Quote:
Originally Posted by HarryT
With respect, Dennis, that was not the question that I was responding to. The previous poster made the claim that eInk readers could not be considered reading devices due to their restricted functionality. I was saying that, if you consider a paper book to be the "definitive" reading device, an eInk book reader actually compares pretty well.
Having used PDAs for reading for 20 odd years before eInk devices appeared, I'm personally very well aware of their capabilities, but that wasn't what I was replying to.
|
And you're strongly misinterpreting my statement, which is why I ignored your question at first.
You yourself have admitted that there are many limitations to e-ink. My comment was simply a response to the idea that we shouldn't comment about e-ink's shortcomings based on an analogy that we shouldn't expect a Sony Reader to make phone calls. Ebook readers never been purported to be any kind of communications device, so why would anyone expect it to make phone calls? Yet it is openly described as a
reading device, and it is not hard whatsoever to include color-illustrated books, magazines, technical documents, academic work, and all sorts of things that e-ink readers are still bad at within the scope of
reading.
It's a continuation of my earlier assertion that too many people presume "reading" to be nothing more than text-viewing.