Plastic Logic 'well on schedule to begin with production in the middle of next year'

[Wizard-mag]

While once again dreaming about A4 flexible e-ink display promised by the Plastic Logic to be delivered in 2008, I have noticed that on 3 September they put out two new press releases concerning their future manufacturing operation in Dresden:
Plastic Logic Appoints Director of Quality
Plastic Logic Appoints Vice President, Manufacturing for Dresden Operations

While most of the releases is about the new appointees, whose appointments themselves might be significant signs of progress in preparations for the beginning of manufacturing, the first also says, "Following the topping-out ceremony last month, Plastic Logic is well on schedule to begin with production in the middle of next year." And furthermore, according to the second, "the construction of the production facilities is well on the way to completion in December of this year."

This looks like they are well on track and gives us a more precise information when to expect their products to be rolled out. I think it might reinforce hopes of all those dreaming of an A4 e-ink device, even though I know I am on the more optimistic end of the spectrum.

[bowerbird]

> even though I know I am on the more optimistic end of the spectrum.

if the past is any guide, the issuance of press-releases on e-ink
does _not_ mean they've made progress; it means that they have
a funding sucker on the line who they want to pull in to the boat...

and _that_ is the "optimistic" option.

the _realistic_ option is that there is such a funding sucker in range,
and they are trying to get it on the line, to later pull it into the boat.

(the _pessimistic_ option is that they are trying to _attract_ such a
funding sucker _into_ range, to get it on the line, and into the boat.)

and by my reading, what it looks like they need additional funding for is
to ensure the "completion" of their "production facilities" in "december".
because if they _really_ were "well on the way" to completing it, they'd
simply wait for two months, when it _was_ completed, and announce it.

-bowerbird

p.s. the cynical option is that they've realized they have a tar-baby that
will never pay off, and the press-release is intended to flip the company.
look at how many times this "promising technology" has been re-sold and
you'll realize that the cynical option is the one that has paid off most often.

[transman]

I'm pretty cynical myself but I think it is unlikely that they are trying to attract more funds. They already got 100 million dollars from a group of investor including Intel. They press releases were just standard notifications of appointments.

Whether they will have any devices out by end next year is what is in doubt. The smaller version will probably be the first out with an A4 version (the one i want) probably out mid 2009 at the earliest.

[bowerbird]

$100 million isn't a very big chunk for the e-ink crowd.
they've gotten amounts that big time and time again...

and burned through every one of them.

and the product that they've turned out -- finally! --
is the one you see today, in the price-range of $300,
in the sony reader. they were quick to tell you about
low energy requirements (only needed on pageturns!),
but they conveniently forgot to mention the slow refresh,
as well as the ugly reverse that preceded the slow refresh.
and i'm still not sure how they will manage copy-and-paste.
(or if the lack of any search functionality is related to e-ink.)

the point is, they're simply not telling you the truth about e-ink.
they just keep snowing us with hype, and you keep buying hype.
me, well i stopped believing them a long, long, long time ago...

i still _want_ the product. i want it to be everything they promise.
but i won't believe it until i see it, working with no hidden gotchas,
at the affordable price that they've been bragging about all along...

and remember, the people chipping in the most recent $100 million,
and probably the people who chipped in the $100 million before that,
and the people who chipped in the $100 million before _that_, will
most certainly want to be repaid (with a handsome return) _before_
the price drops to a level that you and i consider to be "affordable"...

so, um... don't hold your breath, that's what i'd recommend...

-bowerbird

[bowerbird]

and while i'm at it...

take a look at what mary lou jepsen did with the o.l.p.c. screens.

not only did she make a screen that is _much_better_ than e-ink,
but she did it with a whole lot less money, and in years less time.

and her screen will clearly be _cheaper_ than the e-ink version...

faster, cheaper, _and_ better. that's supposed to be against the law.

in retrospect, then, doesn't it occur to you to at least _speculate_
-- since that seems to be the mode around here -- that e-ink inc.
has been putting out their "we're right around the corner on this!"
propaganda _precisely_ to ward off any competitors like mary lou?

who knows how much further along the e-book revolution would be
if we would have been smart enough to demand some _real_ results
way back _years_ ago when e-ink started making all their promises...

i've been a strong e-book advocate for over 25 years, and i'll tell you,
there hasn't been anything more deadly to us than hype and vaporware.

-bowerbird

[NatCh]

Originally Posted by bowerbird

who knows how much further along the e-book revolution would be if we would have been smart enough to demand some _real_ results way back _years_ ago when e-ink started making all their promises....

See, the problem there is that you can't really demand true innovation. The electric light-bulb required 78 years (1802 to 1880) to be developed to a truly commercially viable product (if you count Edison's version as the first commercially viable light-bulb) -- where would we be if results had been "demanded" after only say, 30 years? In the dark I expect.

Oh, and one other note -- E-Ink, Inc. has always been up-front about their sluggish refresh rates, I certainly knew about them long before I knew about the Libriē, for instance.

[bowerbird]

> the problem there is that you can't really demand true innovation

of course not. but _we_ can be smart about making ourselves dependent (or not)
on "innovation" that hasn't yet developed to the point where it is actually usable...

we can be smart about continuing to pursue other options, on a just-in-case basis.

as for being "up-front" about the refresh rates, why were so many people surprised?
sure, e-ink said "this isn't fast enough that it could be used for video...", but that's
a far cry from telling us that it will take a half-second or more to display each page.

furthermore, in programming my own e-book applications, i've been well aware that
one of the ways that people actually _use_ books is to thumb through pages quickly,
so i have taken pride in the fact that my apps can rip through 5-15 pages per second.
and i've used that capability enough to know that it would be painful to live without it.
does e-ink inc. not _realize_ slowness is a huge disadvantage? or just not telling us?

again, i'm not faulting e-ink for failing to materialize. sometimes things do take time.
and for the first few years of their promises, i didn't even fault them for making them.

after all, if you think you can solve the problems in "a couple years", then _say_that_.

but after you've been saying "a couple years" for _eight_years_straight_, then i think
you've gotta come clean and tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
that's not "radical transparency", it's just common human decency...

so i repeat, don't hold your breath, folks... be realistic. wait for honest proof.

-bowerbird

[Wizard-mag]

Actually, Plastic Logic does not use E Ink Corporation products, they are a completely independent company.

I am of course cautious in my optimism, but I really need an A4 solution. At least believing that I will get my hands on it in a year or a bit more will surely have positive effect on my psyche.

As for the E Ink Corp., I would say that they have been quite honest about what they offer. You cannot blame them that not everyone who has purchased a product with their screen did not know about the slow refresh rate in advance. There are many reasons for that, such as the seller not putting the information in the product description, even a manufacturer of the particular device not doing that (do not know whether Sony did that), etc. There are many points where the information could be lost, if it really was lost, and it is probable that those not in knowledge of the fact did not do read much reviews on the device.

[NatCh]

Note: I apologize for repeating some of what Wizard-mag just said, but I started writing before he posted, and I don't feel like re-writing, 'cause I'm lazy.

Originally Posted by bowerbird

> the problem there is that you can't really demand true innovation

of course not. but _we_ can be smart about making ourselves dependent (or not) on "innovation" that hasn't yet developed to the point where it is actually usable...

we can be smart about continuing to pursue other options, on a just-in-case basis.

Ah, I must have misunderstood what you meant by "... demand some _real_ results ...."

Originally Posted by bowerbird

as for being "up-front" about the refresh rates, why were so many people surprised?

Possibly because they weren't paying attention? Keep in mind that E-Ink, Inc. has not been marketing any consumer products. The Press Releases on their site are a pretty good indication of what E-Ink has actually said.

Originally Posted by bowerbird

sure, e-ink said "this isn't fast enough that it could be used for video...", but that's a far cry from telling us that it will take a half-second or more to display each page.

Their press releases usually mention the refresh issue. When I first became aware of it some years ago I believe that the 4 gray-level monochrome was taking 2 seconds to refresh. E-Ink really isn't to blame for the ... glossing over of those who are making end consumer products. I don't think they are responsible, anyway.

Incidentally, they've recently demoed a color version that is almost good enough for video playback, and they're still saying ~2 years on the commercial viability for that tech.

Originally Posted by bowerbird

furthermore, in programming my own e-book applications, i've been well aware that one of the ways that people actually _use_ books is to thumb through pages quickly, so i have taken pride in the fact that my apps can rip through 5-15 pages per second. and i've used that capability enough to know that it would be painful to live without it. does e-ink inc. not _realize_ slowness is a huge disadvantage? or just not telling us?

Again, E-Ink, Inc. is not making any reading devices of any kind, they make display tech -- others have decided that it's good enough for this or that application. And they're certainly not responsible for the software that drives a given reading device!

Personally, I happen to find a 1 second page turn adequate for my reading purposes. But that's something each user will have to decide for themselves. I'm also not trying to flip through pages to find references, but rather just reading fiction one page at a time, which is what the current crop of e-ink readers are designed for, and in my view, do quite well. The fact that they don't do things well that they weren't designed for is a bit like being upset with GE because their toaster doesn't make coffee -- actually, it's like being upset with the folks who make GE's toaster heating elements because toasters don't make coffee.

If the current crop of readers doesn't do what you need, all it means is that they're not what you're looking for, not that they've been over-hyped by the display manufacturer.

Originally Posted by bowerbird

again, i'm not faulting e-ink for failing to materialize.

As a nit-picky detail, this thread was originally addressed to Plastic Logic's version of electronic paper, which isn't e-ink.

Originally Posted by bowerbird

sometimes things do take time. and for the first few years of their promises, i didn't even fault them for making them. after all, if you think you can solve the problems in "a couple years", then _say_that_.

It seems to me that's more or less what E-Ink, Inc. has done, I can't really speak to Plastic Logic, as I haven't been following them for nearly as long, nor as closely.

Originally Posted by bowerbird

but after you've been saying "a couple years" for _eight_years_straight_, then i think you've gotta come clean and tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. that's not "radical transparency", it's just common human decency...

Plastic Logic has only been around since 2000, so it's only got 7 years under its belt, I haven't followed them all that closely, and their Press Releases only go back a to 2006, so I really have no idea what they've promised when for how long in the future.

As far as your main point that these corporate PR predictions should be taken well salted until they actually materialize (and often for some time afterward), with that I agree unreservedly.

[bowerbird]

i suppose everyone can believe whatever they want. i know that's what i do... :+)

-bowerbird

[NatCh]

There's another point of agreement for us, bowerbird.

[GregS]

Could I point out that it is apparently working, and that the nature of being plastic based rather than rigid and class protected has major manufacturing consequences.

A flexible material is inherently easier to produce quickly. Plastics are amongst the easiest materials to deal with in any manufacturing process.

The most expensive part may well be the processing component. A4 with current technology (glass and rigid) would have to become much heavier proportionally as the glass would have to be thicker (for rigidity) to compensate for the fragility of its greater area (I would assume, I would also guess that glass would become proportionally a greater components of overall weight even it became no thicker - there is just more of it).

I would suggest that even if it had a very slow refresh rate, that it may be cheap enough to have two page combinations. Anyhow, it looks good to me at least.

[NatCh]

Originally Posted by GregS

A flexible material is inherently easier to produce quickly. Plastics are amongst the easiest materials to deal with in any manufacturing process.

I'd agree with you, but I think I'm remembering that this is actually manufactured on a rigid substrate and then peeled off it. One of the flexible ones is done that way, but I'm not sure this is the one ... too much stuff to really keep straight.

Anyway, I'm not sure what, if any, impact that would have on the manufacturing costs, so I'm just throwing it out there for discussion.