Quote:
Originally Posted by peterwardgd
good grief, ok your just the messenger/poster we get it. I also get the underlying feeling you have a grudge against that particular kobo device for some odd reason? There is definitely an undercurrent to this thread
|
No, I do not hold any gudge against any Kobo Reader. I don't really like the header/footer size but there is a third party patch available which solves it.
The post (#41) that linked to the test of the Kobo Aura had no additional personal comments from me. Maybe I should have mentioned to take a look at the detailed test results. I also would have post it if the Aura ended on the number one spot.
I refered to the test result because:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anak
I just posted it here only for one reason: to provide a ereader test with some hard numbers in it so anyone who is interested in buying an ereader can make a personal comparison based on aspects they find most important for themselves.
There are so many ereaders on the market today (at least in Europe) and what it makes fairly complicated to choose a reader that suits your personal needs.
This test at least has some data on battery life and other aspects. Which could aid to steer away from the "I like", "I don't like", "It's fine" or "It's not fine" comments.
|
For a more objective discussion. For the reasons you mentioned:
Quote:
Originally Posted by peterwardgd
I am always wary about posts like this and online reviews of anything these days tbh. Backhanders and sponsorship mean honest reviews are rarer than hens teeth. The only way to be sure if you like something is to test it yourself.
|
Well, I'm sure that Chip tests are not sponsored and most (online) available test are quite subjective (too me at least) or only sum up the features of the device (and sound like a PR press release).
All my follow up postings in this thread were only post to put the test results in the right perspective: bring the discussion back to the more objective numbers as most posts denounced the test results only because their personal experience and opinion is different or simply could/would not believe the test result.
To put the discussion back into perspective I used the numbers of the battery life (page turns) as an example. The gap between the Aura and other new readers is large. If Kobo only used a more powerful battery pack the test results would be completely different (it would probably jump several positions higher).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anak
I was probably just as surprised as you when I learned that the Kobo Aura final rank was so low.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by RobertJSawyer
Anak, you're missing the possibility that the Kobo Aura actually might have the same (or even more) battery capacity as other devices, but that one or more of the features it offers draws more power.
|
If the device uses that more power then Kobo should have added a battery with a much higher capacity. A battery that keeps it on par with competitive devices. It doesn't have to be the best in class.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RobertJSawyer
the Kobo Aura uses a completely different sort of page change -- it's not quite as rapid (although still very fast) as the page change on other devices
|
If it is completely different I don't now. The test results show that other devices are faster on the aspect of page turns and therefore end up higher on the list on that particular aspect. Is it fast enough? Probably. But what is fast enough? It is quite vague if you can't put a number on it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RobertJSawyer
Kobo Aura offers that other devices don't (the capacitive touch screen, for instance)
|
The Amazon Kindle Paperwhite (2013), Amazon Kindle Paperwhite, PocketBook Touch eReader and Kobo Aura all have a capacitive touch screen.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RobertJSawyer
it's not, as you chose to paint it, that Kobo chose a smaller/less powerful battery. You simply don't know
|
Maybe you're right about the powerful battery or capacity. I should have used "Akkulaufzeit (max. Beleuchtung) 15:04 hours" for a more balanced judgment on the aspect of battery life.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RobertJSawyer
which is precisely why these sorts of supposedly hard-data test-score charts are at best highly misleading and at worse meaningless.
|
I don't agree but maybe we do agree that charts should not be taken as absolute truths. But my opinion is that it puts results in a relative order. That makes it not misleading as every device is tested exactly the same way on every aspect.