More on TechnologyTell: Gadget News | Apple News
iriver’s horseless e-book reader: Wow—two screens!
January 9, 2007 | 3:38 am
|
By David Rothman
A century ago automobiles were called horseless carriages. That must be the mindset behind the E-BOOk reader, which, like a p-book, comes with a dual-page display.
iriver’s new E Ink machine with touch-sensitive screens, plural, runs off AAA batteries for up to six months. Engadget’s writeup from CES complains of “refresh and ghosting problems” but is gushy overall (“swathed in luxurious leather”).
“We really wish this thing was ready for prime time because we think we may have just found an e-book reader we can get behind,” it says.
Ugh, do you I agree? I don’t.
One less screen, please
In fairness to Engadget, some people might like the two pages because they want to view more text at once, but you could do that with a larger screen, and probably for less. Software displaying two columns could reduce the width of the lines for readers with problems.
The Engadget article does not mention a possible price for a real-life version of the prototype, but I’d be shocked if it came in for less than $400.
I wonder how much of the $400 will go to pay the marketers for lower-casing all of the “iriver” name. I’d like to see fewer screens and more “i” or “r.” Another name for the E-BOOk would help as well. Oh, the endless limits of the human imagination!
Housekeeping note: Yep, the TeleBlog site was down yet again. Thank you, Iand1.com. You bet we’re looking around for new hosting.
(Via Jason Turgeon on the eBook Community List.)
|
Previous
SUBSCRIBE TO RSS
Comments:
Wow, this came from left field.
Iriver has often been at the cutting edge of technology. Their early mp3 players were much better than ipods, and the early ones had features that ipods still lack (such as ogg support). Usability wise, well, I liked it all right, but it wasn’t the greatest.
Iriver simply didn’t market themselves in the US and didn’t make the sort of strategic partnerships to put them on a level with ipod. That I fear may be a reason why iriver’s product won’t have much traction. On the other hand, more devices will cause more competition and hopefully lower prices overall.
Thanks, Robert. In a different context, here’s what a friend e-mailed me as to her favorite e-reader:
Comments, gang?
Thanks,
David
The day before yesterday, I have been talking to a doctor. A large part of her professional reading consists of pocket books by two medical publishers. The layout of the books specifies left-hand text, right-hand illustrations. She has asked me for a device with two facing pages, in a pocket book form factor (to keep it really portable). Money is not really an issue, because she does not need it for fun, and she wants it badly. iRiver squarely hits the mark. Can’t wait to buy it.
There is not going to be the reading device. Academic customers will be reading papers in A4 PDF format and will thus need a larger screen, allowing for annotations and highlighting. Travelers and fiction readers will need a compact, robust and affordable device with long battery life.
Just as e-books are not going to replace paper books in the near future, but create a new market in those areas where their benefits outweigh their drawbacks, this market is going to be populated by many different solutions.
A few months ago, I read yet another article in a major newspaper that noted how much the average reader loved the standard book form factor. The point of this article was that most readers really enjoy books–the look, the feel, the ability to hold a book in one hand and prop it open with your thumb, the ability to look at the number of pages and see what you have read or have left to read–for very tactile reasons.
After I read that article, I sat down and drew out something on a pad of paper that looks exactly like what iriver has just produced. Why? Because that’s what readers want. People like books for their form factor. Why change what works? People who like gadgets and people who like books are not always the same folks, so it seems really logical to me to offer the readers something that feels more like a book than a complicated gizmo.
With two screens, you get twice the screen real estate in the same amount of space as one screen. You get protection from scratches while you’re carrying the book around. You get the option of reading one page at a time, instead of scrolling, which many readers prefer. What’s not to like?
I’d also guess that two smaller screens might be cheaper than one large screen.
I’ve had a half dozen mp3 players over the years, and my favorite by far is still my 1 gig flash player from iriver, that I keep around just for the gym but end up using more often than my big 60 gig creative player, because it’s so much better designed. I think they’re on the right track.
Jason
J&J:
Well, as with the Sony Reader, we’ll see what the marketplace says. I very much appreciate Joscha’s bringing up the med book example–the need for the dual pages in some cases. That said, there’s also the color issue. Would a black-and-white E Ink device be best for rendering med book illustrations? I’d welcome comments. Of course, let’s hope that wonderful E Ink machines with color will be on the way sooner than we’d expect. Perhaps Joscha, as someone in the E Ink space, can share with us his expertise on this matter.
Josh, as for your own thoughts on reader preferences, it’ll be interesting to see if this is a generational thing. Will younger readers care about the dual pages? I recall you’re in school or a recent graduate, and it’s obvious that you appreciate them. So I’ll keep an open mind.
Thanks,
David
Personally, I would prefer a single-pager (and its been quite a few years since school, thank you). I just wanted to point out that there is indeed a justified demand for this type of device.
The current eInk design will become colorful only with a significant decrease in contrast and resolution. Since I am all for resolution, I personally would not accept this tradeoff.
By the way: it was the E Ink display that converted me to e-books. Even though it is slow and expensive, I found reading for extended periods of time to be very pleasant. Beats backlighted LCDs hands down for me, because it is so much easier on the eyes.
There may be no single best solution for all purposes, just as the microwave is not the single best replacement for a conventional stove. Just as the microwave covers an important niche in the kitchen, so does the E Ink bookreader in my library. Extremely useful, even in its current stage with all the known limitations.
“A bigger screen” might not fit in your pocket, David.
Twin screen allow for dual-folio compositions, which is good for comics and manga, although outside of Japan who wants black-and-white comics?
One other nice thing, maybe, about the twin screens: E Ink is slow to refresh. With the right software it might be possible to read straight from one screen to the next, while the screen you just left is refreshing. No more waiting! (With the right software, and it would have to be dead-easy.)
Many text-editors allow for splitting the screen so you can read and compare two widely separated portions of one document. For example, in scholarly works, this might allow for footnote text to appear on one screen while you have the main text on the other. Religious texts could have the main scripture on one screen and commentary on the facing screen. Newspapers and magazines could have the main story on one screen and sidebars on the other; or they could have a table of contents on one screen and articles selected on the other.
My guess is that iRiver will not incorporate all these possibilities. But if dual-screen e-book devices do take off, ever (and this device is something like the 3rd or 4th I’ve seen), then we can look for such developments to come along eventually.
Bad part of dual screens: paying for 2 eInk screens! I agree that this looks like a US$400-500 device, if not more.
I have to agree with the others. There is certainly value in a dual-page format. The only thing that might work better in some instances would be a scroll. The eInk displays are supposed to be bendable, so I can see the utility of carrying a tube in which I pull out the sheet of eInk like drawing down a window shade. I pull out the screen to whatever size I need–anything from a legal size sheet for reading digital newspapers or large tables of data down to a single narrow column of text. Software in the tube would display and reflow text based on the amount of screen exposed. Why limit ourselves to a single size screen when our needs change throughout the day?
Well, that is close to the reader I was looking for. But there must be a funktion to display one A4 page over both screen.
Any ebook reader you will need a cover to protect it from getting scrached. Why not having a screen in it?
Many commenters see the ebook reader only for literatur or newspapers, but there are so many documents, handbooks or studies around you don’t want to print out, because the mess up your bookshelf. Ebook-readers would be fine for it. But many docs are designed for A4 (legal) format, it would not comfortable to read it on a 6 inch display.
The only doubt I have is the e-Ink. All e-Ink devices are expensive. Price must be rest in the display. For the OLPC-Laptop a new display was developed 7,7 inch high resulution (1900 x00) in the sunshine an color 800 x600 with backlight. Price +30$ meaning 2 displays for say 100$. Wouldn’t this be a better basis?
Thank you!