Slashdot Mirror


New Color E-Reader Tech To Challenge E-Ink Dominance

Technology Review reports from the Consumer Elecronics Show in Las Vegas that potential e-reader competitors to E-Ink are everywhere. The current market leader in e-book displays is greyscale-only, and it takes a long time to change the display ("turn the page"), so video applications are not possible. E-Ink says they will have a color display shipping by late next year, but it will be dimmer than the current greyscale and its response time will still be too slow for video. The wannabe competitors — Pixel Qi, Qualcomm MEMS Technologies, Liquavista, and Kent Displays — all do color and some of them can do video (Pixel Qi, Qualcomm, Liquavista), and some of them (Pixel Qi, Kent) are shipping now.

36 of 199 comments (clear)

  1. Power? by chill · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The big draw of E-Ink is that it only uses power when doing a page change. Do the color versions mentioned in TFA do that as well? If so, welcome. If not, nice try but fail.

    --
    Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
    1. Re:Power? by PCM2 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The big draw of E-Ink is that it only uses power when doing a page change.

      This was my understanding as well. So maybe someone who owns a Kindle or a Nook can answer me something that has bugged me for a while: Why on earth do these things appear to have screensavers? By changing the image when the machine is idle, doesn't a screensaver actually drain the battery where normally there would be no drain at all? Does an e-ink screen really need to be "saved" (i.e. will it burn out/burn in)?

      As for the competitors, they are all designed to use very little power. At least one functions in a dual mode, where it can either be an e-ink type monochrome screen or a backlit color screen.

      Here's another article, from The Economist.

      --
      Breakfast served all day!
    2. Re:Power? by theblondebrunette · · Score: 5, Informative

      If you did RTFA, on the first page you'd see:
      "Switching from the backlit mode, to the reflective one drops the display's power consumption from 2.5 Watts to 0.5 Watts. This is for a refresh rate of 60 Hz--fast enough to display video. Pixel Qi claims that using software to put the display into an e-reader mode--suitable for reading text, where the screen might only update ten times a second--could drop the power consumption to as low as 100 milliwatts."

      For the IMOD:
      "The height of the air gap between the plates determines the color of light that is reflected from the IMOD. When a voltage is applied, the plates are drawn together by electrostatic forces and the element goes black. When the voltage is removed, the plates separate and color is reflected off the IMOD. A single pixel is made up of several IMODs; adjusting the height of each affects the overall color of the pixel. The plates stay in place, using almost no energy, until the color needs to change again. A plate only has to move a few hundred nanometers to change color and can do it in tens of microseconds--fast enough to show video."

      Liquavista:
      "The LCD devices are based on a technique called electrowetting, in which a voltage is used to modify the surface tension of colored oil on a solid substrate. In the absence of a voltage, the oil forms a film over the substrate and is visible to the viewer. When a voltage is applied, the pixel becomes transparent. By controlling the voltage of each pixel independently, a picture can be displayed. Unlike E Ink's technology, electrowetting pixels can be switched in a few milliseconds, making them suitable for showing video."

      What the article doesn't say, which is easiest on the eyes. My bets are still on e-ink.
      Recently I tried this "Libre" LCD-based e-reader, and my eyes were bleeding, it was that horrible, or maybe I'm spoiled by real e-ink, and no, it's not Kindle.

    3. Re:Power? by seanadams.com · · Score: 4, Informative

      Why on earth do these things appear to have screensavers?

      Kindle does not have an animated screensaver, it just displays some static artwork such as a photograph of a famous author. It's only one refresh when it goes to sleep and one more when you wake it up.

    4. Re:Power? by elcheesmo · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Why on earth do these things appear to have screensavers?

      The Kindle does display an image, usually of a famous author, when it's turned off. While displaying that image does use some power, it's a negligible amount considering how many page turns the thing gets on a single charge. And it looks pretty cool too.

    5. Re:Power? by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 4, Informative

      The display in the OLPC XO-1 is the predecessor of Pixel Qi's current products. I'd say that the comparison between that screen and the e-ink implementation of the kindle is as follows:

      Color/video/refresh: The LCD, hands down. E-ink doesn't even rate.

      Monochrome/text/reading: Both are a little "greyer" than one would like. E-ink has worse blacks; but a somewhat brighter background(under standard illuminated room conditions). LCD has nicer blacks; but a slightly darker background unless the ambient light is quite bright.

      I'd say that E-ink was modestly better in medium light, by virtue of its brighter background; but worse in low light since there is no way to backlight it just a bit. In full sunlight, either was highly readable; but E-ink suffered from its usual slow refresh issues.

    6. Re:Power? by maxume · · Score: 2, Informative

      Changing to the image and then back to the text does use some power though, which I think is what the GP meant.

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    7. Re:Power? by Idbar · · Score: 5, Interesting

      A couple of years ago, I had the chance of going to a talk from the guys of E-ink. They showed the B&W and Color displays before the e-readers came out. I was amazed at the picture frame prototype they had, and always wonder what happened to it.

      I'm curious about the reason they are holding back the release of color screens and waited for a punch from the competitors. I had it in my hands, so I know it existed way longer than the first Sony reader came to the market.

      This is before they took that off of their website

    8. Re:Power? by tlhIngan · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I imagine they probably decided that the 'neat' was more important than a couple of extra page changes (I think the battery lasts for more than 1,000 page changes).

      Also as a quick screen lock - in case you're reading something someone else might find embarassing. One push, and poof, incriminating text is gone.

      Of course, if the person you're hiding the text from pushes the power button...

      But I suppose the other aspect is to pretend you "closed the book" by showing you a "cover"...

    9. Re:Power? by Profane+MuthaFucka · · Score: 4, Interesting

      No, it cannot be disabled. I wish it could be, but it's not a big deal.

      --
      Fascism trolls keeping me up every night. When I starts a preachin', he HITS ME WITH HIS REICH!
    10. Re:Power? by value_added · · Score: 2, Funny

      The Kindle does display an image, usually of a famous author, when it's turned off

      Hopefully they'd avoid using an image of George Orwell.

    11. Re:Power? by thomas.galvin · · Score: 2, Funny

      I honestly don't know why this isn't the default setting. I actually downloaded the Nook user manual just to see if it was possible to use the cover art (which they already have downloaded, for the CoverFlow-like browsing) as the screen saver, but, no.

      I mean, how can I use my Nook to pick up chicks if I can't subtly cue them in to the fact that I'm reading Twilight?

  2. Do not want. by binaryspiral · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The beauty of grayscale eink is that it's very close to paper - making it easy to read for long periods of time. However, the transition time on the Kindle or other grayscale eink devices is long enough to be annoying. Making these transitions longer will decrease my satisfaction in them, making the display dimmer will make them worthless to me.

    If I wanted color, I'd hit an iPod touch, tablet PC, or laptop.

    Keep It Simple Stupid.

    1. Re:Do not want. by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 3, Informative

      A book with illustrations in color.

    2. Re:Do not want. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Can you explain to me (and I suspect all the rest of us) what a "color book" is?

      When you reach kindergarten, some of the books they give you are not printed in color. Instead, the illustrations are just done in solid lines, with nothing filled in. The idea is that you can use your crayons to fill in the color areas yourself. At first this seems counter-intuitive and time-consuming, but it's actually enjoyable once you get the hang of it.

  3. Don't limit the perception of those screens! by sznupi · · Score: 4, Insightful

    We see in the summary "e-reader", "e-book"...ignoring that those screens (well, at least Pixel Qi one, that I'm sure of) are great also as replacements for screens in netbooks (remember commercials of those depicting them on the beach, in the park or bright cafe?); generally any highly portable device.

    Those are the screens which were supposed to be in place all along. Finally we can have them. Who cares about e-book readers?

    --
    One that hath name thou can not otter
  4. flickering with e-ink by e**(i+pi)-1 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    the new technology with color, faster page build and better energy efficiency is welcome. My biggest complaint with electronic ink is the "flicking" before a page turn. I was told that it is necessary to remove any traces from the previous text. Its certainly a personal thing, but I find this annoying. Every page flip reminds on how unfinished the current e-ink technology is.

  5. I love my kindle by LlamaZorz · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I have a Kindle2 becasue it enables me to read more than I normally would. Certain things I would only read online like periodicals and hack tutorials were not being read due to eye strain. I didnt want to print these as it would become expensive and wasteful fast. My kindle has really long battery life and I actually get less eye strain with it than with real paper books given the grey background. I love the thing, any gloss or color will just make the device cause more strain and that's now what I wanted.

  6. I'd prefer higher contrast by JakeD409 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    A color eBook reader is something that will really appeal to my girlfriend (who has many art books and comic books). I, on the other hand, use my Kindle to read novels and programming books. There might be a little colored syntax highlighting in my programming books, but that's the extent that color would affect my eBook-reading experience. I'd much prefer a higher-contrast greyscale eBook reader. Currently, the contrast on my Kindle (and, from what I understand, the Nook and the Sony readers) is about the same as that of a dirty newspaper (about 8:1 I believe). It doesn't bother me, but I'd buy one that has paperback book contrast (about 50:1) in a heartbeat.

  7. Real book page turn times by Mr.+Freeman · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I don't understand these complaints about the response times for the screens on e-readers. They're designed to be easy to read for the purpose of replacing paper books, not replacing LCD TVs or computer monitors. A real book doesn't have instant page turn times and there's a bit of "flicker" as the page flips up and over the current page. I've used a kindle before and it takes longer to turn a real page than for the kindle to refresh so I don't see a problem here.

    Seems like people are really bitching that e-readers can't be used for video. My question is why did you buy an e-READER if you wanted to watch VIDEO? You should have bought a laptop.

    --
    -1 disagree is not a modifier for a reason. -1 troll, flaimbait, redundant, overrated are NOT acceptable substitutes.
    1. Re:Real book page turn times by QuantumG · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You just expressed a view that is completely lost of marketing fools who see features features features as the only way to sell units. This is why every ebook reader also has an mp3 player in it.

      --
      How we know is more important than what we know.
    2. Re:Real book page turn times by warcow105 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You hit the nail right on the head. My sony reader got me reading books again, and thats what I got it for...I didnt wish it could do video, nor did a pause between pages bother me(like you said, it takes longer to turn a real page). Feature bleed is a royal pain, instead of these manufacturers making a device that does 1 thing excellent, they jam as many features in as possible so their sales flier has more bullet points that company b, but it does it all half assed.

    3. Re:Real book page turn times by im_thatoneguy · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Oh I thought that was because I usually listen to music while reading and the two were a natural fit for sitting on an airplane listening to music while reading.

    4. Re:Real book page turn times by drinkypoo · · Score: 2, Funny

      This is why every ebook reader also has an mp3 player in it.

      No, every eBook reader has an mp3 player in it because every manufacturer wants audio feedback that doesn't sound like an alarm clock being murdered. If you're going to [therefore] skip the bit-banging speaker interface and even FM synthesis and move along to some real audio, it barely costs more to install a codec capable of handling the audio output part; and decoding mp3 is such a trivial task compared to [say] displaying a PDF in a timely fashion that it doesn't even bear mentioning in terms of CPU time... especially since mp3 can be decoded with integer-only math. Also, if you're implementing text-to-speech, mp3 is a joke. Not putting it in would only confuse.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  8. Re:Full color book reader by vcgodinich · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Do you have a desktop computer AND a phone? They both can get online, edit documents etc. . . why do you have both? Don't knock ebook readers till you try them. Anyone that has one will laugh at comparing them to reading a book on a phone. LAUGH.

  9. Re:We don't need e-ink by vcgodinich · · Score: 2, Insightful

    1) Failure to understand the benefits of the technology. CHECK

    2) Offer proposal not based in reality (Technical or Fiscal) CHECK

    3) Typical "Someone should do something about ..." bitching. CHECK

    Three strikes and you are out.

  10. Re:Sorry, not news. by macshit · · Score: 2, Informative

    The Liquavista stuff looks more interesting though -- in particular, it doesn't need separate pixels for RGB.

    (The Liquavista website is not nearly as slick as the mirasol site tho; it looks like the researchers also did the web design...)

    --
    We live, as we dream -- alone....
  11. MIssing the point. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The problem here is that people are forgetting that the entire purpose of these gadgets is for reading books. How many books that are read by adults have significant amounts of color in them? Almost zero have pictures...let alone color pictures. Furthermore, video (while cool) has nothing whatever to do with reading books.

    I got a Kindle for Xmas - the older one with the smaller display.

    It uses very, VERY little power (I've read about 3000 pages on it - and it still hasn't needed to be recharged) - which is a plus because I want to spend a long time reading books and I don't want a power cord. The reason it uses so little power is that (like an actual book), it doesn't consume power when you're S-L-O-W-L-Y reading through a page because ePaper retains it's image even when the device is switched off - so the kindle pretty much turns everything off until you press a button - then it does what you asked and then turns itself off again.

    The page turn time is indeed rather slow - but it's comparable to the time it takes to turn a page on a paper book - which we've already deemed "acceptable"...I only find that a problem when I'm using it for something non-bookish.

    The huge range of angles through which you can view the ePaper is useful for reading in bed. The fact that it's reflective lets you read in bright sunlight. It's resolution is good enough to let me get the equivalent of an entire page of a paperback on one screenful. It's super lightweight.

    All of those things are what matters for an actual book reader...not color or video.

    If you want video and color and that stuff - it's not for book reading - it's for something else. Worse still, the steep increase in power consumption, drop in resolution, increase in weight and failure to be readable in bright sunlight that is required to make that happen makes them dramatically LESS good as book readers. I can read my Kindle in bed (I use a little clip-on white LED light as I do with paper books so as not to disturb my wife with bright lights) - and it's actually dramatically better than an actual paperback because the screen is always at right angles to my line of sight - which is something that's tough to achieve on both the odd and even pages of an actual book. The price of the cheaper Kindle is about the same as my annual book buying budget and because eBooks are about 50% of the price of paper books, it'll pay for itself in 2 years.

    I love the Kindle as a book reader.

    The only downside is the DRM crap...but I don't imagine for one moment that these new color machines will be any less encumbered than the Kindle in that regard. The Kindle can be persuaded to read free books from Project Guthenburg for $0 - so free books are still free.

    I fully realise that it makes a crappy laptop/pda/netbook/cellphone/pizza-oven/etc - but that's OK because what I actually WANTED was an eBook reader. If you're offering me color and video, I'll take it - but only so long as there are zero compromises to the main function of the machine - and that's flat out not true right now.

    1. Re:MIssing the point. by OrangeTide · · Score: 2, Informative

      Magazine sales are vastly higher than book sales, and I think ebook reader vendors realize this. Plus there has been sort of a race to color by everyone for publicity's sake.

      The display technology used in the Kindle hasn't changed much in the last 5 years, it has only gotten cheap. (so instead of insanely expensive it is simply costly now)

      ps- I'm glad you like the Kindle, I certainly enjoyed making it. And I still use one of my prototype Kindle 2 units every day.

      --
      “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
    2. Re:MIssing the point. by Paradigm_Complex · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The problem here is that people are forgetting that the entire purpose of these gadgets is for reading books

      Not necessarily. The purpose of the e-ink tech is to be a low-power-usage display. However, there's drawbacks (limited/no colors, poor refresh time) that have forced it to be stuffed in to the niche of being a display for books. If/when the technologies improves, it can be used to display other things.

      All of those things are what matters for an actual book reader...not color or video.

      Other uses for this improved tech aren't going to somehow mean everyone stops using it to read books. All it does is expand the market, which in turn will probably mean more funding for better e-book readers. Use your imagination a little bit. Consider:

      I use my netbook in class to type notes in vim. That's *it.* I made a point of disabling pretty much all the background processes possible and underclocked/undervoltaged the CPU - when I'm not hitting a key, the only real power draw is the display. Yet I still have to charge it every night. If the e-ink stuff improves sufficiently, I could use it here. It just needs a slightly better refresh rate, and maybe some colors for syntax highlighting (I take my notes in LaTeX).

      Then, as more people buy e-ink-based tech, the prices drop and quality goes up. Soon ebook readers won't cost an arm and a leg as they do today, and will last even longer on the same charge. Imagine going months or even years without having to plug the thing in. AND other people benefit by using the tech for other things.

      that's OK because what I actually WANTED was an eBook reader.

      The only weird part is, the engineers behind these things aren't forgetting how to make the old tech, and the marketing people aren't forgetting about the money being made by selling ebooks readers. It's almost like ebook readers aren't going to disappear as these gadgets are pushed into new markets! Wouldn't that be horrible - people using technology for things other then what you bless it for?

      --
      "A witty saying proves nothing." - Voltaire
  12. Sunlight laptop by jones_supa · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I don't care that much about e-readers, but hey, getting a laptop that could be viewed under full sunlight is just revolutionary for me.

  13. Re:Sorry, not news. by DrXym · · Score: 2, Insightful
    Nice that there are newcomers to the party, but Amazon hedges its bets with a iPod Touch / iPhone Kindle App. So, you don't need these new things if you want e-books and video on the same device.

    That might be fine if you love format restricted, DRM'd up the ass proprietary devices, but not so good if you don't.

  14. Um, people did. by aussersterne · · Score: 2, Informative

    Go on eBay and you can pick up greyscale LCD e-book readers for well under $100, sometimes under $50.

    Thing is, they suck. You don't want to read 1,000 pages with a backlight, nor can you sustain a battery for 1,000 pages with a backlight.

    --
    STOP . AMERICA . NOW
  15. Re:Why not just a labtop? by aussersterne · · Score: 3, Insightful

    (sigh) clearly Slashdot geeks don't read much.

    1. You can't easily carry a laptop around with you for six or seven days in a variety of non-office circumstances. Laptops are heavy and fragile.
    2. You have to charge a laptop often. You can't pick up War and Peace and read it cover-to-cover on battery power on a laptop.
    3. Laptops are obtrusive or not allowed in many circumstances.
    4. WHILE READING, laptops require that they sit on your lap or a desk. ebook readers can be read in ANY POSITION.
    5. The user interface of a laptop imposes all kinds of extra work; ebook reader you just open and read, no navigation of user interface.

    I'm a serious reader. I've probably read 50-100k pages on my Kindle 1. I've had a personal laptop since the late '80s. I never read a single document on a laptop longer than about 50 pages. If I had to do that, I'd just buy the book. Since acquiring Kindle, I only buy academic books in printed form. For all other reading (newspapers, magazines, novels, non-academic nonfiction) I just buy it on Kindle. Easy impulse buy, easy, flexibile tool for reading. I charge maybe once or twice a week. I can carry my Kindle in a tiny messenger bag, wherever I go.

    --
    STOP . AMERICA . NOW
  16. Re:We don't need e-ink by dangitman · · Score: 3, Insightful

    e-ink is to book readers what monster cables are to cables, if monster cables were the only cables you could buy anywhere with no lower priced competition.

    But Monster Cables don't have any advantages over cheaper cables. Electronic Ink displays do have advantages over other types of display.

    This is price fixing.

    I don't think you know what "price fixing" means.

    Once someone starts selling a fairly priced LCD alternative, it's all over for the e-ink people as their overpriced gadgets will only be bought by hardcore textophiles.

    So, how can it be "price fixing" if somebody could just make an LCD-based alternative and take over the market? Price fixing implies collusion among industry players not to allow such competition. But in reality, there are lots of different companies competing for this market with different technology. There's not an agreement among them to fix prices.

    I also know that a paperback book sized LCD device could be mass manufactured and sold for $19.99

    Well, why don't you produce such a device, take over the market, and become wealthy for life, then?

    --
    ... and then they built the supercollider.
  17. Re:We don't need e-ink by vlm · · Score: 2, Insightful

    At first it's slightly easier to read than an LCD but if you want to sit down for a few hours to read it it'll save you one hell of a headache.

    What is wrong with you slashdotters? Not so much you individually, but in general? Every week we have the required slashvertisement for e-ink based displays, and the astroturfers come out and post unbelievable claims about humans eyes being physically unable to gaze upon LCDs, like they're a medusa's head made of silicon.

    It would be laughable if read on time.com or something, but its even worse here. Come on, this is slashdot. Supposedly we all spend 16 hours a day gazing into our L C D computer screens doing programming or sysadmining or WOW or Pr0n or slashdot or whatever. I have spent 40 hours a week at work gazing into my "horrible LCD" since the early 2000s, and prior to that I spent at least a decade or so gazing into CRTs. It doesn't hurt. At all. Its actually kind of nice.

    What does hurt, is holding a Sony e-ink reader and being able to read the tiny little page faster than it refreshes, while I squint at gray on gray color scheme and no proper backlight so its always got weird distracting shadows. Its about as appealing as reading a book in a cave with the worlds slowest robot arm turning the pages. I'm sorry if it ruins the slashvertisement, but the product just sucks. It may be useful as a marketing bullet point, after all, the public is trained that if its more expensive, it must be better, look at automotive SUV vs car or pretty much anything else. Marketing wants me to buy e-ink, and there is no other compelling reason to buy e-ink, that's why I bought a LCD based ebook reader. I simply don't care if I have to charge it every second week instead of every fourth week, it looks great, works fast, and its cheap.

    If your eyes hurt, see an eye doctor, like TODAY. Spending more on display technology that is heavily marketed is not a good long term solution if you're currently losing your eyesight due to untreated illness. And if its just slashvertising, stop the campaign, its reached annoyance stage.

    --
    "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger