The video shows a weather app as an example. It implies we would leave our phone the e-Ink screen up. I find it interesting because it changes the way we are using our devices today.
Calling/skype, various messaging apps, podcasts, music, weather, bus app, email, calendar, chess clock. There are some things that wouldn't work (games, video). These are fairly low priority for me. Some things that might sorta work, especially if they were re-made for e-ink (eg maps/navigation apps). These I want on my phone.
An e-ink phone might not be a bad idea if it could carry other advantages too. A $200 smartphone with 3 day batteries that runs 80% of apps might be appealing to a lot of people.
Something with just a little more capability than a "dumb" phone or feature-phone but with a more comfortable interface and 7 days battery life would be able to capture the market. Let's say, one builds "visual voicemail" and add some sort of more user-friendly banking front end which still uses the current SMS channels. Combine that with light web browsing and something like Wikipedia and Twitter/Facebook, and you'd have it.
It didn't had much success in Perú. (although I'm an avid fan an ex-user of it)
Why do you think it hasn't cautious on in Peru. What would catch on there?
The phone had 3 mayor design issues. At least from my POV. First, I couldn't write . in in text messages. I had , @ even £ but alas, no .! Then there was the issue that all sound went increscendo, thing is the message notification was to short for the sound to reach an audible level. And last, as the e-ink only consumes power to paint the screen if you manage to run out of battery You wouldn't realize immediately as the screen was still showing what it showed before running out of power.
I think what would catch is something cheap that seems pretty/expensive.