Quote:
Originally Posted by -read-
I think this point is especially interesting - the Que seems to have very impressive document handling capabilities, but it is rather slow - and we expect our computing devices to display information at nearly the speed of thought and input. Perhaps for this reason electronic ink is just not right for the ideal academic e-reader. At a minimum, an ideal device will have to provide both readability, speed, and organization. |
Unfortunately the Que seemed to be a good ambitious idea that came out of and by extension depends largely on on relatively limited (but interesting) screen technology. Had they originally developed around something like Pixel Qi or Liquavista, I wonder how far off the "ideal" academic tablet would have been.
Perhaps the Que isn't quite optimal either, but it has set a very useful example of where a documents-oriented interface can start.
Quote:
Originally Posted by -read-
How important is text readability on this hypothetical tablet?
|
I'm not sure I understand this question. What do you mean by readability? Resolution? Contrast? Reflective/backlit? I think dmaul1114's statement about E-Ink refers to the company's products specifically, or EPD technology in general (E-Ink/PVI, SiPix Microcup, etc.). e-
paper like Liquavista will certainly be welcome, as will good reflective and transflective LCD tech, but EPDs like E-Ink's are just too sluggish (would have said glacial, but that's more like FLEPia) for that dynamic use.