The fact that it's long and narrow must give good light to text since it kinds of comes from more than one direction.. Must reduce shadows from hands and other stuff. Cool.

I got this a month ago and I really like it. My only criticism is that it requires a wall wart style transformer, which is a very un-green choice by the maker. It also can't be switched on via an switched outlet, it requires a manual button push even if you have it on a switched outlet.

Other than that it's amazing! You can see some pictures of it here... http://www.flickr.com/photos/43st/sets/72157594283189519/

So where's the much-vaunted greater efficiency of LEDs? From the figures given above it seems like their efficiency is pretty much on a par with CFLs. I have had two 11w CFL-based desklights for years that give about as much light as a 60w incandescent bulb would and I'm very happy with them and they only cost about $15 each. Sure, the bulbs won't last quite as long as LEDs, but that's a very big difference in price for very little reduction in energy usage!

Actually, AFAIK most LEDs are a bit less efficient than CFLs.

That we are now making some that are as efficient or more is a really great development. The main advantages of LEDs are that they last extremely long, are very durable and shock resistant, and they don't contain mercury. They are also more directional, so for less total output they can still give as much or more light than an omnidirectional light in some situations.

With a bit more technical refinement (better color, a bit more efficient and cheaper to make), they could be an almost perfect solution, IMO..

I have seen a number of previous posts on the subject of the mercury in CFLs, and the conclusion has always been that the amount of mercury is relatively insignificant in the great scheme of things, making it something of a red herring.

The directional nature of LEDs, however, IS a bit of an issue. Although I can see their value in situations where this is a bonus (automotive, torches and downlighters in the home are three that come to mind), it is a positive disadvantage in many (replacements for most standard light bulbs).

Furthermore CFLs are available now and clearly are pretty efficient - much more so than any incandescent lamps. Let's just make sure that we don't pass them by as old hat in favour of the future (questionable?) promise of LEDs!

One other interesting technology is cold cathode - I haven't seen much on this recently and it promises very good efficiency (through less wasted heat generation), better even than CFL, whilst remaining an omnidirectional light source. It also has a more compact tube which can be a benefit in designing lamps from the POV of reflector efficiency etc.

As an architect LEDs provides us with innumerable options . They are extremely small , can be tucked away anywhere , have looong life , so one can put them in places that need not be accessed every some time for replacements , LED strips can take any contour . But the initial cost is still a huge factor . Most people I know would buy an incandescent bulb over a CFL for that reason, LEDs would be used only for speciality lighting . $149 is quite a bit more than other equivalents .

I see it for $129 on the Smart Home site.

This lamp isn't very bright. Look at the picture the guy submitted above on Flickr, it barely lights up the space BEHIND his monitor, much less his whole desk.

120 lumens is about 10% of the light of a 100W bulb. SO WHAT if it saves you some money, you can't SEE.

Don't forget one drawback to CFLs are that them emitt UV - Bad for eyes. LEDs used in lamps do not.