eInk readers dying before they spread?

[Nate the great]

Originally Posted by jboardman

How in the world did you infer that I accused anyone of lying? I just stated my opinion, and I will stick by it. If you ever TRY an e-ink device for any length of time, you will see the difference. I also agree that if an e-ink tablet with web browsing capabilities comes to market, I would be one of the first to jump on it. My Iliad allows me to mark up copy and to take notes, so Irex has already overcome that deficiency. I read for pleasure three or four hours a day - from the NYTimes, USA Today, etc., to novels and easier reading. I could never last that long with an LCD.

I have tried epaper devices, and I've gone back to LCD. This is true for a number of other people here.

[Sonist]

Originally Posted by Nate the great

... This is true for a number of other people here.

A pretty small number, though....

[alecE]

Whilst I can see the appeal of a multi-function device, Im happy to keep the functionalities of mobile, PDA, laptop, netbook & ereader separate (and therefore simpler) - if I lose/break one it's an inconvenience, not a mega-disaster. Now, when I can finally have one charger to charge them all and in the darkness power them...

[rgeorg]

Originally Posted by Sonist

A pretty small number, though....

Probably, outside the MR context there are many, many more people who choose to read ebooks and articles, newpapers, and so on, using LCD devices (dedicated or part of a PC) than use eink. And they continue to do so for excellent reasons...

[worxland]

Originally Posted by rgeorg

Probably, outside the MR context there are many, many more people who choose to read ebooks and articles, newpapers, and so on, using LCD devices (dedicated or part of a PC) than use eink. And they continue to do so for excellent reasons...

And none of those excellent reasons have anything to do with:
-readibility
-battery life: hours vs days
-reading while holding the device in hand: 500-1000 grams vs 150-250 grams
-eye strain

[rgeorg]

I am NOT going to start a rehash of the eink vs LCD argument - but I do recall posts on mobileread complaining about eink readability under some conditions (low-light/sunlight), page flashing & delay, format issues, reading while holding device in hand (button placement) and eye strain from the flashing. Many LCD tablet and reader devices are low-weight and conversely there are eink devices (iRex or Kindle DX for example) that are heavier than 250 gr. Clearly not everyone is as happy and problem/inconvenience-free as you are with eink. And the devices are expensive and very breakable!

--- I'll grant you the battery life point in general. I suppose the value of that depends on how long one is typically away from a wall socket. I suspect that battery life of 8-10 hours is more than enough, unless you purchase it for long-haul travel or camping. Just my opinion.

My point was that taking the sample of people on MobileRead and extrapolating that "only a small number" of people *in general* are content with LCD solutions - is just plain incorrect use of a biased statistical sample. MR forum members are primarily eink device users. Just observe the forum titles and this is clear.

Note that I do not perceive any issue with you stating that YOU prefer eink for the reasons that you list (that apply to your device). That is an entirely different statement, and I respect your opinion.

Also, for the record - I am not saying that eink/LCD is good/bad or generalizing - I just thought that Sonist' post didn't take the MR context into account and that worxland way over-generalized in his reply.

[griffonwing]

Originally Posted by rgeorg

I am NOT going to start a rehash of the eink vs LCD argument - but I do recall posts on mobileread complaining about eink readability under some conditions (low-light/sunlight), page flashing & delay, format issues, reading while holding device in hand (button placement) and eye strain from the flashing. Many LCD tablet and reader devices are low-weight and conversely there are eink devices (iRex or Kindle DX for example) that are heavier than 250 gr. Clearly not everyone is as happy and problem/inconvenience-free as you are with eink. And the devices are expensive and very breakable!

Yes, flashing used to be a very prevalent problem (still quite prevalent in some readers) but the new Epson controller greatly diminishes this now. Used to, the budding controller hadn't really changed, and from what I recall ( i may be incorrect) the controller hadn't changed much since eink was released. "It worked, therefore, we'll use it." It wasn't specifically designed FOR speed, just to work. Epson stepped in and designed a controller to help with these issues, and they've greatly diminished the flash time.

Format issues? How is this different from an eink reader to an LCD reader? This, it would seem to me, is inherent in the format of the book, NOT in the device in which its being read. Unless I am misunderstanding the subject of the "format issues". I assume its format of text.

Similarly, the same goes for button placement. This is all case-design issues, and has no bearing on the underlying eink vs LCD debate or comparison.

The weight. Since the power is used only when changing the screen, it would come to pass that it would not need as large of a battery as an LCD if both units were set up for the same amount of page turns. Granted, you'd have to guage the average time it takes to read a page of text, and extrapolate how many hours worth or battery time one would need to read 8000 pages on an LCD. The battery required would quite hefty in comparison to the eink device.

As for eyestrain. As a majority consensus, reading newsprint is less strenuous on the eyes than reading on a monitor (which refreshes at least 60 times a sec), therefore, eink would be easier to read on than LCD. However, the flash of eink, albiet even on a new reader, might cause some readers eyes to strain a bit. If not a strain, at least a distraction.

Eink vs LCD, if given the same requirement, the eink device would almost always win vs the LCD... this is solely on technicals. As for ones personal requirement, an LCD may very well suit you more, esp if you spend most of your reading, for example, at night in bed, as many people do.

[Teyrnon]

Originally Posted by desertgrandma

Many people (me included) prefer a device that just reads books.

We don't need to play mp3, call, or browse the net.

Don't underestimate the market.

I agree. I already have an mp3 player. I already have a computer to browse the net. What I'm looking for is a device I can comfortably hold in bed, on the couch, or sitting under a tree and just wile away a few hours reading.

Personally I don't care for this one device must do everything stuff. I'd prefer devices with a dedication function that do that function well. Trying to pack every possible function into one device seems like you'd just end up with a device that while having broad capability does nothing excellently.

[Jill74]

Wow! This has been a very informative post! I learn something new today.

[fugazied]

In my humble opinion, I think the next generation of ebook readers (touch screen, color, faster wifi, more storage), will be here soon.

I know the Apple rumors are usually disproved (the latest rumor is early 2010 Apple tablet will be released), but we have seen the technology in the iPhones/iPods and other touch devices. They look incredible and once a touchscreen reader comes out with sufficient battery life and great specs, I think it will wipe the competition out because of it's 'utility'. A device that does everything from music to video to ebooks to internet and games/apps just crushes everything else.

At the rate technology moves, such a device will probably be out within 3-4 years and will eventually incorporate video chat and have all kinds of other interesting uses.

[DoctorOhh]

Those having the LCD vs eInk debate. The eye strain issue is there using any backlit device. Eye strain doesn't take hours to be noticed. One side note to this debate everyone over 45 will eventually come to the conclusion that backlit devices are too much of a pain for pleasure reading. Until that age you may or may not even know what many of us are complaining about.

Of course not all LCD screens are back lit. The Jetbook has a LCD screen that is not back lit and it claims 11500 page turns per charge. Pixel QI is developing screens now that are LCD but not back lit. The OLPC program uses such a screen.

I think any high contrast / non-backlit screen, whether it is LCD, eInk or a yet to be determined screen will be acceptable to the market. Currently it looks like the non backlit LCD screens have the potential to be cheaper and more flexible then their eInk cousins. This flexibility would easily allow multifunction robust readers that would still be the size of current readers or full page tablets (Including color).

I'm looking forward to the next generation devices and the options they'll bring.

[rgeorg]

Originally Posted by griffonwing

Yes, flashing used to be a very prevalent problem (still quite prevalent in some readers) but the new Epson controller greatly diminishes this now. Used to, the budding controller hadn't really changed, and from what I recall ( i may be incorrect) the controller hadn't changed much since eink was released. "It worked, therefore, we'll use it." It wasn't specifically designed FOR speed, just to work. Epson stepped in and designed a controller to help with these issues, and they've greatly diminished the flash time.

Hi griffinwing,
I really enjoy your posts on the Astak thread! "Used to be a problem" is debatable since everyone with an eink reader currently has this problem (should I say "feature?").

The Epson controller does sound promising as far as reducing flash goes (the "non-problem" that the manufacturers are scrambling to cure!) - but I don't think the devices are available yet? Has Robertb posted a video of the new page-turn rate? I think it's only a claim for now. At this point in time it's "6 of one and half-dozen of another" regarding eyestrain LCD vs flashing of eink - a draw(IMHO). How long one reads at a sitting is also relevant - I read <1hour in general. For lucky others who have hours-and-hours to read at a sitting, eink may make more sense.

Other issues being more-or-less even as you point out, and we are left with expensive, breakable and single-purpose. I'm referring to the $200-$500 offerings, although prices seem to be dropping fast. I'm just pointing out that:

1. It's not necessarily true (and definitely not proven) that "many more" people use/prefer - and are willing to pay the premium for - eink over LCD.

2. The perceived advantages of eink over LCD are not clear (at least not to me), and certainly not trouble/issue-free. I grant you that this is a debatable issue - OK?

3. Ebook readers in general are relatively expensive when compared to other PMP devices (such as mp3 players). This must change.

This is an interesting discussion that is probably a waste of time as new models and technology are expected to be available in the coming 6-12 months which will totally change the discussion parameters.

[Sonist]

Originally Posted by rgeorg

...
Other issues being more-or-less even as you point out, and we are left with expensive, breakable and single-purpose. I'm referring to the $200-$500 offerings, although prices seem to be dropping fast. I'm just pointing out that:

1. It's not necessarily true (and definitely not proven) that "many more" people use/prefer - and are willing to pay the premium for - eink over LCD.

2. The perceived advantages of eink over LCD are not clear ....

You are mixing "affordability" and "preference" here, which might be the wrong way of looking at this. Because as current tech gets cheaper, better stuff comes out, which is still "too expensive."

It used to be, that LCDs were more expensive than tubes, and many had all sorts of reasons why they bought tubes, instead of LCD.

But LCDs were much better than tubes, as far as eye strain went, and once LCD prices drooped, you stopped hearing about how great tubes are.

For me, there is no contest between backlit and e-ink. Back-lit tires my eyes over long periods more than e-ink, period.

And it makes sense from a tech standpoint: the backlight usually has some frequency, and your eyes register it, even if you are not aware of it. Look to the side of your backlit monitor, and if you are like most people, you will see a bit of flicker from the monitor in your peripheral vision. Over a long period of time, this flicker will cause you some eye-strain.

But if you are fine with LCD, that's fine, for you. Many were fine with tubes, and many were fine with those green monochrome monitors from decades ago. But that's not the point, really.

As far as new tech, yep, it's coming. And it's coming. And it will keep coming.

I am sure in a few years there will be something to replace LCD and e-ink, be it OLED or whatever. But then the year after that will bring something even more exciting.

I'd wait for a month or two to see what the large-screen Sony unit brings, or until Fall, to see if the flexi screens will pan out. But at some point, you either jump and enjoy what's available, or you just sit paralyzed by the news of the next breakthrough, which is just around the corner.... :-)

[rgeorg]

Originally Posted by Sonist

You are mixing "affordability" and "preference" here, which might be the wrong way of looking at this. Because as current tech gets cheaper, better stuff comes out, which is still "too expensive."

But if you are fine with LCD, that's fine, for you. Many were fine with tubes, and many were fine with those green monochrome monitors from decades ago. But that's not the point, really.

I'd wait for a month or two to see what the large-screen Sony unit brings, or until Fall, to see if the flexi screens will pan out. But at some point, you either jump and enjoy what's available, or you just sit paralyzed by the news of the next breakthrough, which is just around the corner.... :-)

Slightly snarky, huh?!

No, that's not the point. The point was that a poster stated a generalization regarding eink vs LCD based on a sample of people from MR - which I simply pointed out was not an unbiased statistical sample. As you exemplify.

Waiting for the downward trend on the price-curve of new technology is considered wise by some.....particularly when it is expected within a few months. But individual spending habits differ.

Again, I stress that it up to individual tolerance and finances - not necessarily "paralysis" as you so smugly state.

[Lemurion]

Originally Posted by rgeorg

Hi griffinwing,
I really enjoy your posts on the Astak thread! "Used to be a problem" is debatable since everyone with an eink reader currently has this problem (should I say "feature?").

The Epson controller does sound promising as far as reducing flash goes (the "non-problem" that the manufacturers are scrambling to cure!) - but I don't think the devices are available yet? Has Robertb posted a video of the new page-turn rate? I think it's only a claim for now. At this point in time it's "6 of one and half-dozen of another" regarding eyestrain LCD vs flashing of eink - a draw(IMHO). How long one reads at a sitting is also relevant - I read <1hour in general. For lucky others who have hours-and-hours to read at a sitting, eink may make more sense.

Other issues being more-or-less even as you point out, and we are left with expensive, breakable and single-purpose. I'm referring to the $200-$500 offerings, although prices seem to be dropping fast. I'm just pointing out that:

1. It's not necessarily true (and definitely not proven) that "many more" people use/prefer - and are willing to pay the premium for - eink over LCD.

2. The perceived advantages of eink over LCD are not clear (at least not to me), and certainly not trouble/issue-free. I grant you that this is a debatable issue - OK?

3. Ebook readers in general are relatively expensive when compared to other PMP devices (such as mp3 players). This must change.

This is an interesting discussion that is probably a waste of time as new models and technology are expected to be available in the coming 6-12 months which will totally change the discussion parameters.

The price premium for eink devices over multi-function devices such as PMPs is not solely due to the display technology, display size also plays a part in it. The screens on most PMPs are just too small to read comfortably on. I have two PDAs, and the 3.5" screen on the iPaq is the smallest screen I can comfortably read on - I've tried using the screen on my phone, but it's just too small for any length of time.

All else being equal, Readers are always going to be more expensive than most PMPs because the screens are larger. Yes they will get cheaper, but unless people are willing to accept much smaller screens they won't get as cheap as budget PMPs.

As to advantages: both eink and LCD have real advantages over each other. Eink's greater battery life is a real advantage, not simply perceived, as is LCD's ability to display color.

Now which advantages are more important to you as a reader may be a different question - but eink has real advantages.

I will say this: I've been reading on eink for a month - and had portable LCD for four years - and I find eink much better. I'm not opposed to LCD - but I don't consider current LCDs to be as good for reading as eink.