$13 eReader?

[murraypaul]

Originally Posted by fjtorres

Priced the same as more capable readers that accessed better ebookstores.

Does anyone actually know the price yet?

[beachwanderer]

Originally Posted by murraypaul

Does anyone actually know the price yet?

No. Apparently txtr is still in negotiations about the distribution. So we'll all have to wait.

[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by murraypaul

Does anyone actually know the price yet?

I *was* talking about the iRiver there. (Just in case.)

[TechniSol]

How does anyone figure that selling a device that costs $60 to make, for $13 subsidized to people who don't often read and therefore won't buy many ebooks through the subsidizer will make them money? Perhaps, it is the only way for them to get in the game and make money from a new revenue source? Wouldn't it probably make more sense for carriers to commission a phone with an LCD on one side and an e-ink display on the other side behind a piece of gorilla glass sharing the same battery and processor with just the display driver and display as overhead? Heck, we already have phones with 4.3" to 5" displays. Unless they can produce these for much less than the cost of a typical e-ink display I really can't see the sense of it beyond the "but, it's the latest gimmick crowd!"

[Quexos]

Sorry, cannot stop seeing it as a crippled reader because that's exactly what it is. Also why would I waste time taking a "cheap" device to the beach or on a daytrip when I can take a much better up-to-date one and enjoy it ?
I'm one of those weirdos that wants more technology, not less

Originally Posted by CommonReader

I do not quite understand the extreme negativity toward this device. Obviously a lot will depend on the actual price and any sort of other pitfalls. However, once you stop seeing it as a crippled ebook reader but as an accessory for a smartphone it does make a lot of sense. A cheap device you can take into the bath tub, to the beach or on a daytrip without having to worry about it too much.

Not my problem, as a user I want to have all my books in my device. Why would I cripple myself with a 5 books only reader. Out of sympathy for the manufacturer and his "legal reasons" ?

Originally Posted by CommonReader

I guess that the limitation to five books at a time may have legal rather than technical reasons.

I do. First I don't have a smartphone cause I don't need it so I won't spend 3 or 4 hundred euros just to be able to use a 10 euros device and second, why would I want to carry both a smartphone and a reader to read ? I can do this by carrying an up-to-date reader and nothing else.

Originally Posted by CommonReader

Who cares about the 5 books limit if you have your books on your smartphone and you can change them on the device whenever it's required?

So Dear Germans, until you get serious about e-reading hardware, please stick to what you do best: Cars ...
Thank you

[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by Quexos

So Dear Germans, until you get serious about e-reading hardware, please stick to what you do best: Cars ...
Thank you

Have you seen recent car reliability ratings?

[BillSmithBooks]

I think the appeal is rock bottom pricing, same as for generic MP3 players -- I know I wouldn't be nearly as distraught at losing/destroying a $20 MP3 player than I would be if it is was a $200 IPod.

I think there is a HUGE market for cheap, "disposable" ereaders when done properly.

[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by BillSmithBooks

I think there is a HUGE market for cheap, "disposable" ereaders when done properly.

If done properly, yes.
We're not far from it, either; we'll probably see a $49 *new* Reader sometime this year with WiFi and rechargeable batteries (and no subsidy gimmicks) so a $29 blisterpack reader designed for AAA batteries should be doable by next summer. No Wifi, minimal Storage. If they use the new 4.3in screens the thing might fit in airport vending machines.

[Elfwreck]

Originally Posted by BillSmithBooks

I think the appeal is rock bottom pricing, same as for generic MP3 players -- I know I wouldn't be nearly as distraught at losing/destroying a $20 MP3 player than I would be if it is was a $200 IPod.

I think there is a HUGE market for cheap, "disposable" ereaders when done properly.

Cheap, generic MP3 players don't require special software to use, and aren't limited to 5 song at a time. (Nor 5 albums at a time, if that's more equivalent.)

They will play any .mp3, and usually .wmv and .ogg files; no special conversion necessary. And they function as flash drives; they'll also carry non-music files.

A basic ereader that had the processing capacity and file support of the Clie I used five years ago, with an e-ink screen and today's battery life and internal storage ability, would indeed cover a huge market niche. This isn't that.

[BillSmithBooks]

Elfwreck:

Complete agreement with you, the Beagle is definitely not what the market is looking for.

But a small, compact generic ebookreader, in the same tradition as today's generic MP3 players? That could be cool and relatively simple:

Probably linux based that can read epub and mobi, with a card slot, running on replaceable AA batteries and a small eink screen, in the $40 range now, dropping to $20-25 in a couple of years as the tech matures and costs go down...perhaps partnered with a prominent indie retailer (I'm looking at you, Smashwords or Baen ) ... I really think that would be a hot commodity and cheap enough that it would open up ebooks to a lot of people who would never consider a dedicated ereader, even at the lowish current $69 Kindle price.

[charmian]

I think it's only a matter of time until the low-end Kindle is under $50.

I wonder if the txtr folks might not have been onto something there about an e-reader as peripheral to a cell phone, though. If the e-reader was reduced to just a screen and the processor duties offloaded to another device, then it would indeed become cheaper. However, having it as an independent device reduces its utility.

But, what if it were like a cover that attached to a tablet and got its power and processing from it? I have no idea how feasible this is, but something like an iPad cover with an e-ink screen would be useful to some, I think.

[fjtorres]

Cellphone peripherals/second screens has been tried before.
So far it has always ended up poorly whether we talk of the Plam Foleo or the Motorola Lapdock.

The whole selling point of smartphones is that you already carry a cellphone so piling on features is *reducing* the number of devices you have to deal with. Spinning off features that the cellphone can do onto a separate accessory rather runs counter to that trend/philosophy so the odds of large amounts of phone buyers suddenly changing their mind strikes me as vey unlikely.

[CommonReader]

Originally Posted by Quexos

I do. First I don't have a smartphone cause I don't need it so I won't spend 3 or 4 hundred euros just to be able to use a 10 euros device and second, why would I want to carry both a smartphone and a reader to read ? I can do this by carrying an up-to-date reader and nothing else.

Yes - and, so what? Don't buy one. Don't assume that you represent a sizable part of the population, though. Perhaps you should take a look at the number of smartphones vs. the number of dedicated ebook-readers being sold. I don't understand your weird reasoning about "spend(ing) 3 or 4 hundred euros just to be able to use a 10 euros device". People have a smartphone anyway and just put it to yet another use.
You may also want to see someone about that chip on your shoulder. Must be inconvenient to carry around.

People here seem to fall for the fallacy to believe that they represent a sizable part of the population just because they have met a couple of like minded people in an internet forum. This way 50 people out of 200 million can convince themselves that they represent the majority opinion.
As to the figures as regards production and sales costs I haven't seen any solid figures at all.

[QuantumIguana]

I suppose it's possible that people are eager to buy a $13 reader that only holds 5 books and that you need a smart phone to load books on it, but I doubt it. One of the biggest selling points of an e-reader is the ability to have a library on it, and using a smart phone to put books on it seems like a real pain. Limited functionality and decreased ease of use doesn't look like a path to success.

[Elfwreck]

Originally Posted by CommonReader

People here seem to fall for the fallacy to believe that they represent a sizable part of the population just because they have met a couple of like minded people in an internet forum.

People here are not a good representation of the public. They are, however, a reasonable representation of the ebook-reading public, if somewhat skewed towards early adopters.

I have no problem imagining that many, many cellphone/tablet owners would happily fork over $13 for an ebook accessory along with their new contract. Some would even get a contract they'd otherwise pass by, for the novelty of it. However, the majority of those won't be avid readers--who won't think 5 books is a reasonable cache--and after a bit of experimentation, they'll give up on carrying around the extra, somewhat-fragile device.

If the phone had the ability to transfer, say, website articles to the ereader, to show them in a larger font and with e-ink's clarity of display, *that* might get them hooked. But it sounds like it wants ebooks only, transferred through its special app. It won't appeal to avid readers, who will quickly discover that there are a lot more effective reading devices for not much more money; it won't appeal to non-readers, who don't want to carry around a paperback, much less a device with a fragile glass screen. It won't appeal to students, who need more versatility from an ereader than a read-only no-longterm-storage device. It won't appeal to people who bring e-ink readers on vacation because they don't need to be recharged; the 5 book limit makes it a bad choice. Without knowing more details about the transfer setup, we can't tell if it's good for business travellers who want something to read on the plane.

It does look like an interesting device. I just can't figure out who it's *for.* It doesn't matter how cheap it is if its target demographic finds it lacking some essential feature(s).

So far, the best use I can see for it is "hardware-hacker geeks convince their friends with the right kind of cellphone contract to pick one up, so the hardware hacker can disassemble it for parts." $13 for an e-ink screen and surrounding electronica sounds like a bargain; attaching a processor and storage would be great fun for some of the Maker Faire crowd.