Talk:Comparison of e-readers

Rebrands

I have a feeling we're missing a few. i.e. the Cybook and the eSlick are I think both rebrands of Netronix hardware but different software, though I'm having trouble finding a source. DaveWF (talk) 23:19, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Comparison

It would be nice for someone to start and E-book device comparison page. With the Kindle coming out, this will become a popular topic over the next few weeks...

Sounds a good idea. You might like to consider starting it off yourself. — Matt Crypto 19:02, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Price

I added the fact tag to the claim that e-readers are expensive compared to PDAs and laptops because it's potentially misleading at the moment. While I would agree that most e-book readers are expensive compared to laptops and PDAs, this is only relatively because of what you're getting. For example the $400 for the Kindle or even $500 for the Sony E-reader isn't really that expensive compared to a laptop, there aren't that many at the price (new). The issue is of course that with a laptop you get a device with a bigger colour screen, a better processor, lots of hard disk space and which can do a lot more. With PDAs, $400 is I think on the fairly high end although PDAs tend to be smaller (but again as with laptops have colour screens and usually better processors etc) Nil Einne (talk) 10:49, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Reader programs for PC

www.ereader.com seems to be perhaps the only PC reader that doesn't include burdensome DRM (such as preventing copy/paste) the way Adobe Digital Editions and Mobipocket do.[1] --Ty580 (talk) 04:46, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Existence of this article

There is an issue if this article should exist or not. On the pro side is myself, on the con side User:Thumperward.

I believe Wikipedia should have a comprehensive and complete list all of dedicated e-book readers. It is not an open-ended or unusually long list, there are only about perhaps one or two dozen. This list would include discontinued models for historical purposes to show how the technology has advanced and changed. The article is currently a stub but it could be expanded to include much more information about each device in a grid matrix. For example. I don't believe I am the only one who feels this was as another anon user expressed a similar sentiment above.[2]

On the con side, from what I can gather, the position is that Wikipedia should only list notable models (ie. those with their own internal Wikipedia article) and not have a "list of" article at all, but only list them in a more general parent article. In effect, this "list of" article would be re-directed e-book and the list pared down (as it currently exists in that article).

Hopefully this states the general positions. Can Wikipedia have a comprehensive and complete list of all e-book readers, or only a partial list based on some criteria of notability (ie. Wikipedia article for the device).

Thanks for your input. Fothergill Volkensniff IV (talk) 14:45, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

At present, such a list is easy to make and provides an exhaustive overview of a niche market. However, if e-book readers will become popular, the number of models will surely explode, and then it will be both unfeasible and meaningless to try and keep an up-to-date list, in the same way that few people would take interest in a list of all cellular telephones or all PDAs.

I would propose to have no more than several examples of state-of-the-art readers on the e-book reader page to give an idea of typical capabilities, possibly in a matrix format, and have a short list of the notable readers (the Kindle; first e-paper-based reader, etc.). MaxVT (talk) 18:31, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Like all such lists, in a class of things where many of the readers are notable, it is usual to limit the list to that, and the reason is WP:BOT#DIRECTORY. A list of all ebook readers may be useful, but it is not our job to do thisany more than w list all of any other sort of products. A list of t he ones with articles is useful, as a guide to the reader--it helps to give a little more information than can be conveyed in an category--which is just the name. I A comparison article is possible, but then, it would be fair for this to include all that do have an article. There is no real reason to vary Wikipedia policy for this particular instance. The existing policy has proven very successful here and elsewhere in keeping out spam, while keeping in notable information. DGG (talk) 23:44, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

The list is finite and small. There is no spam since it is a complete list, and many of the models are no longer being sold, it's a history of the industry. Concerns about what might happen in the future: if in the future things do in fact explode and there are 100s of models and it is difficult to keep track of them all like PDA's or cell-phones, than obviously only "notable" models should be listed. Until then, listing the industry history is very simple - there just are not that many - we've done it and should be happy to have it here as a base to work from for future historians (wikipedians) to write a history of the most important models (important != most well known). Give this article some time to see how the industry develops, because no one really knows where things are headed, and what in the past will be important. 71.191.40.106 (talk) 05:31, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

if they ever were notable, write articles on them. If not, try an article on history of e book readers, if you have adequate sources. DGG (talk) 08:45, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

readius bit

why does readius and the manufacturer link both link to the phillips page? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.132.218.207 (talk) 21:44, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

The redirects of Readius and Polymer Vision to the Philips page doesn't make sense. Also, the redirects were established by a user who later had his account suspended on grounds of abusive edits. I have requested the deletion of the redirecting links. 85.24.120.207 (talk) 09:45, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

Citations

In intro paragraph, can we just say that use of the term "for this article" is restricted to a certain meaning? Seems way more readable and economical. Ronocdh (talk) 00:58, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

elonex and borders

elonex are releasing a new reader under a deal with borders in the UK. this has many ghits, from notable reliable sources. someone may wish to add the elonex device. it's probably a rebadged machine, but I don't know enough about the devices to tell which one it is. 87.113.86.207 (talk) 17:21, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

software and hardware

A web search will show many software projects that call themselves, and are called by other people, "ebook reader software". See, for example, Microsoft Reader (which even uses a freakish proprietary format with DRM). So I've removed the comment about "term restricted to hardware not software". 87.113.86.207 (talk) 20:23, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Rumored devices or prototypes

I think this section is just about apple and it should be expanded or completely erased.