The Kobo’s touch sensor seems to work as well as the others, so I’m curious why the Nook and Kindle needed such deep bezels. The deeper bezels also make it more awkward to hit touch targets near the screen edges. The shadows amplify the perceived depth of the bezels, and they can be particularly problematic when they cover text or interface elements too close to the screen margins. This is especially noticeable with close, single-point light, like a lamp on an end table or night stand. The Nook’s is deepest and the Kobo’s is the most shallow:įrom the top of the stack: Nook, Kindle, Kobo bezels under diagonal lightingĪs I emphasized with the lighting angle here, the deep IR bezels cast shadows onto the screen margins. The thick IR-touch bezels are all deeper than on non-touch readers. The Kobo is the lightest, at 185g versus 211g for the Nook and Kindle. And critically, its magazine and newspaper selection is abysmal - if you intend to read magazines or newspapers on your e-reader, you shouldn’t consider Kobo. In my searches, while book availability was pretty good, it had the highest prices most often. Kobo’s ecosystem is still a disadvantage. But Barnes & Noble’s content store is very buggy for me: I often get errors claiming unspecified problems with purchases, downloads, or connectivity. The Nook is particularly good for magazine availability, even slightly exceeding the Kindle’s availability in my searches. Content libraries and ecosystemsĪll of the major e-readers have similar content libraries these days. They’re all available for $99, but the Kindle and Kobo both show ads (“special offers”) at that price - if you’re looking for an ad-free reader, the Nook is the least expensive at $99, with the ad-free Kobo at $129 and the ad-free Kindle at $139. (Any screen differences in the photos are the result of uneven lighting, not any real differences.) They all have the same E-Ink Pearl screen with the same contrast, the same resolution, and the same type of IR touch-screen sensor. Nook Simple Touch, Kindle Touch, and Kobo Touch A programmer, writer, podcaster, geek, and coffee enthusiast.Ībout Kindle Touch compared to Nook Simple Touch, Kobo Touch, and Kindle 4Īmazon’s new Kindle Touch, Barnes & Noble’s Nook Simple Touch ( my review), and the Kobo Touch are surprisingly similar. Guess I'll have to get unlazy one of these days and actually try it out :P. For a few articles here and there, Print to PDF or saving the HTML like you said would probably suffice (and not eat up a staggering amount of memory while it does it). It'd probably just be a few articles here and there. I also wouldn't want to read "everything" on the go. The only big problem I have is that Calibre takes up a good 600 megs of ram for some reason on my computer. So rather then manually saving, converting, and transferring each article to the Kobo manually, you get a RSS feed type thing that is automated. But after some thinking, I believe the advantage of this system is you can use the Calibre fetch news function to automatically aggregate all the individual pages you 'bookmark'. I was thinking the same thing when I read this post. If you just saved in HTML and then converted to EPUB, the result would be much nicer than the PDF conversion.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |