[Kali Yuga]

Originally Posted by ekaser

I'm trying NOT to play semantic games by 'defining' things one way or another.... I think it's pretty indefensible to claim that eInk/"optimized for book reading" devices will (or even should) retain a majority share of the market. It's just not going to happen.

It's not a "semantic game." It's pointing out that there is a big difference between device type X being in the hands of the majority of individuals, compared to device type Y driving the majority of the revenues.

Let's assume that a total of 10 million people purchase ebooks in 2010 at $10 each. 50% buy an average of 5 ebooks; 24% buy an average of 15 ebooks; 14% buy an average of 30 ebooks. The first tier generates $250 million in sales; the second, $360 million; the third, $420 million. From a revenue perspective, if that top 14% (and some of the second tier) wants a device that's dedicated for reading, and epaper happens to offer the best reading experience, then it's pretty clear that epaper devices will not only stick around, but command a significant percentage of the ebook market.

Kapish?

Originally Posted by ekaser

Now, I'm sure your argument will be that eInk machines will inherently always be cheaper than fast color multi-function devices, but if that's so, why don't we still have monochrome word-processing machines in all of our offices?

Not really, device price isn't terribly critical to my argument. I've also pointed out in previous posts that the complete cessation of a focused device because of a superior multifunction device does happen, but this is extremely rare; so far all I know of are these dedicated word processors and PDA's.

And if convergence is so fantabulous and inevitable, then why do most people still have separate TV's and computer monitors? Why don't most TV's have DVD and/or Blu-Ray and/or DVR's and/or home theater amplifiers built into them? Why do we have separate applications for word processing, spreadsheets, page layout, HTML layout, image editing, database functions and so forth instead of one converged application that does it all?

Originally Posted by ekaser

The REST of the population still reads, and reads a tremendous amount, but it's newspapers, magazines, WEB SITES, etc, all of which benefit tremendously from faster, color machines. When more than 80% of the population wants fast color reading devices, where do you think the market is going to go?

Hard to say, as that depends on how long it takes color epaper to become viable.

And if that 80% uses their Plastic Fantastic Tablets to get the magazine for free via the web (a setup that doesn't provide magazines with sufficient revenue to stay afloat, btw) while the remaining 20% happen to be on epaper devices and actually pay for the magazine content that also includes trackable ads, which do you think the publishers will want to emphasize and cater to?

Originally Posted by ekaser

Just because something CAN play movies, too (and quite well) doesn't mean it can't display books in an excellent fashion, too.

Based on current technology, this is probably incorrect. Again, epaper is light, thin, cheap, easy on the eyes, and terrible for animations; an LCD-type display is great for motion and has color, but will result in a heavier device, far less battery time, etc etc.

Originally Posted by ekaser

Maybe we don't have the technology today, January 1, 2010, but I think you're being very short-sighted if you think it will never happen (and likely sooner than later).

Y'know, maybe if Duke Nukem Forever actually came out, your tech optimism would be valid.

More to the point is that a) I expect both LCD and epaper to improve moving forward, thus largely preserving their relative advantages; and b) regardless of technological issues, a focused device is always going to be better for the specific task of reading. Separately, 90% of the functions people want to shove into their ebook readers will be included into all these other devices. Why will you need a calendar in your ebook reader, for example, when you've got synced calendars on your 2 home computers and your smartphone?

Originally Posted by ekaser

And yes, those 15+/year book readers WILL be a major force in driving ebook revenues, but ebook revenues are a tiny (and rapidly shrinking) percentage of all 'media' consumed today and in the future....

EBooks are a small slice, but a rapidly growing part of the (iirc) $135 billion book industry (about $35 billion in the US). Not bad, considering that movie theaters in the US broke $10 billion this year and that US video game revenues were around $42 billion. The ebook market isn't likely to stay "tiny" for long.

I have no idea when ebooks will constitute a major percentage of the book market, but it seems very likely this will come to pass long after color eInk is shipping.

Originally Posted by ekaser

You say to-may-toe, I say to-mah-to... I consider a device that drops from around 80 or 90% market share to less than 10% in a 10 year period to have been "eaten up".

Then your consideration isn't taking into effect the fact that this is a nascent market, not an established or zero-sum environment -- i.e. one tablet sold does not necessarily mean one less epaper-type device sold (or vice versa). E.g. the figures you cite could easily result in eInk making 10 times more screens for reading than they do now, or that epaper devices may drive more than 50% of the revenues of the electronic end of the industry (especially if they wind up making big gains in the education market). E.g. Apple has a fairly small market share overall, but obviously commands an influence (particularly over the media) which is far in excess of any rational measure of its market share or revenues. I'm not sure anyone would describe Apple as "eaten up" by Microsoft, or BMW as "eaten up" by GM or Ford, or Prada as "eaten up" by Levi's, despite their small share of their markets.