The Sony Reader will be outdated in 10 years

[NatCh]

Ah, I see what you're saying now. Try Walgreens, they usually have the FM scan-tuning variety for $5~$10 (did last time I looked, anyway).

[Aprilbeginnings]

We looked everywhere, plus he wanted something that sounded good. He found a few online, but what he really went out and did was go to the antique stores and buy one used..... and pray it worked, LOL.....

[NatCh]

That's funny. I'm glad he found what he was after.

Okay, that's it for me -- off to eat some turkeys!

[Bob Russell]

I have fond memories of the old transister radios that bragged about the fact on the case! Some of them had really nice metal cases and were really sturdy. Not like the light, plastic that we see on cases these days. More practical and cost effective, but sometimes I miss the old feel.

I suspect that we may feel that way in 10 years about the Sony Reader. We'll miss the solid feel of the Reader, and future e-ink reader models may never have the same solid feel again.

I've often noticed that early models of a new product category are a bit over-engineered, and it's only after the initial model that we start to see cheaper cases and parts used. Probably because the focus shifts from making a product that works, to squeezing out the most cost and production efficiencies possible.

[tcv]

Originally Posted by Bob Russell

My gosh, I certainly hope the Sony Reader will be outdated in less than 10 years. If it takes that long, what would that say about future Sony devices and all the other potential new devices we hope to see? We are surely hoping for progress faster than that!

I agree! 10 years seems an awfully long time for any device. But I suppose when you measure it against, paper, then 10 years is microscopic.

In any case, I had been thinking about my own adoption of e-devices. In my first decade (1970-1980), there really wasn't much electronic-readable available to the average household. But this has exploded since then.

I am visiting with my parents this week and even though each of them have their own computers, they read the newspaper every morning. Me? I get my laptop and read RSS feeds and I get the same information they do.

This is the kind of adoption I think you'll see with ebook readers, but it's going to take a long time, I think.

Originally Posted by ultim8fury

I've just read the article and I'm amused by the two examples of unchanging technology he quotes.

Heh. In this, the writer reminds me of George Costanza who pontificated that tissue paper hadn't changed in a thousand years. Jerry and Elaine pointed out how it has changed..

[yvanleterrible]

Originally Posted by Bob Russell

I have fond memories of the old transister radios that bragged about the fact on the case! Some of them had really nice metal cases and were really sturdy. Not like the light, plastic that we see on cases these days. More practical and cost effective, but sometimes I miss the old feel.

I suspect that we may feel that way in 10 years about the Sony Reader. We'll miss the solid feel of the Reader, and future e-ink reader models may never have the same solid feel again.

I've often noticed that early models of a new product category are a bit over-engineered, and it's only after the initial model that we start to see cheaper cases and parts used. Probably because the focus shifts from making a product that works, to squeezing out the most cost and production efficiencies possible.

If we go back to the first news of eink, the pictures accompanying the news show a flexible plastic sheet. This is the future of readers. A standard size will exist for every format of publication. News papers will share one size, novels an other etc. These readers will be cheap and reusable. The challenge now is to miniaturize computing power and data input sockets to a smaller size proportionnal with the sheet's thickness. That is one step not necessarily in line with novel readers but with the true meaning of e-ink.

[jæd]

Originally Posted by yvanleterrible

The challenge now is to miniaturize computing power and data input sockets...

Why not just have everything done wirelessly, including the power...?

[NatCh]

Inductive-coupling charging? Nice idea.

[HarryT]

If it works . As a physicist, I have major problems with the idea. I'd like to learn more than has been published about it in the popular press. Nice though it would it be, I'm not going to hold my breath!

Cheers,

Harry.

[NatCh]

It worked fine for my Sonicare Toothbrush when I had it.

It's basically a transformer, with the two parts seperatable -- half in the charger, half in the chargee.

[HarryT]

What some jolly clever chaps at MIT are talking about now, though, is broadcasting power over distances over several metres using "coupled resonance". Basically the idea is that you have a transmitter and a receiver which resonate at the same RF frequency. They claim that power stored in the transmitter will "tunnel" to the receiver via some type of quantum coupling effect. That's what I have issues with - great if it works (wireless charging of laptop PCs, for example) but I have severe doubts about it from a purely theoretical viewpoint. I hope I'm wrong .

Regards,

Harry.

[Alexander Turcic]

Originally Posted by NatCh

Inductive-coupling charging? Nice idea.

Check out this older post of mine on Splashpower: https://www.mobileread.com/forums/sho...?threadid=3163

[yvanleterrible]

Broadcasting power would surely not be permitted by the FCC. The other concept NatCh describes is called induction, but parts for it are still quite large and I don't know how it would interfere with the display processes of eink. Some electric cars that I've tried had such a system to recharge batteries, no electrocution possible. It really is a clever process.

As for wireless acquisition of data, great where you can get it, but you will need some access to prerecorded data in remote areas, flash memory is still a necessity. On board flash with induction type transmission? Imagine putting a document next to your computer and they update all by themselves, but don't forget your unsecured book by your neighbor's! Then again a reader would still be slave to a computer. The real challenge is to make it independant.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by yvanleterrible

Broadcasting power would surely not be permitted by the FCC.

You can't practically broadcast power - you're killed by the inverse square law - you need to transmit massive amounts of power for even a tiny amount to be picked up by a receiver.

The point of this MIT idea is that the power isn't being "broadcast", but instead directly transferred from the transmitter to the receiver (which are linked by "resonance coupling") via some kind of "quantum tunnelling" effect. Their claim is that it should work over a range of several metres, and be highly efficient.

It would be great if it ever came to fruition as a practical concept. They're just talking theory at present.

[yvanleterrible]

Originally Posted by HarryT

You can't practically broadcast power - you're killed by the inverse square law - you need to transmit massive amounts of power for even a tiny amount to be picked up by a receiver.

The point of this MIT idea is that the power isn't being "broadcast", but instead directly transferred from the transmitter to the receiver (which are linked by "resonance coupling") via some kind of "quantum tunnelling" effect. Their claim is that it should work over a range of several metres, and be highly efficient.

It would be great if it ever came to fruition as a practical concept. They're just talking theory at present.

Would that mean that they would have to transmit in a closed or controlled channel? Linear like laser? Or diffuse like waves?