iRex's iLiad E-ink eBook Reader is Now Available

An anonymous reader writes "iRex has just started shipping its e-ink eBook reader, the iLiad, starting today (July 3rd) — making it the first e-ink reader commercially available outside of Japan. It is available for purchase though iRex's website, for 649 euros (ouch!). Hopefully this price will come down before Sony releases their eReader later this summer."

Comments

I see copyright infringement coming...

[just_another_sean]

I think this guy might have something to say about the name. :-)

Shweet

[dedazo]

iThink tHis is aGreat iDea. iMean, yAy!

I'll stick with books...

[Frosty Piss]

I'll stick with books if only for the pure satisfaction of the ritual of turning pages. And of course, books are a less painful loss when left someplace by mistake (or stolen).

Re:I'll stick with books...

[harrkev]

Books are also not crippled by DRM either. They don't ask you for a license before letting you turn the page.
Yup, I'm sticking with books.

Really, about the only advantage that electronic books have over the real thing is the ability to search (but real books have an index), and the fact that they occupy no additional physical space/weight above that of the reader. If Sony wants us to buy one, they need to offer some real advantage. If anything, DRM-crippled products are a definate disadvantage.

Re:I'll stick with books...

[theStorminMormon]

Books are also not crippled by DRM either.

This line made me chuckle. Not crippled by DRM? How about a DRM that made it so that if you wanted to make a copy you'd have to either re-write the entire novel or OCR the whole thing? Imagine not even being able to make a quick archive copy for personal back up! You'd be up in arms! Or a DRM that was constructed in such a way that if you lent your copy to a friend you coudln't read your copy until you got it back. And if your friend lost it - you'd have to buy a new copy if you ever wanted to read it.

Books already have the best conceivable DRM policy - the content is died directly to the physical media. And you thought propietary formats were bad!

I'm not saying I'm a fan of DRM, but anyone that compares a hard-copy book to DRM media and sees the DRM media as a pain in the ass is just bonkers. The only reason the DRM is more annoying is because you can break it. And so we're tempted to try and it's a pain in the butt. You can't break the DRM on a book and so we forget that it even exists.

Now maybe you understand why RIAA execs keep cramming insane DRM schemes down our throats. They must believe that if only DRM could be as iron-clad as physical media we'd all stop whining about it.

-stormin

Re:I'll stick with books...

[alegrepublic]

This line made me chuckle. Not crippled by DRM? How about a DRM that made it so that if you wanted to make a copy you'd have to either
re-write the entire novel or OCR the whole thing? Imagine not even being able to make a quick archive copy for personal back up!

Imagine a book that wouldn't let you open it unless you paid a rental fee to the publisher. Or a book that insisted on being
read only when placed on a certain desk. Or a book that locked up when put on a copy machine. Or a book that would only
let you use publisher-approved markers to write on it... The annoying part of DRM is not copy protection as much as access
protection.

Re:I'll stick with books...

[ChaosDiscord]

I'm not saying I'm a fan of DRM, but anyone that compares a hard-copy book to DRM media and sees the DRM media as a pain in the ass is just bonkers.

The key is that a book is reliable. Properly cared for a book will last a long, long time. The author and publisher can't stop me from reading, lending out, giving away, or selling the book. If a publisher goes bankrupt, there is no risk that my paper books will suddenly become unreadable when their authorization servers go down. (As happened for anyone who purchased "silver" unlimited access to DIVX movies.) There is no practical way for a publisher to somehow lock down a book to make it impossible to, say, scan a page and reproduce it for commentary purposes.

True, books are a nuisance to copy or scan, but it's possible (as the small but vibrant illegal e-books scene shows).

Yeah, but what format?

[XenoPhage]

From their FAQ:

Which formats do you support?

In order to stimulate the momentum in electronic reading, iRex Technologies will support as many formats as possible in as open an environment as possible, respecting the rights of owners of content and IP.

Ok... So what formats are those again? This sounds, to me, like they will only support DRM capable formats... Which makes this a non-buy in my opinion.

Re:Yeah, but what format?

[Ethan Butterfield]

Odd that they didn't copy their supported format list from their product spec PDF, but oh well. In any case, if you check out that PDF here, they list the supported formats as PDF, XHTML, TXT and APABI (only in China). Support for OEB files as well as MP3 playback is due in an August/September firmware update.

iWhat? eWho?

[jmobley]

iThat iProduct E-name eSucks

iT iMakes eMe i-Sick (tm)

[Speare]

iUgh, an e-New iContender for the worst eBuzz.com i-Product iName, turbo gold deluxe II.

Re:Links to iRex's iLiad purchasing site?

[joe 155]

in all fairness to /. - what else could they do on an issue like this? They had to report on it or everyone would say "This site is crap, digg reports on stuff like this...". If they report on it you want them to put a link to a site where you can buy it. I remember when someone submitted a list of "spy gadgets" with no link to where you could buy it and people were up in arms. So it needs to be reported on and needs a link to where you can buy it... all gadgets will be reported on because thats why were here; to know first and be at the cutting edge of nerding

Expensive, 2 seconds per page flip, no backlight

[lonesometrainer]

Even for an early adaptor this thing is disappointing.

1. VERY expensive, Euro 649 (that includes VAT over here) for a black+white ebook reader. I'm come on... Please leave the WLAN out next time.
2. VERY slow, VERY slow. Page flipping sometimes takes 2 seconds, sometimes 3-4. That's bad for a newspaper, but it's simply unusable for a technical documentation where you're searching for specific parts, etc.

see mobileread.com for videos.

3. No backlight, I (as a consumer) don't care wheter that's realizable or not, but I would like to have some sort of backlight. Yes a book doesn't have a backlight, too. But my books at least don't cost 650 Euros.

Nice is: a 1024x768 resolution, everything else is not usable for my purposes.

I'm waiting for the next generation.

Re:Too late, too big, too expensive, no market

[mypalmike]

There are two key differences between this and your PDA:

1. E-ink looks like ink on paper. Less eye strain than other display technologies.
2. E-ink doesn't require power to be visible. Much lower power consumption - only needed when turning pages.

I wouldn't be surprised if E-ink overtakes dead-tree publishing within a decade.

Re:Links to iRex's iLiad purchasing site?

[theStorminMormon]

I agree. Digital ink is one of those technologies - like flying cars - that's been around in sci-fi for decades and yet somehow never seemed to be realized in real life (even though, unlike FTL travel or universal translators, it doesn't seem that hard to create). It's one of the technological advances that I think will have a geuinely huge and lasting impact on digital media.

Just think about it - any portable device (other than an audio device) has pretty much been constrained to indoor use. Take a laptop outside and try using it. And sure, $900 can buy a lot of paperbacks, but try carrying them all with you at once. On top of that, $900 is what it costs now. What did the first CD or DVD player cost?

And on top of that, you have to realize that this is much, much more than just the capacity to carry around a library with you. With searcheable documents and note-taking ability it's going to grant users the capacity to carry around a library, card catalog, and user-created index.

I've been waiting for this to come out for years. Of course I'm not in a position to get the first model (too expensive, and I imagine that some things like text recognition won't be working quite right) but I honestly believe this is one of those products that will (if quietly) really change the landscape of digital devices. As far as I'm concerned it's 10 times more useful than a laptop for most non-tech-related uses already.

We give out laptops to middle and high school kids in my county. What a waste! Textbooks are pain in the ass to read on laptops. And that horsepower is wasted on kids who don't code, can't game, and don't even use cool programs like Mathematica or something. For note taking, reading, and research this is a real breakthrough. Toss in mp3 support and it's like any bibliophiles idea of portable nirvana.

The only thing that remains to be seen is how they draw the line between eBook devices and laptops. What functaionality will end up where? What will distinquish one from the other - or will they merge into one ultra-device if digital ink gets full color, etc.?

Oh yeah - and did we mention 21 hours of battery life. Now THAT is starting to look like a portable device.

-stormin

Field test results

[yelvington]

I saw this device last month in Moscow at the World Editors Forum, where Dr. Caroline Pauwels of the Free University of Brussels discussed a field test being conducted in conjunction with De Tijd, a daily newspaper published in Antwerp, which produced a daily e-paper edition. They gave the device to 200 people, both print and online readers. The test was continuing but she talked about some preliminary results:

* Slow.
* No search.
* Difficulty setting up wifi connections.
* Good quality display, easy to read.

The bigger picture: She called it an "evolution of paper" but not an evolution of newspapers, and raised questions about whether editors are prepared to evolve into a medium where RSS feeds/aggregation, interconnections with other resources, and conversation are expected and demanded.

I briefly examined the device, which seems a bit larger than the e-paper device Sony has been selling in Japan for a couple of years now.

Please note that this is a developers version

[mean pun]

Although the website is not very clear about this, iRex considers the current version a developers release. On this page there is this sentence:

To individual consumers who have sent in their request for notification, we recommend to wait for our consumer version, which will have a more extended functionality (September 2006).

backlight = bad

[chocolatetrumpet]

(IANAMD), but I think a backlit display is probably one of the biggest causes of eye strain. The whole point of buying an e-reader, for me, would be the e-paper.

My dad prints out hundreds and hundreds of pages daily because he simply hates reading backlit displays.

Re:Poor eyesight forbidden by DRM?

[tftp]

But consider that if the DRM allows you to increase the font until it becomes readable then you can just put the thing down on the scanner, press a button and go get some dinner. By the time you are back, the scanner will have OCRed the whole book, easier than with paper even!

The DRM book can be only safe from you if its font is as legible as those twisted, crooked, scratched letters that you need to recognize and enter for subscription to Web services.

Re:Expensive, 2 seconds per page flip, no backligh

[Mac Degger]

I'm with you. IMO they made some serious mistakes. First and formost is the cost. Secondly we have something which ties in directly to the first, which is the inclusion of (of all things) an mp3 player. Is it some new dictum that all new hardware will evolve to a point where it includes an mp3 player?

Anyway, it's too expensive. I'm an early adopter, but I will not pay that kind of money for a mere ereader. A portable screen like this should cost 300 euro's max...and that's for the first run of the tech. But then they have to go and include an mp3 player?!? WTF? WHY? I do not want one on my ebook reader. Either make an all purpose device like a palmpilot with this screen or just make a simple no-frills reader. Preferably just the reader, as everyone and his dog has a better mp3 player. It increases cost and size (chip, jack) and drains the battery. AND PEOPLE WHO WANT THIS THING TO READ ON DON'T WANT AN MP3 PLAYER! THEY WANT TO READ BOOKS!

I mean, shoot, my phone has an mp3 player which I never use, as does my palmpilot (which I do use the mp3 function on). I love the screen on this thing....but just not for that money. My guess is they'll never re-coop their investment, as they screwed up their market research on who wants one of these things and what they want on it. They should have diverted the mp3 R&D towards creating a html help (.chm) reader for this thing, as that's what it's sorely missing.

Other technologies are waiting in the wings

[smartalix]

Don't forget that none of this development is going on in a vacuum. Cholesteric LCD (www.kentdisplays.com), Iridescent display (www.qualcomm.com/qmt), and electrowetting display (www.liquavista.com) technology are all reflective bistable formulations. Any of these could leapfrog E-ink and make a better, cheaper E-book.

Pics of these technologies at the last Society for Information Display Show is here:
http://www.smartalix.com/Consumer/SID/page2.html