"first to build an under-$150 e-book reader will win"

[Kali Yuga]

The concept of "winning" in this context is somewhat absurd, imo.

The only real advantage that a "winner" will have is some additional leverage with the publishers, and that's really about it. Bigger market share does not guarantee higher profitability, for example. And for a company like B&N, they'd be smarter if they focus on just making a really good device, good customer service, and good selection, to make sure they don't completely tank if/when pbook sales shrink.

Originally Posted by Alisa

That's one way to go. Personally, I think the winners will be the folks who make multifunction devices that are as comfortable to read on as an e-ink reader and have enough battery life for us to not worry about charging all the time....

Yeah, that's gonna be a while. I'd add 6-12 months to the predicted release date of whatever Great Screen Tech is supposed to come up next (including color eInk).

Plus, it will need to be as thin and light as the current crop.

Originally Posted by Alisa

The race to the bottom for prices on dedicated devices will just end up with poor quality devices and razor thin margins.

Not necessarily; after all, the Kindle 2 dropped to $275 from $360 in less than a year, while adding international capability. I doubt price drops will be that rapid, but it's very common for technology to both improve quality and reduce price simultaneously.

Originally Posted by Alisa

Most people don't read books but they do read magazines and blogs.

Blogs maybe, but apparently magazine readership is tanking.

Originally Posted by Alisa

By the time you could make a large, color reader for $150, I'm betting tablet hardware will have made the idea obsolete.

Maybe, maybe not. E.g. by that time, epaper devices may also have other bonuses -- thinner, faster, better touch-screens, foldable, impact-resistant.

Besides, "obsolete" devices tend to stick around. AIO's and fax servers haven't replaced dedicated fax machines, copy machines, or printers; radios are still around; cameras still exist. Heck, film cameras still exist. Heck, sheet film cameras, which pretty much have the same designs as they had close to 100 years ago, are still around....

[Kris777]

Originally Posted by ardeegee

Just an observation, but this is one of the few places where that classifies you as a "light reader."

Well, the size of books can be different

[calvin-c]

Originally Posted by Kali Yuga

Heck, film cameras still exist. Heck, sheet film cameras, which pretty much have the same designs as they had close to 100 years ago, are still around....

Off-topic, but, sheet-film cameras, really? Except as antiques, of course. (And antiques may be not only working but also used, but they're still antiques. We have one photographer who uses a 1920's camera to take the occasional panoramic photo-last one I remember was a '100-year' reunion with about 500 people gathered in a circle, or maybe a semi-circle. So it's still used for those special photographs, but even the photographer considers it an antique.)

[Penforhire]

4x5 view ("large format") cameras are still a working professional tool, really. Yes, digital is making inroads there (e.g. Leaf) but large format still lives and the gear is quite expensive.

[Kali Yuga]

Originally Posted by calvin-c

Off-topic, but, sheet-film cameras, really?

Yes, really.



They're mostly used for architectural, still life, and landscape photography; sometimes also for other work (e.g. portraits). While you can typically put a digital back on a view camera now, film is still useful in the field, and (afaik) the image quality from an 8x10 view camera with a good lens is far beyond what any digital camera can provide.

Oh, and apparently there are a couple of wags who are trying to bring Polaroid film back, too...

[Bremen Cole]

I was going to sit this one out, but then I thought.............

[ardeegee]

Originally Posted by Kali Yuga

Oh, and apparently there are a couple of wags who are trying to bring Polaroid film back, too...

http://www.flickr.com/photos/dark_or...7603226919391/

[charleski]

Originally Posted by Kali Yuga

While you can typically put a digital back on a view camera now, film is still useful in the field, and (afaik) the image quality from an 8x10 view camera with a good lens is far beyond what any digital camera can provide.

Digital still has a large number of issues with architectural photography which are related to the basic technology involved in the sensors (basically, digital sensors have problems handling light rays which are not normal to the sensor plane, causing hue and exposure shifts, etc.). For the sort of resolution needed in these applications it's also massively (and I mean massively) more expensive.

But back to books. The problems with ereaders at whatever price-point is that it's hard to see the value-proposition for those who don't read a lot. When you read a couple of books a week (or more) then being able to manage them digitally removes a lot of hassle. If you only read a book every couple of months then ereaders make no sense at all. Multi-function devices may be a route to pulling in new readers, but I don't think Kindle for the iPhone has exactly set the world on fire. At the end of the day it may need a generational-change to expand the market - get kids hooked on reading textbooks digitally and hope that this translates into them buying books for entertainment.

[Dopedangel]

To me the winners would be the one to to make under $150 device.
And get it into the school systems of countries etc.
Forget college text books from kinder garden to high school.
millions of dollars are spent on school books and disposing of them when they are upgraded or get spoiled etc.
Building a sturdy reader that could last years in childrens hands.
Thats should be the target atleast if I was in the ereading device business that would be my main target.

[DawnFalcon]

I'm going to be...very interested...in Asus's pricing on their SiPix reader.