Dedicated E-Readers: They're History

[BenLee]

Originally Posted by DJHARKAVY

Well, for one, not all LCD is like your computer monitor. Reflective LCD has no backlight and has similar (measurements say superior) contrast to e-ink. And it is the backlit display that tires your eyes.

YMMV.

Yea, I think the newer screen technologies will eventually overtake e-ink if they can supply color and remove the backlit display part that wears your eyes out.

[BenLee]

Originally Posted by LDBoblo

That or past experience with poor LCDs and poor font rendering, which could very well be discouraging to almost anyone.

I have read considerable numbers of ebooks on my computer and yes, the experience was not pleasant when compared to reading on an e-ink device.

[Maggie Leung]

Originally Posted by BenLee

I think it's great that you can read for sustained periods with LCD screens.

I don't think you're in the majority however. Many people complained about NOT reading ebooks a few years ago because they don't like staring at a computer. LCD screens haven't changed much. They still wear your eyes out.

I like iPads too, but I'm not going to deny that e-ink is superior for looking at for long periods of time.

I don't presume to speak for others, which is why all my statements about iPad are written in first-person, rather than as generalizations. Some e-ink fans do not acknowledge the distinction between preference and facts.

[BenLee]

Originally Posted by Maggie Leung

I don't presume to speak for others, which is why all my statements about iPad are written in first-person, rather than as generalizations. Some e-ink fans do not acknowledge the distinction between preference and facts.

It's not a fact of course that e-ink is superior to LCD because it's easier on the eyes. That's my opinion, and I believe the opinion of many people who've tried both. That's why people market the e-ink devices as e-ink. Because people associate ink with paper and therefore less eye strain. Check out the Nook copy on their site: "The most advanced E ink® Vizplex™ electronic paper display reads like the printed page." I don't think iPads are using the same selling point with LCD and for a good reason. It would be ridiculous!

[Maggie Leung]

Originally Posted by BenLee

It's not a fact of course that e-ink is superior to LCD because it's easier on the eyes. That's my opinion, and I believe the opinion of many people who've tried both. That's why people market the e-ink devices as e-ink. Because people associate ink with paper and therefore less eye strain. Check out the Nook copy on their site: "The most advanced E ink® Vizplex™ electronic paper display reads like the printed page." I don't think iPads are using the same selling point with LCD and for a good reason. It would be ridiculous!

I don't doubt your opinion. I figure each reader has preferences and can speak for himself. Some e-ink fans and iPad fans have a hard time accepting that their preferences (and eyesight problems) don't apply to everyone else.

[BenLee]

Originally Posted by Maggie Leung

I don't doubt your opinion. I figure each reader has preferences and can speak for himself. Some e-ink fans and iPad fans have a hard time accepting that their preferences (and eyesight problems) don't apply to everyone else.

hahaha. ok

Maybe we need a poll or something

[kjk]

Originally Posted by BenLee

I think it's great that you can read for sustained periods with LCD screens.

I don't think you're in the majority however. Many people complained about NOT reading ebooks a few years ago because they don't like staring at a computer. LCD screens haven't changed much. They still wear your eyes out.

I like iPads too, but I'm not going to deny that e-ink is superior for looking at for long periods of time.

Actually, LCD screens have changed from a few years ago, especially in the mobile device category. We are a long way from the old flickering florescent backlit low res screens that were common before.

And, "They still wear your eyes out" is just subjective-and not borne out by any scientific studies I've seen. LED backlit, IPS LCDs have not been extensively tested for "eye wear out" as far as I know.


Like others, I'm pretty tired of the eInk vs. LCD battles-there is a huge difference between "personal preference", which everyone can hopefully respect, and blanket "it should be obvious to everyone that x is better than y" statements, which have no basis in fact..or rather any facts that I've seen backed by evidence other than anecdotal.

And yes, I realize that some people just cannot read on LCD screens, and get headaches, etc. Everyone has different tolerance levels, I'm sure. I'm just saying that the scientific research on it is inconclusive:

http://articles.latimes.com/2010/jan...29-2010jan29/2

A perhaps more dubious strike against the iPad is that the light from its screen could put strain on users' eyes after prolonged periods of use. Electronic ink, which was created to mimic the visual properties of a printed page, has been praised by critics and consumers as being more eye-friendly.

But the science does not yet support the idea that backlit digital displays are bad for your eyes, said Ivan Schwab, a professor of ophthalmology at UC Davis.

The idea that computer screens cause eyestrain "is more hearsay and anecdotal," he said. "I don't think the screen is any more toxic to the eye."

One thing that DOES puzzle me though; if the eInk manufacturers are convinced there are obvious, testable. scientific health/eye strain advantages to eInk displays...where are the formal studies to back it up? Amazon definitely has the resources to make it happen, and I'm surprised they haven't done something of the sort, just for the potentially huge marketing advantage.

Of course, maybe they are hard at work on that research right now ;p

[LDBoblo]

Originally Posted by kjk

One thing that DOES puzzle me though; if the eInk manufacturers are convinced there are obvious, testable. scientific health/eye strain advantages to eInk displays...where are the formal studies to back it up? Amazon definitely has the resources to make it happen, and I'm surprised they haven't done something of the sort, just for the potentially huge marketing advantage.

Of course, maybe they are hard at work on that research right now ;p

Those tests would indeed take quite a bit of time to put together, and there may well be studies underway (and if not, they might get a boost now that emissives could steal a little thunder), but given the success of the marketing as it feeds off long-held feelings about emissive displays and years and years of awful habits, I'm not sure they've considered it a high priority.

Then in communities like this, people tend to insulate and justify their personal opinion by imagining a majority that agrees with them. Add an extra buffer of confirmation bias checking out all the pro-E-Ink reviews and rants, and you get a belief that's quite hard to shake with things as trivial as facts.

[BenLee]

Originally Posted by LDBoblo

Then in communities like this, people tend to insulate and justify their personal opinion by imagining a majority that agrees with them. Add an extra buffer of confirmation bias checking out all the pro-E-Ink reviews and rants, and you get a belief that's quite hard to shake with things as trivial as facts.

I'm not opposed to LCD. Maybe you could be right, LCD is in fact better for your eyes than e-ink and most people prefer LCD for long sustained reading. Doesn't seem likely, but who knows. Could be true.

[cfrizz]

I do 99% of my reading on my pc's LCD screen. My eyes are fine, it's my butt that gets sore from sitting for hours!

[Maggie Leung]

Originally Posted by BenLee

I'm not opposed to LCD. Maybe you could be right, LCD is in fact better for your eyes than e-ink and most people prefer LCD for long sustained reading. Doesn't seem likely, but who knows. Could be true.

To me, it doesn't matter what "most" people prefer, unless it affects my ability to get the product I want (if they stopped selling my favored product, for instance). When I buy a product, all it has to do is please me, not others.

Added: Dunno why there's a frowning icon on my post, but I didn't put it there on purpose.

[sabredog]

Originally Posted by BenLee

Maybe you could be right, LCD is in fact better for your eyes than e-ink and most people prefer LCD for long sustained reading. Doesn't seem likely, but who knows. Could be true.

Love to see scientific evidence on that. I know from personal experience that e-ink is far more a comfortable experience than reading from an LCD screen.

[Maggie Leung]

Originally Posted by sabredog

Love to see scientific evidence on that. I know from personal experience that e-ink is far more a comfortable experience than reading from an LCD screen.

If you know what's comfortable for you, isn't that what matters? Would scientific evidence help? If 99 out of 100 people found LCD or e-ink better, why would the 100th person go against his own reading experience?

[BenLee]

Originally Posted by Maggie Leung

If you know what's comfortable for you, isn't that what matters? Would scientific evidence help? If 99 out of 100 people found LCD or e-ink better, why would the 100th person go against his own reading experience?

That's a good point. I think it ultimately just comes down to what you personally like and what's out on the market. But the scientific evidence would be interesting just to know which screen is potentially doing more harm to my eyes. It could turn out that e-ink, for whatever reason, is slowly damaging my eyes over time. Science doesn't always give the answers we'd like.

[sabredog]

Originally Posted by Maggie Leung

If you know what's comfortable for you, isn't that what matters? Would scientific evidence help? If 99 out of 100 people found LCD or e-ink better, why would the 100th person go against his own reading experience?

Strewth, it does not matter to my choice of reader display at all.

However I like to be informed, so I asked the question of BenLee. If wanting to be informed about such matters is not the right thing, then I apologise.