Touch-screen non-eInk readers?

[rogue_ronin]

Originally Posted by nrapallo

If it's backlit and has color, I'll buy one too...

Oh yeah! Backlit, color, touch-screen, wifi, bluetooth, usb, SD, standard headphone jack, mike jack, minimal-functional-fast OS.

I'd mimic palmOS apps (Memos, Calendar, To-Do, Address) because I need something that syncs, add a Sketchpad w/alarms, add an FBreader that handled bookmarks, tables and CSS. Decent on-screen keyboard, or handwriting recognition. Screen Rotation! Auto-Bluetooth pairing. Good network manager (like WICD.) Good movie player, good music player. Guess I'd add a good browser (Tear?) and email client. And I'd be done. Well, maybe a PDF reader, although I dislike PDFs. I'm not a game person, beyond FreeCell.

The Smart Q7 could actually accomplish most of this, if the manufacturers would hire some decent programmers. The hardest part of all this, oddly, seems to be making decent PIM applications. GPE really doesn't work, is awkward to use and is a b**ch to sync. There are a couple of other suites, but they're incomplete and also a b**ch to sync.

It's strange to me, because all the pieces are there!

• PIM: Palm, like 15 years ago developed simple, useful apps. No one has cloned them! Why? Why do frickin' engineers always seem to make the interfaces. Have you ever tried to use Evolution? Gah! And GPE has no energy in its team. That said, OSMO looks good, but doesn't sync or allow individual entries for appointments. And without screen rotation, it doesn't fit properly on the Q7, or any machine that insists on wide-screen.
• Sketchpad: Ancient Palm apps: BugMe, Diddlebug. I can get alarms, I can get paint programs -- I cannot get the two combined. Have you ever used such a thing? It is so dang useful. It's one of the few things that keep me using my d**ned Treo. (see syncing, above.)
• FBReader: nearly there, but focus has shifted to the Java port. I expect it to die the death. Bookmarks, tables and CSS have been in the works for what seems like years.
• Keyboard: Nokia 770 onscreen keyboard is decent, but there are better models out there (things like CellWriter, or hex keyboards.) Even the Q7 keyboard is laid-out alright, but blocks the apps! There's no reason it shouldn't float over the app, and be translucent and movable.
• Movies: mplayer port for the Nokia 770 is fast, accurate and excellent. The Nokia doesn't have the video hardware that the Q7 has -- but no one has made any tweaks to use it. Imagine how good it could be!
• Music: MPD works great. Sonata is my favorite front-end. Pretty light resources, too. Already on the Q7. As a bonus, it's network aware.
• Browser: Tear is supposed to be great. Dillo would be great if the developers would stop being complete geeks. Midori is alright, and the Q7 has flash enabled (kludgeishly.)
• Email: well, I use gmail, so I could lose this. But claws is supposed to be excellent.
• Screen rotation. Available for years. Disabled on the Q7.
• WICD is the default network manager on the Q7, works well.
• epdfview is about the lightest PDF viewer, next to xpdf -- but neither work too well without a keyboard that includes Fn keys.

I think I get worked up like this because it's all possible -- but folks who can make it work, don't. Look at something like the gnome network manager being used on Mer. GNOME! On machines that have 128 MB of memory (at best.) I'm not dogging on the Mer guys, they're doing awesome stuff with little resources. And I'm sure that it'll all work in a few months -- they're doing smart things like using a smaller X server, etc. It's just -- I don't get why people keep making the same mistakes over and over again. So many competent, capable people... How can you build a Q7, then not make it work properly? Or make a beautiful little machine like the Nokia 770 and then abandon it, never letting it work to it's potential?

Okay, rant over. I know why it happens, and so do you.

My Q7 should be working when I get back to Honolulu -- I'll try to overcome all this stuff by reading Mr. Google and solving whatever I can. But I can't develop apps, so I will never have the whuffie to get people to change stuff.

m a r

[bjkel]

I was reading the faqs section of the Jetbook, here is some of their reasoning:

Why doesn't jetBook have a touch screen display? Touch screen panels dramatically reduce the purity of an image. It blurs letters and puts stress on the eyes causing fatigue. This is the main reason why we did not use a touch screen.

Why is there no backlight in jetBook? We deliberately removed the backlight from jetBook's original specification after a lengthy consultation with ophthalmologists in the US. We were advised that if we wanted to make jetBook closer in experience to a regular book, we should not use any backlight. Similar to the fatigue that comes with computer monitors, if you read by looking at a source of light your eyes get tired within 1-2 hours and you need a longer period of rest to recover. Just like a regular printed-paper book, with jetBook you read in reflected light so the eyes do not get tired (if you get tired just switch the font to a larger size and you may continue to enjoy reading). This is the main reason why the backlight was not implemented.


I have been reading for years on lcd screens, originally on a Dell Axim and I have never had these problems mentioned. Personally I think people have problems with the backlight because they leave it up too high, I tend to have mine pretty low and off colour background, not glaring white. But what can ya do? The experts have spoken.

@rogue_ronin Yeah, I'm not sure about Mer. I was wrapped to be able to get Alreader working on WinCE. It's the best ereading program I have tried, and I've tried a few.

[rogue_ronin]

Originally Posted by bjkel

Why doesn't jetBook have a touch screen display? Touch screen panels dramatically reduce the purity of an image. It blurs letters and puts stress on the eyes causing fatigue. This is the main reason why we did not use a touch screen.

Why is there no backlight in jetBook? We deliberately removed the backlight from jetBook's original specification after a lengthy consultation with ophthalmologists in the US. We were advised that if we wanted to make jetBook closer in experience to a regular book, we should not use any backlight. Similar to the fatigue that comes with computer monitors, if you read by looking at a source of light your eyes get tired within 1-2 hours and you need a longer period of rest to recover. Just like a regular printed-paper book, with jetBook you read in reflected light so the eyes do not get tired (if you get tired just switch the font to a larger size and you may continue to enjoy reading). This is the main reason why the backlight was not implemented.


I have been reading for years on lcd screens, originally on a Dell Axim and I have never had these problems mentioned. Personally I think people have problems with the backlight because they leave it up too high, I tend to have mine pretty low and off colour background, not glaring white. But what can ya do? The experts have spoken.

Yeah, that FAQ quote is a bunch of weaseling about why they wanted to use the cheapest possible components. I agree with you about LCDs -- it's mostly the backlight, and mostly the fact that most backlights were fluorescent. Fluorescent light hurts. But it's cheap!

Ophthalmologists, my ass.

JetBook gets a lot right. It's definitely a superior device. They're working on their firmware constantly. But if they did just a little bit more, and without excuses, they'd go over the top in a big way.

For instance, with a touch-screen, they don't need that silly side-keyboard. The buttons could do with a good redesign, as well. There's more. Lots more. Oh, my brain is full of more!



m a r

[Sweetpea]

Originally Posted by bjkel

I was reading the faqs section of the Jetbook, here is some of their reasoning:

Why doesn't jetBook have a touch screen display? Touch screen panels dramatically reduce the purity of an image. It blurs letters and puts stress on the eyes causing fatigue. This is the main reason why we did not use a touch screen.

Why is there no backlight in jetBook? We deliberately removed the backlight from jetBook's original specification after a lengthy consultation with ophthalmologists in the US. We were advised that if we wanted to make jetBook closer in experience to a regular book, we should not use any backlight. Similar to the fatigue that comes with computer monitors, if you read by looking at a source of light your eyes get tired within 1-2 hours and you need a longer period of rest to recover. Just like a regular printed-paper book, with jetBook you read in reflected light so the eyes do not get tired (if you get tired just switch the font to a larger size and you may continue to enjoy reading). This is the main reason why the backlight was not implemented.


I have been reading for years on lcd screens, originally on a Dell Axim and I have never had these problems mentioned. Personally I think people have problems with the backlight because they leave it up too high, I tend to have mine pretty low and off colour background, not glaring white. But what can ya do? The experts have spoken.

When I read in a dark environment (dark bedroom at night for instance), I'll turn the background to black and the letters to white (on my PDA) or gray (on my JE100). I can read for hours that way, if I don't fall asleep halfway...

The light itself isn't causing the fatigue, the overdosis of light is.

Originally Posted by rogue_ronin

Yeah, that FAQ quote is a bunch of weaseling about why they wanted to use the cheapest possible components. I agree with you about LCDs -- it's mostly the backlight, and mostly the fact that most backlights were fluorescent. Fluorescent light hurts. But it's cheap!

Reflective is better than transparent for outside reading. I now have two LCD devices at home. One is transflective (the best of both worlds), the other transparent.

From the faq:

We were advised that if we wanted to make jetBook closer in experience to a regular book, we should not use any backlight.

When I read on my PDA (transflective), and I'm outside on a sunny day, I can turn off the backlight completely. It will make the screen brighter. So, I have the option to turn on the backlight (so I don't need another source of light), or read without the backlight on, and have as they say: an experience closer to that of a regular book.

Problem is, transflective is more expensive than reflective... It also can hold colour and a touchscreen.

[Sweetpea]

Originally Posted by rogue_ronin

That looks good! But it's WinCE... which makes me wince.

Still, I'm not sure that it's a step up from the Q7 -- the Q7 seems to have more memory, and better specs overall. Like most hardware, its main problem is bad software design/integration. And it can use WinCE.

As for the REB1200, well, I remember drooling over it back in the day. Hard to find on eBay, still.

I'm going to have to hit the lottery, and then start a company that makes the things I want. What should I name it? Banana?

m a r

No, TUER (The Ultimate E-Reader)!

It should have that PixelQi screen, or in the least a transflective one. Backlit, coloured, touch. And it should either run a Linux or a WinCE OS! (you should give people a choice, I don't like Linux...)

[rogue_ronin]

Originally Posted by Sweetpea

No, TUER (The Ultimate E-Reader)!

It should have that PixelQi screen, or in the least a transflective one. Backlit, coloured, touch. And it should either run a Linux or a WinCE OS! (you should give people a choice, I don't like Linux...)

I'm fine with having a choice. I like Linux because it's changeable in ways that MS would never permit. But I wouldn't pay for WinCE myself, you'd have to buy it on your own.

And I understand why people don't like Linux, as it tends to not be integrated well enough. Ubuntu is pretty darn good, though.

Hmm, name... How about The Reader's Ultimate Experience? TRUE! Then it would be the TrueReader... 'course, I'm not exactly describing an eBook reader, am I? It's more of a Personal Organizer and Entertainment Manager or somesuch. (Hah! POEM!) If it had OLPC networking, it would rock even harder.

m a r

ps: still waiting on the lottery.