Fujitsu dramatically enhances color-e-paper functionality - Update

Fujitsu enhances color e-paper functionality
  The image at the left is of the older model.

"Tokyo, May 7, 2010 - (ACN Newswire) - Fujitsu Laboratories Ltd. today announced the development of a newly-enhanced color electronic paper (e-paper) that features the world's highest-level color image quality. By extensively redesigning the panel structure and image re-write methods of Fujitsu's previous-version color e-paper, in addition to offering bright color, Fujitsu has improved contrast ratio to 7:1 (a threefold improvement compared to Fujitsu's previous version), and has made the image re-write speed twice as fast at 0.7 seconds compared to Fujitsu's previous color e-paper, thus enabling smooth image transitions and color display quality that is at the highest levels available for color e-paper. "

Details at the Earthtimes link above.

UPDATE - May 7, afternoon. (Original posting was same date, morning).
Electronista displays what it says are current color capability vs older version.
  They also say that "The device is intended for the Japanese market and may be a sequel to the pioneering Flepia.  American companies haven't adopted color e-paper so far, although Amazon has already said it eventually plans to switch to color for the Kindle. [via Akihabara]"

See larger picture (and accompanying story) at  the Akihabara story or by clicking on the comparison photo.

SPEED AND VIDEO
I still think there is not that much contrast for a device that is currently selling for $1,000 in its less contrast-capable version.  Also note, that Electronista  mentioned  "A 1024x768 color image redraws in 0.7 seconds, which is still too slow for video but is closer to the speed of regular grayscale e-paper " (which is important only because the Qualcomm Mirasol will have that.  You can search previous articles here  on Mirasol at top right search-bar).

Some Good Review Links for Kobo, Alex and other e-readers - Update1

Video of Len Edgerly's take on the Alex, after using it for about 2 weeks.

   He mentions that it's $399, which takes it a bit out of contention due to other aspects he describes and shows, but it appears that it will sell for about $349, I read.  That is still $100 more than the leading e-Ink e-readers (Nook, Sony, Kindle).  Also, I've read that Borders will be partnering with the Alex, and the Borders bookstore selection will be available to Alex users probably in June or July.

  In the video, Len compares the Alex -- which has a small color web-browser component (WiFi) at the bottom -- to the Nook, which has a smaller lower color panel that can now be used for seeing slices of web-browsing in  WiFi mode (with fuller website data shown in the e-Ink area).  The Alex can shift material from the small color screen to the e-Ink screen for easier reading.  It's interesting to see these two e-readers side by side.  Neither one has 3G cellular wireless access.

Here are are a couple of links to some very thorough reviews I enjoyed recently:
ALEX - by Spring Design
  Alex review by Laptop Magazine, March 19.

KOBO - by Kobo Inc
Bear in mind that it appears to be a very good bare-bones e-reader for $150 or so.  If getting it for your kids for educational purposes, note that it is less expensive because it has no in-line dictionary,  no Search, no highlighting or notes (all things important to me because I actually remember better when I can highlight and make notes, and I learn a bit more actually using a dictionary instead of guessing as I did for decades).

  It also has no wireless of any kind for downloading books even, but uses bluetooth, has no text-to-speech, and no mp3's as most other e-readers have (but the latter isn't important).

  BIG PLUS - it allows you to borrow public library books.
  That alone can make the difference.

And it comes with 100 classics on it.
  Kobo review by Electronista

I may update this one as it goes, depending on how long it is between fairly thorough reviews that I notice.  (There are a lot of reviews that aren't thorough.)

UPDATE 1  - May 7. (Original posting May 6 ) - Borders is named as retail partner.

MacWorld on 3G iPad video streaming performance + tips

MacWorld's iPhone Central reported that ABC Digital released the latest version of ABC Player on Tuesday and it now supports video streaming over 3G (Consumer Reports had mentioned that the ABC Player couldn't be used for that, before the new update).

 However, there are limits in how much data can stream over 3G cellular wireless, since several apps streaming unlimted HD videos could bring down a network not meant for that.  Therefore the streams are downsized and the viewing quality is noticeably lower.

  MacWorld's Dan Moren also has some cautions reported on the performance of video streaming over 3G.  First, he reminds buyers that the costs of a 3G iPad are ultimately a bit more than some have realized, as the $500 price for the Wi-Fi-only low-storage iPad has been the most quoted as representing iPad pricing.

" 3G models command a $130 premium over their Wi-Fi-only siblings, making the price tags $629 for the 16GB version, $729 for 32GB, and $829 for 64GB.  And keep in mind that the higher price covers only the 3G hardware inside the iPad. In order to actually use the 3G service, you’ll need to pay for one of the two monthly plans that Apple and AT&T have teamed up to offer: a $15-per-month plan that allows you 250MB of data transfer or a $30-per-month plan that allows you unlimited data.  And unlike the iPhone service agreement, which requires a two-year commitment with AT&T, you can cancel your 3G plan for the iPad at any time. "

The focus of the article though, is the 3G experience when it comes to streaming video, relative to what it is with most WiFi setups -- and I'll stress that you can still choose to use the WiFi which is included in the 3G iPad also, and you can shut off the 3G when you want to use the WiFi.  In other words, Moren is discussing an added capability that does not have to be the option used when you're around a WiFi network but will give you access where there is no WiFi network or hotspot available:

" Given that the iPad also boasts the latest 802.11n Wi-Fi specification, there’s no contest between the two: Wi-Fi will beat 3G every single time. I ran a few speed tests using the Speed Test iPhone application and, though unscientific, Wi-Fi’s superiority was readily apparent—in one test at my home, Wi-Fi was an astounding 70 times faster at downloads and 30 times faster at uploads. Other tests (such as the one pictured here) showed less of a disparity, but still universally deemed Wi-Fi the winner.

Of course, such performance varies widely depending on the quality of the AT&T network in your location. And given that poor performance on AT&T’s 3G network has been one of the major complaints with the iPhone, don’t expect magically better performance on the iPad. "

However, he says that if you have solid 3G access where you are,  you'll find this access "perfectly serviceable" for reading email, websurfing, RSS feeds, and checking into Facebook and Twitter.

  With more data-intense tasks like video streaming though, Moren considers the performance "sometimes subpar," with Netflix's iPad app "mostly watchable" though there were frequent pauses in playback for them as the video re-buffered.   YouTube over 3G is "substantially lower quality" than when over WiFi.

  He confirms that Netflix down-samples the video but finds it "passable," and when he tried the the AirVideo video-streaming app, which offers a choice of a variety of data rates, he still had trouble with pauses in playback.

  With the ABC Player update, the performance really varied depending on location, with streaming impossible at his home but better elsewhere.

" Most perplexingly, I found that YouTube videos streamed over 3G were practically unwatchable, due to their low quality—you appear to get the same videos that the iPhone gets over the 3G connection, which look terribly pixelated on the iPad’s higher resolution screen. "

Moren also points out that when you're out and about and no WiFi is available, these flaws won't bother you much (which is the way I feel about the no-cost Kindle 3G for B&W text and still-images when I'm roaming the streets).

Moren writes TONS more and has lots of good advice about the $15 or $30 payment options as well as how to get the most out of the 3G iPad.  He also compares battery usage between the choices of WiFi and 3G.

Even though I personally have no need or desire for an iPad because my Samsung Netbook (same size screen, with no reflections, 2.7 lbs, terrific keyboard, lots of great features and even the basic ones :-), and  excellent video streaming under WiFi though the price on this model keeps going up), my advice has always been to pay the extra $130 for the flexibility of the 3G  iPad when there is no WiFi available -- all of this depending on whether that's important to you and/or your pocketbook.  His final take is similar.  I wouldn't like to pay that much money and find myself needing access and not having 3G (and I'm spoiled by always having that (free) text-lookup capability on the streets with the plain-jane Kindle, which is otherwise just a dedicated B&W e-reader).

When iPad availability is nil in some areas and you don't mind quite exploitative pricing by marketplace stores at Amazon,  there's a link in the right-hand column for those.
   But me?  I'd wait until they become available again.  Most of us have plenty of access with other devices, and most don't see this as a 'need-' but a 'want-' item and friends love it for that aspect.  As has been said, it's a beautiful consumer device for consuming info as compared to one you create work or long pieces on.  But MacWorld's cautions on expectations for the 3G video-streaming are good to consider when deciding which iPad would be most worth the investment for you.

Interesting info from commenters to the article there also.

iPad helps win $361,661 in court case vs $6,600 settlement

CNet's Chris Matyszczyk reports that, rejecting a settlement for $6,600, Peter Summerill and his iPad won a trial the other day, using the eye-catching device for quick presentations to the jury:

' To the unincarcerated eye, MacLitigator seems to have used the unassuming genius of the iPad to maximum effect. "Using Keynote, all documents to be admitted at trial were loaded in. BlankiPad_Trialslides provided a 'tabbed' divider set up, separating photos of the scene, X-rays, medical records, tables, and summaries into their respective categories," he wrote on his blog.

  This all seems so beautifully seamless. But wait, there's the iPad's wonderful speed too. "Because the iPad can switch so quickly between presentations, flipping from the trial slides to the deposition transcript slides during a cross-examination is an effortless process," explained MacLitigator. '

Details at the link...

Consumer Reports has some issues with 3G iPad streaming video

Consumer Reports writes about its tests with streaming video on the 3G cellular wireless capable iPad, which is being shipped to those pre-ordering earlier and will be officially available for others on May 7 -- for $629 for the lowest storage capability of 16G.

They speak to the issue of $15 vs $30 for a month's of cellular web-data from AT&T's 3G network on top of the added $130 cost for 3G capability of the hardware.

Most of us know that 3G cellular wireless will tend to be slower in real-world access speed than a strong WiFi system.  But I would have held out for the 3G capability for use when not near a WiFi hotpoint.  This report recommends against that.

Excerpts: notable points

3G was slower than Wi-Fi. Download and upload speeds were significantly slower than the Wi-Fi version, but still fast enough for routine Web browsing.

You can’t stream all sources on 3G.
  [ The ABC Player app does not support cellular apps at this time.]
  [CR's attempt to download a TV show over 3G from the iTunes store was also thwarted, with a message they'd need Wi-Fi or should use iTunes on a computer to buy the video.]

Video quality varied by app
[ The YouTube video was blocky and lacked detail.  Netflix was better but still softer ]

Video quickly eats into the cheapest iPad 3G plan
[ The $15/mo. plan can be used up pretty quickly -- a few Youtube videos, a short segment from a Netflix movie, downloading some small apps and buying a couple of books used up more than 30%.]

[They'll run more tests over the coming week.   but here's their take so far:]

You won’t want to buy the iPad 3G to stream videos; we encountered too many problems.  It might come in handy for Web browsing and e-mail, but odds are you already have a smart phone to do just that.  Unless you want to spend another $30 a month to browse on a large screen, we recommend a pass.

My take The 3G iPad does have WiFi capability too though, so it's still at least as useful as the WiFi-only model while giving some capability when away from hot spots, if you can justify the expense.

Qualcomm Mirasol stories out today & the Amazon rumor

Earlier, at the Kindleworld blog, I added some more info on Qualcomm's Mirasol technology, including the rumor (from Qualcomm reps, per Clayton Morris) that Amazon may be using the e-paper-like (but speedy) color technology in the Fall (see link above).

Yesterday, Cliff Edwards of Bloomgberg's Businessweek reported on Qualcomm's Bright Low-Power Screen and the "So-called reflective displays [that] use microscopic mirrors to create iridescence"

  In that story which explains the technology, Edwards writes:

' [CEO Paul Jacobs] says that this fall at least one manufacturer, which he declined to name, will ship e-readers using Mirasol displays. The timing could be fortuitous. Yankee Group forecasts sales of e-readers to more than triple, to 19 million, by 2013. Dell (DELL), HTC, and other companies have announced plans to introduce full-color devices later this year to grab a piece of that market. Amazon declined to comment on its plans. '

Businessweek adds another story on how Mirasol imitates butterfly wings.

HP apparently killing their tablet too

Tech Crunch's Michael Arrington reports that a source briefed on this has told him that HP isn't satisfied with Windows 7 as a tablet operating system and has terminated the project.

He adds that "HP may also be abandoning Intel-based hardware for its slate lineup simply because it’s too power hungry. That would also rule out Windows 7 as an operating system."   I had seen a real lack of enthusiasm over the last couple of months over the HP tablet's performance.  Full details at the link above.