iPad vs e-book readers: price matters

Spot on the money again.

Another insightful piece of analysis.

It's all about eye strain and battery life.

I can look at the electronic ink screen of my Sony Pocket Reader (£140 from WH Smith) for hour after hour with perfect comfort and because it draws no power when its not "turning" pages I can get through between 10 and 15 books on a charge. Ebook readers are designed to do one job and do it well, jack-of-all-trades devices like the iPad are by definition compromises.

Is this article a joke ?

Ereaders have only one advantage, power conservation ? I'm sorry but that's just a consequence of their main advantage, the non-light emitting e-ink, which you then proceed to dismiss.

I read books, lots of them. I've read them on desktop pc monitors, laptops, netbooks, mids, phones, etc, and trying to do any sort of heavy reading on any of them is hopeless. The raison d'etre of ebook is e-ink, thus lack of eye strain, end of. What a pathetic article.

Two hundred and fifty quid for a good ebook reader?

Maybe so, if you insist on something with a nine or ten inch screen. But I'd submit that for many *readers*, as opposed to those who would rather use it for e.g. large tech drawings, newspaper/magazine format, or similarly large format display, the five or six inch screen is ideal. The unit's small enough to fit in a pocket, but has a screen with a decent amount of text on a screen - and the Sony 300 reader is available for under a hundred and fifty.

Which suggests that it's an easy price drop to under the ton - pile it high and sell it cheap. Addenda like music players, or even touch screen or note-making ability... these are not something I expect in a book, and so not in a reader. And network connectivity? Why? You might load a book once every two or three days, more likely download to a library and upload from there the once a month the thing requires charging. Again, it's a feature that has no real utility except to push up the price.

A critical requirement for any reader *must* be surely that you can hold it and use it in one hand? (To be sure, the Sony has an issue there; the page turn button is in the wrong place). But I can't see an ipad being used one handed.

I'll stick with the Sony thanks, six hundred quid for a thing which can do more in real terms but which is so much inferior in many others... nah.

Paris, because she's obviously reading something one-handed. And looking confused at the long words.

Google Android, Really?

Considering that Google just shafted all their hardware partners on the Android Phone by releasing their own I would think that most people who might have produced an Andriod Pad would be very very cautious about jumping in to bed with the company that does no evil again so soon.

Not to be pedantic...

But haven't apple already gone down the ebook reader style market with the newton??

That was effectively the same price as the ebook readers are now and the same size...

Also iPad sounds like a feminine hygine product does it not????

I think the point is being missed.....

The e-reader is really an immersive experience (sorry, I sound like a marketing drone) - you forget completely that you're using an electronic device and just get involved. It's just like a book. Colour doesn't matter, and in fact will get in the way. Same applies with a book.

I don't think that the ipad will ever be like that. It may have a place, but I don't honestly see it for books. Apart from anything else - it's just too big.

Pixel Qi?

Pixel Qi screens will tempt serious e-book readers away from readers, not the iPad.

"E Ink screens have just one advantage over the iPad’s display: power conservation.

It’s also said by some users that they’re easier to read for long periods of time than LCDs, and will almost certainly be easier to read outdoors in bright lighting."

E Ink is so superior for reading on it's not even funny.

Now if the iPad had one of these screens then you might have been onto something.

Missing the point

E-Ink was invented because refresh rates on LCD's do tire peoples eyes, it's not some kind of quirk that a few people have. The technology has cost millions to develop. The idea people were waiting for Apple to produce an LCD tablet in order to make LCD based readers viable is a bad one.

I doubt the price difference between E-Book readers and the iPad is going to be "£100". The most expensive reader I've seen is a 7" screen Sony reader in Waterstone's and that cost £270. Traditionally in consumer electronics you take the dollar sign and switch it to a pound so I think the iPad is going to be in the £400 - £850 range. This makes the iPad massively overpriced for the reader, netbook and tablet market Apple seem to be going for.

I admit I don't get the iPhone but I really don't get the iPad craze the device is literally a bigger and heavier iPhone without a camera or GPS, I was expecting something in between Mac OSX and the iPhone OS but from Job's description it sounds like it is running the iPhone OS.

"... which punters will happily risk the device quickly becoming obsolete"...

... and herein lies the problem that all e-Book readers face - longevity and obsolescence.

Books may be heavy & take up a lot of space, but they tend to last a very long time - their obselescene is based on language, relevance and accuracy.

eBook manufacturers may agree to standards - the ePub format, but some of them (that would be you Apple), have applied thier own layer of restriction - purchase from the iBook store and the only device you can view the book on will be an Apple one.

So, you've purchased a two hundred books over the course of 5 years, only to find your iPad is now obselete, thus rendering your collection of two hundred books useless.

Or your iPad packs in after a year and you can't access all those books you purchased - ah well, best go buy another iPad for £350 then.

You can paint it anyway you like, but books on electronic devices will never be a large market until those devices are as practical as a bog standard dead tree book.

Magazines, newspapers - yes, definately - there's a market there, but eBooks?

I can picture it now, I want to settle down in bed and read for a few hours. I grab my iPad or Kindle or whatever, turn it on, only to find there's no battery power left. Damn, where did I put that charger? Now I need to find the charger and plug the damn thing into a socket.

I'm sitting on the train with a three hour journey ahead of me - damn, but I forgot to charge the bloody eBook reader - tum te tum...

Granted, the Kindle, if your just reading on it, has a battery life of up to 2 weeks.

The reality is, a device sold on the strength of being just an eBook reader isn't a valid enough reason to purchase the device, regardless as to whether it costs £100 or not.

20 years down the line, several competing formats later and your book collection is a either a mess, or you've spent time, effort and probably money converting between formats.

I sincerely hope that eBooks are *never* more than just a novelty, a fad - life without libraries, book shops, sharing books with friends, turning a physical page, the smell of ink and paper...

How cold and heartless that would be.

£200?

The sony pocket reader costs less than £150 - half the price of the big iPod.

There is already a £150 e-reader, and e-ink is important

Sony make an e-reader with a 5" screen for £150 called the Sony Reader Pocket Edition, and it's a joy to use. I think you dismiss e-ink far too readily in your article, considering how much like reading real paper it is. Also the "obnoxious" flash is certainly a negative, but perhaps not to the extent you claim., it lasts only a brief moment, and because there is no backlight does not strain the eye.

Reading from an e-ink screen is far more relaxing then reading from an LCD screen, which is what I used to do using the iPod touch's stanza application. I don't think I'd want to go back.

what?

What a strange article. The only way to make the iWaste look good is comparing it to an ebook reader? An ebook reader is, guess what? An 'ebook reader', it replaces, 'b o o k s' and my last Stephen King paperback was never able to surf the internet, I have a laptop for that.

The iSilly fills no gap. It's not that much smaller than my 13" Macbook Pro. And my MCP has a proper operating system, net access, proper storage, it can read ebooks and has a DVD drive. Not to mention that I don't have to consantly hold it on the train etc.

You can't seriously type on it, not seriously. So you can opt for the keyboard? Great, more things to carry! Again, my MCP already comes with a keyboard too! :D

I'm afraid if you want to compare this iSausage to something, it has to be other tablets, it which case it fails miserably. And if you want to use it as an ebook reader, it's battery life sucks compared and your eyes will just not be able to cope. There is a huge difference between momentarily looking at a nice pretty colour screen and comparing it to e-ink, and reading it for a few hours. Your eyes will be streaming. By which time it's battery would have ran out whereas the ebook reader is still at 98% and eyes are fine.

There is no mystical person that somehow wants net access but doesn't yet own a laptop. We can't keep pretending they exist. Apple disciples will buy it, some of them, then the sales will slow to a trickle.

It really is OK to criticise Apple people, they have created an iLemon and we can't even make lemonade with it. Once the fabricated iHype disperses it'll be a nothing.

I have a Touch and good eyesight

This iPad thing appealed to me until I found out that Apple is in full control of what I put on it (until the jailbreak). That sucks. Blows, even.

This, though, is the beginning of always-connected, intelligent delivery products. Maybe even the keyboard.

But to consider moving from an iPod Touch to this Pad thing - nah. I can get a proper little computer for the same price and that does what I want.

Apple has lost the plot and started believing their own BS, IMO

"Taiwanese hardware makers like Asus and Acer are already working on colour tablets"

Make that "already sell", or did you not even check this very site?

http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2009/11/27/asus_t91mt/

It is what it is but

One of the reasons I was disappointed with the iPad was that after waiting so long for something like this and SJ allegedly pulling the thing back to the starting blocks for a rethink several times, there was nothing exciting or new about the hard tech. With Mirasol and LiquaVista screens on the near horizon and looking so very interesting to just see an "up-to" ten hour LCD laptop lid was, well a bit of a let down I thought. Then you find all the other things that Apple want to charge extra for and it starts to look like a very rushed effort, something that was put out to do one thing and one thing only...grab early market attention. Doesn't matter if it isn't the finished deal, doesn't matter if the 2G and 3G iterations will be completely different and probably what they really intended to build in the first place, the market is seen as ripe and therefore must be poached. People will buy it, everyone will see all competition as a "potential iPad killer" and Job's is your uncle, the perception is there that whatever comes out if it ain't fruit branded it ain't as good.

Still too much

£100 for an e-book reader? Try £25 or I'll stick with a book book.

Eye-strain nonsense

Eye-strain is quite simply caused by stress of the muscles used to move and focus your eyes. There is no difference between e-ink and LCD in terms of causing eye-strain, if you're focussing at the same distance, and looking at the same size type on the same size screen. LCD DOES NOT CAUSE EYESTRAIN ANY MORE THAN E-INK . I have seen no scientific evidence to contradict that view. This is a myth in the same category as the one about wi-fi signals cooking your brain, caused by misconception and ignorance. Reading small type on a badly positioned monitor gives you eyestrain, regardless of what type of monitor it is. I read ebooks for hours on end on an LCD PDA, and have done for years, and I have experienced no eyestrain. On the other hand, I do often get eye-strain after a few hours coding on my 1920x1200 17" laptop display, where I typically do have the text small in order to fit more information on-screen.

e-book readers all the way.

I have one of the (now slightly aged) sony prs500 Ereaders, and its great.

Battery lasts longer than it takes to read a book, takes a couple of hours to re-charge then your off for more reading fun.

Came fully equipped with a leather effect 'bound book' style case to keep the screen safe (and if you so choose make it look like your reading an untitled paper book), which you can easily remove, making it just the right size to fit in my jacket pocket, which is where it spends a fair deal of its not in use time.

Add to that that for the original price of £200 i also got included in the box a CD with 100 classic books (War and Peace, Origin of Species, Mobey Dick, Alice in Wonderland, Various Dickens, Bronte etc.. (many if not most I plan on reading)) you end up with 100 books, at an average of £2 each, and a device to read them on that fits in your pocket.

Reading is a pleasure, and for anyone that is bemoaning the 'flash' that you get when you turn the page, I have found that after about 20 mins of reading, you don't even notice it. (its like living next to the train tracks)

Hmm...

"E Ink screens have just one advantage over the iPad’s display: power conservation."

As others have pointed out, this is: a) a major advantage, and b) not the only one, as readability is also important in an, er, e-reader.

I still use a monochrome Palm Pilot, for similar reasons. A battery charge lasts at least a fortnight.

I have absolutely no idea why anyone would want an iPad, unless they're really desperate for something shiny to fondle, but I'm sure someone will.

One (hyphenated) word.

Tam-pod.