I would have agreed with you before I got an iPad. After all, I used to read for hours on end on Palm devices and my iPod touch and iPhone, and I work all day staring at LCD screens, and neither glossy screens nor backlighting ever bothered me. Pre-purchase I figured that my problem with reading on the iPad would come down to battery life. That is a pretty big issue, especially when traveling, but not even close to the worst.
I *hate* extended reading on the iPad. It causes eyestrain. My gut call is that it's because of the font smoothing. All of the fonts I've tried, in both iBooks and the Kindle app, appear blurry. The pixel density of the iPad screen is just too low for font smoothing, I think, and *none* of the available fonts avoid it. On the handheld devices the fonts appear sharp, and on my PCs they are sharp. But not with the iPad's e-book readers!
Interestingly, I do not have this issue when reading web pages, nor with the Wired iPad app (I really think magazines on the iPad are a winner), nor with the new NY Times app. None of these use the fonts used in the e-book readers, and all appear much sharper to my eyes. On the other hand, it's rare that I read for very long before bouncing around in any of those (even long Wired articles are usually finished in 5 to 10 minutes); maybe the changing page layouts makes a difference.
I am not doubting what you say but I read on my iPad every day without suffering from unsharp fonts. I rarely read for more than an hour at the time, however. But I do spend most of my day staring at an LCD monitor in one form or another and suffer no eye strain. So I think it is an individual thing. If you spend a few hours reading a regular old fashioned book you may suffer from eye strain, depending on a number of factors, such as font size, your eye sight, light. Its not as if eye strain didn't exist before the iPad. Staring at video monitors for hours at an end can cause eyestrain for different reasons (such as forgetting to blink).
Quote:
I think the glossy screen makes a big difference, too, even though it never bothered me on my Macbook. The angle at which I use the iPad is much more horizontal than any laptop I've ever owned. That makes it far, far more likely to reflect ceiling lights into my eyes. It's really irritating, enough that I have considered getting one of those laminates to reduce the glare. (Haven't done it yet because I really don't like sticking things to my screens.)
Many people hate the glossy screen but I have never been one of them. If there is too much reflection and I can't adjust the screen I just stop reading. My office used to get direct sunlight late in the afternoon that hit my iMac. That was problematic until I move a plant to create some shade.
Quote:
On top of that eyestrain issues, the iPad really is too heavy as a reader. I literally got tennis elbow within a week of receiving my iPad. I'd never had that before, and I have had to be very careful when holding the iPad for extended periods. It really needs to be propped up. That's no big deal when I'm watching movies with it on a table or pillow but it's kind of a pain when I'm reading in a chair.
The iPad is heavy but tennis elbow? I think you are fairly unique, there. I got that through playing squash. But yes, a lighter device is undoubtedly better for extended reading. Hardbacks are the same.
Quote:
I still love the iPad, and I am totally shocked at how little I use my laptop now, but given my choice I will do extended reading with the Kindle every time. It's much more comfortable to hold, screen glare is much less of a problem, it works in bright light, its fonts are SHARP, and I don't have to worry about the battery dying if I can't recharge it in the evening.
YMMV, but my opinion stems from having and using both for hours every day. If you love to read, and you're reading novels rather than graphic layouts like magazines, then the Kindle is by far the better choice in my opinion. Even if the screens were equal, the lower weight is by itself a huge improvement. The Kindle is, of course, lousy for non-textual content ... so it's nice to have both if you can do it.
If I don't have my Kindle I'd still rather read books on the iPhone than on the iPad. You cannot even imagine how much that surprises me.
Sure as hell surprises me but each to his own. I used to read books on the subway to work on a Palm - black and white, no backlight, low contrast, pen input... but if the book was good it mattered little.
I don't really see why it should be impossible to use different tints for the e-ink particles, without needing filters. They're not using filters now, right? Their problems seem to be two-fold:
1. It is difficult to construct small enough pixels to be able to pack them in tight enough for blending when each pixel has to be a particular shade. It's likely this will get solved as the technology matures.
2. It is difficult to get high levels of contrast, so the colors appear muddy. This may actually be improved faster than #1; it's really amazing how much better the contrast is on a K3 than the K1 or K2.
I'm not sure they couldn't do pretty well even with muddy colors, though. Much graphic content doesn't need to be vivid to convey the information. Still, I think it'll be a long time before I prefer a Kindle to an iPad for color content.
The problem with what you propose is where do the reflective tints go when they aren't needed? Because you would need a ridiculous number of them for every pixel. Reflective color is subtractive color and to get enough color gamut per pixel you would need a lot more than just RGB elements, at least several hundreds per pixel. There just isn't enough space to twist polarizations for all those necessary sub-pixels let alone figuring how to store it without bleeding color.
The current e-ink is simple, and it is a filter. It either reflects everything off the background for "white" or does not reflect 99% or so for black by a simple polarization twist filter. There's nothing left to get in the way like there would be with color reflective elements.
Simply doing color with RGB in e-ink like we do color with backlights does not work because light has to go through color e-ink pixels twice, where it only has to pass through once with a backlight. That difference is HUGE when you determine what color gamut can actually be displayed.
I have both and use both for different purposes. I would never settle into bed to read a book with the iPad. It simply strains my eyes after awhile. It is more comfortable reading on the Kindle for long periods.
I would never settle into bed to read a book on Kindle. My wife would be so annoyed by the light I have to turn on while white-text-black-background on iPad is great.
Besides the iPad fails as an eReader- who wants to read staring into a light source?
Quote:
Originally Posted by paxman
Groan... not that retarded rhetoric again. There is nothing 'bad' about reading on a backlit and yes, glossy, screen. It won't screw up your eye sight. You may not like it but that's totally different.
Quote:
Originally Posted by iLiver
To my ignore list, Apple fanboy. Keep reading into a light bulb.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nvidia2008
LOL I wonder who's the one going into people's ignore lists.
No kidding. Who will get the axe? A smartie-pants newbie that created an account a couple weeks ago with 15 posts, vs. a respected member of 3+ years with over 1,100 posts. Hmmm.
Quote:
Originally Posted by matrix07
I would never settle into bed to read a book on Kindle. My wife would be so annoyed by the light I have to turn on while white-text-black-background on iPad is great.
This is a deal-breaker for me. Unless you're single, reading in bed with an external light is going to annoy the hell out of your spouse/partner/dorm-mate/whatever. I'm really (really) not a fan of glossy screens, but a Kindle is useless for reading in bed at night. Laptop works fine, iPad would work fine. For me.
Contrary to popular belief, it's glare, not light that causes eye strain. On that note, I experience a little bit of eyestrain with the iPad, but the benefits of the device far outweigh the negatives. For me, I don't use it just for reading novels. I'm a student and it does a fantastic job with PDFs for class readings and etextbooks and I'm not the type of person that has to have a physical book in front in front of them. I'm also a history major and use a lot of books for classes that don't have indexes, so the the ability to type in what I'm looking for into a search box is an invaluable time/sanity saver. Given that only the Kindle DX can really handle textbooks, I'd rather spend a couple hundred more dollars on a device that allows me to view color pictures and do a lot more than read books. Also, my etextbooks each semester are rarely all on the same platform and the iPad allows me to use Kindle, Nook, iBooks, etc.
Groan... not that retarded rhetoric again. There is nothing 'bad' about reading on a backlit and yes, glossy, screen. It won't screw up your eye sight. You may not like it but that's totally different.
Yet everyone that has reviewed both believe kindle is a LOT better for reading.
I now own a kindle and an iPad. Like someone posted earlier, they don't really compete...yet. But when e-ink technology matures I guarantee apple will release a competing product, but done properly. I have only owned it for 10 minutes and I'm thinking 'if this was an Apple product it would work like...' much room for improvement, but til then I have the best of both worlds.
Define 'done properly':
I predict you say something as stupid as unibody aluminium, multi touch and syncs with itunes.
The kindle is already doing it 'properly'.
All apple will do is copy it and send it to Johnny Ive.
No kidding. Who will get the axe? A smartie-pants newbie that created an account a couple weeks ago with 15 posts, vs. a respected member of 3+ years with over 1,100 posts. Hmmm.
This is a deal-breaker for me. Unless you're single, reading in bed with an external light is going to annoy the hell out of your spouse/partner/dorm-mate/whatever. I'm really (really) not a fan of glossy screens, but a Kindle is useless for reading in bed at night. Laptop works fine, iPad would work fine. For me.
sorry I have to laugh at this.
Deal breaker because your wife is annoyed with you putting a light on in bed. You can get reading lamps that give off less light than an iPad.
25% who own an iPad are not satisfied with the device! Sheez...what would it take to satisfy them?
Sheez!
Best
That's an odd question to ask on a computer site's forum. It's quite possible that they are not satisfied because they want it to have the features of iPad 2 of course.
Quote:
"No matter how loudly the business-as-usual bells chime, we cannot silence that quiet voice within that asks how a system dependent on lack of satisfaction could ever lead to satisfaction"
- Corrina Gordon-Barnes
Quote:
Our enormously productive economy demands that we make consumption our way of life...that we convert the buying and use of goods into rituals...that we seek our spiritual satisfaction, or ego satisfaction, in consumption. We need things burned up, worn out, replaced and discarded at an ever-increasing rate.'
The real question is iBooks Vs Kindle. Since I got my iPad, I have bought 2 books on the iBook store (both in the first week of having the device) and 6 in the Kindle store.
I own both. They really don't compete, in my opinion. Reading on the iPad annoys me: the LCD is too bright, the fonts are jagged and low-res, the device is way too big and heavy. The Kindle, on the other hand, is absolutely perfect for reading, annotating etc. The e-ink screen really is amazing. The iPad wins when it comes to reading magazines and newspapers, browsing the web... Basically everything except serious book-reading.
Oh, and also: The Kindle in its official case fits into every coat pocket. I take it with me wherever I go. The iPad is just too big; I might as well bring along the physical books.
Meanwhile Kindle 2's sold out in a nano second on Black Friday.
i don't think this 'result' is good. why not use sales of kindles and see how much they have declined?
i would say if you are going to purchase and ipad then why buy a kindle too? i have both (kindle was a gift) and i love the kindle for novel reading but the small kindle is awful for technical books. all the diagrams are tiny. i would rather have the kindle dx but who is going to pay 400 dollars for that? get an ipad....
The real question is iBooks Vs Kindle. Since I got my iPad, I have bought 2 books on the iBook store (both in the first week of having the device) and 6 in the Kindle store.
i can read the kindle books on the ipad, imac, windows, android, iphone and even linux if you are lucky enough to have the previous installer. that keeps me with amazon and am happy with it.
Marketing nonsense aside, the Kindle offers an unmatched value: free 3G connection for life! Compare this to a $1000/year data plan...
- sent from my wife's Kindle
what is this 1000 dollars you speak of?
3g plans for the ipad in the US are
$15/month for 250GB and
$25/month for 2GB
max $300/year, and there's no contract. pay as you go - turn it on and off as you need it and you do it right from the device.. you don't need to call or visit a website to enable/cancel service.
Comments
I would have agreed with you before I got an iPad. After all, I used to read for hours on end on Palm devices and my iPod touch and iPhone, and I work all day staring at LCD screens, and neither glossy screens nor backlighting ever bothered me. Pre-purchase I figured that my problem with reading on the iPad would come down to battery life. That is a pretty big issue, especially when traveling, but not even close to the worst.
I *hate* extended reading on the iPad. It causes eyestrain. My gut call is that it's because of the font smoothing. All of the fonts I've tried, in both iBooks and the Kindle app, appear blurry. The pixel density of the iPad screen is just too low for font smoothing, I think, and *none* of the available fonts avoid it. On the handheld devices the fonts appear sharp, and on my PCs they are sharp. But not with the iPad's e-book readers!
Interestingly, I do not have this issue when reading web pages, nor with the Wired iPad app (I really think magazines on the iPad are a winner), nor with the new NY Times app. None of these use the fonts used in the e-book readers, and all appear much sharper to my eyes. On the other hand, it's rare that I read for very long before bouncing around in any of those (even long Wired articles are usually finished in 5 to 10 minutes); maybe the changing page layouts makes a difference.
I am not doubting what you say but I read on my iPad every day without suffering from unsharp fonts. I rarely read for more than an hour at the time, however. But I do spend most of my day staring at an LCD monitor in one form or another and suffer no eye strain. So I think it is an individual thing. If you spend a few hours reading a regular old fashioned book you may suffer from eye strain, depending on a number of factors, such as font size, your eye sight, light. Its not as if eye strain didn't exist before the iPad. Staring at video monitors for hours at an end can cause eyestrain for different reasons (such as forgetting to blink).
I think the glossy screen makes a big difference, too, even though it never bothered me on my Macbook. The angle at which I use the iPad is much more horizontal than any laptop I've ever owned. That makes it far, far more likely to reflect ceiling lights into my eyes. It's really irritating, enough that I have considered getting one of those laminates to reduce the glare. (Haven't done it yet because I really don't like sticking things to my screens.)
Many people hate the glossy screen but I have never been one of them. If there is too much reflection and I can't adjust the screen I just stop reading. My office used to get direct sunlight late in the afternoon that hit my iMac. That was problematic until I move a plant to create some shade.
On top of that eyestrain issues, the iPad really is too heavy as a reader. I literally got tennis elbow within a week of receiving my iPad. I'd never had that before, and I have had to be very careful when holding the iPad for extended periods. It really needs to be propped up. That's no big deal when I'm watching movies with it on a table or pillow but it's kind of a pain when I'm reading in a chair.
The iPad is heavy but tennis elbow? I think you are fairly unique, there. I got that through playing squash. But yes, a lighter device is undoubtedly better for extended reading. Hardbacks are the same.
I still love the iPad, and I am totally shocked at how little I use my laptop now, but given my choice I will do extended reading with the Kindle every time. It's much more comfortable to hold, screen glare is much less of a problem, it works in bright light, its fonts are SHARP, and I don't have to worry about the battery dying if I can't recharge it in the evening.
YMMV, but my opinion stems from having and using both for hours every day. If you love to read, and you're reading novels rather than graphic layouts like magazines, then the Kindle is by far the better choice in my opinion. Even if the screens were equal, the lower weight is by itself a huge improvement. The Kindle is, of course, lousy for non-textual content ... so it's nice to have both if you can do it.
If I don't have my Kindle I'd still rather read books on the iPhone than on the iPad. You cannot even imagine how much that surprises me.
Sure as hell surprises me but each to his own. I used to read books on the subway to work on a Palm - black and white, no backlight, low contrast, pen input... but if the book was good it mattered little.
I don't really see why it should be impossible to use different tints for the e-ink particles, without needing filters. They're not using filters now, right? Their problems seem to be two-fold:
1. It is difficult to construct small enough pixels to be able to pack them in tight enough for blending when each pixel has to be a particular shade. It's likely this will get solved as the technology matures.
2. It is difficult to get high levels of contrast, so the colors appear muddy. This may actually be improved faster than #1; it's really amazing how much better the contrast is on a K3 than the K1 or K2.
I'm not sure they couldn't do pretty well even with muddy colors, though. Much graphic content doesn't need to be vivid to convey the information. Still, I think it'll be a long time before I prefer a Kindle to an iPad for color content.
jim frost
[email protected]
The problem with what you propose is where do the reflective tints go when they aren't needed? Because you would need a ridiculous number of them for every pixel. Reflective color is subtractive color and to get enough color gamut per pixel you would need a lot more than just RGB elements, at least several hundreds per pixel. There just isn't enough space to twist polarizations for all those necessary sub-pixels let alone figuring how to store it without bleeding color.
The current e-ink is simple, and it is a filter. It either reflects everything off the background for "white" or does not reflect 99% or so for black by a simple polarization twist filter. There's nothing left to get in the way like there would be with color reflective elements.
Simply doing color with RGB in e-ink like we do color with backlights does not work because light has to go through color e-ink pixels twice, where it only has to pass through once with a backlight. That difference is HUGE when you determine what color gamut can actually be displayed.
I have both and use both for different purposes. I would never settle into bed to read a book with the iPad. It simply strains my eyes after awhile. It is more comfortable reading on the Kindle for long periods.
I would never settle into bed to read a book on Kindle. My wife would be so annoyed by the light I have to turn on while white-text-black-background on iPad is great.
Besides the iPad fails as an eReader- who wants to read staring into a light source?
Groan... not that retarded rhetoric again. There is nothing 'bad' about reading on a backlit and yes, glossy, screen. It won't screw up your eye sight. You may not like it but that's totally different.
To my ignore list, Apple fanboy. Keep reading into a light bulb.
LOL I wonder who's the one going into people's ignore lists.
No kidding. Who will get the axe? A smartie-pants newbie that created an account a couple weeks ago with 15 posts, vs. a respected member of 3+ years with over 1,100 posts. Hmmm.
I would never settle into bed to read a book on Kindle. My wife would be so annoyed by the light I have to turn on while white-text-black-background on iPad is great.
This is a deal-breaker for me. Unless you're single, reading in bed with an external light is going to annoy the hell out of your spouse/partner/dorm-mate/whatever. I'm really (really) not a fan of glossy screens, but a Kindle is useless for reading in bed at night. Laptop works fine, iPad would work fine. For me.
LOL I wonder who's the one going into people's ignore lists.
Liver and Onions ( Serves 4 )
Ingredients:
2 pounds sliced beef liver
1 1/2 cups milk
1/4 cup butter
2 large onions, sliced
2 cups all-purpose flour
salt and pepper to taste
Groan... not that retarded rhetoric again. There is nothing 'bad' about reading on a backlit and yes, glossy, screen. It won't screw up your eye sight. You may not like it but that's totally different.
Yet everyone that has reviewed both believe kindle is a LOT better for reading.
I now own a kindle and an iPad. Like someone posted earlier, they don't really compete...yet. But when e-ink technology matures I guarantee apple will release a competing product, but done properly. I have only owned it for 10 minutes and I'm thinking 'if this was an Apple product it would work like...' much room for improvement, but til then I have the best of both worlds.
Define 'done properly':
I predict you say something as stupid as unibody aluminium, multi touch and syncs with itunes.
The kindle is already doing it 'properly'.
All apple will do is copy it and send it to Johnny Ive.
No kidding. Who will get the axe? A smartie-pants newbie that created an account a couple weeks ago with 15 posts, vs. a respected member of 3+ years with over 1,100 posts. Hmmm.
This is a deal-breaker for me. Unless you're single, reading in bed with an external light is going to annoy the hell out of your spouse/partner/dorm-mate/whatever. I'm really (really) not a fan of glossy screens, but a Kindle is useless for reading in bed at night. Laptop works fine, iPad would work fine. For me.
sorry I have to laugh at this.
Deal breaker because your wife is annoyed with you putting a light on in bed. You can get reading lamps that give off less light than an iPad.
LOL
Define 'done properly':
I predict you say something as stupid as unibody aluminium, multi touch and syncs with itunes.
The kindle is already doing it 'properly'.
All apple will do is copy it and send it to Johnny Ive.
This is very low grade trolling. You should try harder.
sorry I have to laugh at this.
Deal breaker because your wife is annoyed with you putting a light on in bed. You can get reading lamps that give off less light than an iPad.
LOL
This is actually worse (the LOL
I suspect your heart's not in it and you're just bored.
25% who own an iPad are not satisfied with the device! Sheez...what would it take to satisfy them?
Sheez!
Best
That's an odd question to ask on a computer site's forum. It's quite possible that they are not satisfied because they want it to have the features of iPad 2 of course.
"No matter how loudly the business-as-usual bells chime, we cannot silence that quiet voice within that asks how a system dependent on lack of satisfaction could ever lead to satisfaction"
- Corrina Gordon-Barnes
Our enormously productive economy demands that we make consumption our way of life...that we convert the buying and use of goods into rituals...that we seek our spiritual satisfaction, or ego satisfaction, in consumption. We need things burned up, worn out, replaced and discarded at an ever-increasing rate.'
Victor Lebow, US Retail Analyst, 1950
This is very low grade trolling. You should try harder.
Any tips? I have noticed you are very good at trolling against people that have any opinion against an apple biased article.
Define 'done properly':
I predict you say something as stupid as unibody aluminium, multi touch and syncs with itunes.
The kindle is already doing it 'properly'.
All apple will do is copy it and send it to Johnny Ive.
Crumbs. You should work for MSFT R&D.
So many areas to improve on:
E-ink screen too slow refresh.
E-ink screen black & white.
Screen too small. casing too big.
Too many buttons.
Crappy UI.
No multitouch (I keep going to press the screen, I hate shit that I can't press nowadays).
bla bla.
Erm what would be stupid about "multi touch " hmm clearly you the stupid one.
Don't get me wrong. I'm enjoying my kindle. But give it two years and it will be annihilated by Apple. Guaranteed.
Oh, and also: The Kindle in its official case fits into every coat pocket. I take it with me wherever I go. The iPad is just too big; I might as well bring along the physical books.
Does Apple own ChangeWave?
Reminds me of those old Microsoft bought surveys.
Meanwhile Kindle 2's sold out in a nano second on Black Friday.
i don't think this 'result' is good. why not use sales of kindles and see how much they have declined?
i would say if you are going to purchase and ipad then why buy a kindle too? i have both (kindle was a gift) and i love the kindle for novel reading but the small kindle is awful for technical books. all the diagrams are tiny. i would rather have the kindle dx but who is going to pay 400 dollars for that? get an ipad....
The real question is iBooks Vs Kindle. Since I got my iPad, I have bought 2 books on the iBook store (both in the first week of having the device) and 6 in the Kindle store.
i can read the kindle books on the ipad, imac, windows, android, iphone and even linux if you are lucky enough to have the previous installer. that keeps me with amazon and am happy with it.
Marketing nonsense aside, the Kindle offers an unmatched value: free 3G connection for life! Compare this to a $1000/year data plan...
- sent from my wife's Kindle
what is this 1000 dollars you speak of?
3g plans for the ipad in the US are
$15/month for 250GB and
$25/month for 2GB
max $300/year, and there's no contract. pay as you go - turn it on and off as you need it and you do it right from the device.. you don't need to call or visit a website to enable/cancel service.
http://www.apple.com/ipad/3g/
Define 'done properly':
I predict you say something as stupid as unibody aluminium, multi touch and syncs with itunes.
The kindle is already doing it 'properly'.
All apple will do is copy it and send it to Johnny Ive.
Back from the va-ca already are we?
Done properly is handling all the concerns that were outlined in the posts exchanged between jimafrost and me.