained any foothold.

For the saturated markets product innovations are required to attract existing owners of e-book readers to upgrade. Instead we are rather seeing a reduced range of options. All the major readers are quite similar now.
We aren't even seeing 5" and 7" readers any more.

The lack of options does suck. I'd love a larger display device, but the Kindle DX (which is pretty much dead) is about the only option, unless you go with some of the lesser known companies, and all of them are very expensive. They all pretty much come in under $400. That is three to four times the cost of your average ebook reader, and I can get a tablet for less than that price.

Originally Posted by DarkScribe

You might not believe it but the retail companies who are selling them do as they are who are claiming that the market has peaked. For three years they were one of the most popular Christmas presents, then last year they dropped back slightly. The market has not evaporated, it is just the the boom has ended. It will not die unless there is a sudden upsurge in the popularity of printed media coupled with a major reduction in cost - something that is not very likely.

As for cheap tablets, as they are not the same thing I can't see them having any lasting effect on the eReader market. Saying that they do is like saying that people will stop buying electric drills because a range of cheap Chinese power saws has been released. They are both tools and each has its purpose; one cannot replace the other. Cheap tablets might even aid eReader sales when the people who buy them discover that they don't make very good eReaders.

A tremendous number of people who buy tablets load something like a Kindle app onto them and start reading. Many then complain of sore eyes, headaches etc., as even though they can browse on a computer screen all day, when reading for several hours straight, their eyes are effected. Why else would so many who already own a tablet go out an buy a dedicated eReader? I don't know of anyone, family, friends, or those who I work with, sail with, socialise with who only own one device; they all have both a tablet and an eReader.

You obviously haven't paid attention to tech generally. Cheaper multipurpose devices tend to dominate. How many people do you know buy MP3 players anymore? What is the most popular camera you see now a days? The cheap, ubiquitous smartphone has largely replaced those devices for most people.

As far as your example, well, that's not the same. It isn't apples and oranges. A saw and a drill do totally different jobs. If you were talking about people buying fewer routers, because they could get dremel tools, that can do routing. Does the dremel tool do as good of a job? No, because it is a general purpose tool and is designed more for doing many things, so compromises had to be made. Most people are fine with that, because it is so much cheaper, and they just make due.

And yeah, many people do complain about eyestrain with reading on LCD. Reading webpages and such is easier, because there is so much to distract the eyes, having them moving around so they don't linger. But, the average person just doesn't read much, and when they do they read for shorter periods of time, so it isn't a big deal.

Originally Posted by DarkScribe

Vapoware applies to software that is rumoured but not developed. When the company who makes the eInk screens say that they are working on prototypes in conjunction with other companies you can be pretty sure that those prototypes will hit the market. When Amazon takes out a patent on technology that is core to their business, they aren't just playing.

But if you really want to get into denial, tell me that the Entourage dual screen device was vapourware. It wasn't very successful, but it wasn't vapourware.

Dude, no, that is not the definition. Vaporware can include hardware, and things in active development. By your defintion Duke Nukem Forever was never vaporware, because it was actively developed for its entire 15 year development cycle (which, it won Wired's vaporware award several times). An infamous hardware example, is the Infinium Phantom, which missed several release dates, and was never cancelled.

Originally Posted by DarkScribe

As do I, it supports what I am saying, that owning both types of device is becoming commonplace. Anecdotal evidence can be very useful. Much research is aggregated anecdotal reports. What do you think a survey is?

Among certain types, owning both is common. But the thing with anecdotal evidence is that it isn't reliable due to a small and potentially biased sample set. Surveys are generally considered more reliable, due to increasing the sample size. You claim most people you know own both, but how many people do you know are relatively dissimilar to yourself?

Originally Posted by DarkScribe

You do that - I have a more realistic approach to technology.

So rarely that I wouldn't use it as a basis to give credence to one of the most popular devices in modern history not being further developed. I would give it as much credence as a rumour that Apple was giving up electronics and going into the fertiliser business.

Right -" before they can."

In a cutthroat industry they will keep it on the backburner. E Ink Holdings Inc., while this is happening will just sit and twiddle their thumbs or maybe take up knitting until Amazon et al., is ready.

Not going to happen.

If nothing else, they can still profit without even producing anything. Anyone who comes along with a similar tech still has to license their patents. If someone is trying to produce a competitor, they can use the patent to block it.

Originally Posted by DarkScribe

E-Ink is a supplier of screens. While I doubt that they have been idle, they aren't the issue. It is the companies like Amazon who make the devices. As for RIM, I agree - they were very badly managed. This was apparent for quite some time. I traded my BlackBerry 9500 for an iPhone several years ago.

Well it has been fun - well maybe not fun, but distracting. You have an opinion, I have one that differs, only time will determine who is correct. This thread started with a complaint that there was not enough innovation and "new" features - with regard to the screen. I contend that there will be a number of device changes, with my contention supported by patent applications, prototypes, market demand, and press releases from several of the players involved. You choose to dismiss all of this and in some strange way try to use RIM and its problems to support your thesis. RIM has been imploding for years, Amazon has strong growth. I don't see a connection.

At this stage there seems to be little point in going further. We will just bore everyone.

The device makers are still limited to part availability. If only one display panel can be had, they have no choice but to use it. For Blackberry, it was easier for them to feel damage from mismanagement, because they produced the final product. No one was really captive to their decisions, like it is with eInk.