Review – Sony Reader Digital Book PRS-700

[dhbailey]

Well after his comment on people whose spouses/partners don't sleep well with the light on as being "more oppressive domestic situations" I realized that anything else he says is hyperbole. I don't view the fact that my wife sleeps better in a darkened room as being an oppressive domestic situation. And that doesn't even take into account that I enjoy best reading in an otherwise darkened room, having only my reading material illuminated.

The pictures are the pictures -- I could take unflattering pictures of anything if I wanted. And none of us who like the 700 have tried to say that the screen is sharper or clearer than the 505 or the Kindle -- but those last comments about wondering whether anybody bothered to read a book on the device before actually manufacturing them just makes me wonder whether he tried to read a book on it or simply saw that it was different from his favored devices and therefore garbage to begin with.

I wonder how he would have liked it if he had never seen a 505 or a Kindle.

In any event, those of us who enjoy reading on the 700 are going to continue to do so and those whose main reaction is "But it isn't a 505!" are going to continue not to like the 700.

I'm certainly not trying to change anybody whose mind is already made up, but merely to present an opposing point of view so that those who are trying to do research can realize that the device isn't an unreadable failure, but rather, in the opinion of a growing number of members of this forum an excellent (even if not perfect) device which we enjoy reading on.

[ColdSun]

There is no right answer, only opinion, and as stated several times - everyone needs to make their own. At the same time, you folks shouldn't get down on us folks that don't like the 700. We are just voicing our opinion. Is your opinion any more valid? The below statements are fact:

1. The 700's screen contrast, for whatever reason, is not as good as the 505
2. The 700 has some glare issues due to the extra layers above the screen
3. The 700 has an updated UI and many improvements to the usability over the 505
4. The 700 is touchscreen

Now, it is up to each person to decide if the contrast difference is a deal-breaker for them. Is it worth it to them to have the extra power and features of the 700 when the screen is not as good? My opinion was that I wanted the best screen an e-ink device had to offer since this was my first one. After research, I concluded that was the 505. In addition, and I'm in the minority on this, I didn't want a touchscreen because I don't want to wipe fingerprints and smudges off all the time (which in my experience is definately more noticable when you are using the device with the light in the dark).

So to sum it up, I don't think it is right to tell the folks on this board to ignore the negative posts and the device is just fine. The beauty of this forum is that there is a lot of information and people can come here and educate themselves and make the decision that is right for THEM.

[dhbailey]

I don't believe I've told anybody to ignore the negative posts -- just to take them for what they are, which is what you've said. They're opinions. But opinions expressed as hyperbole do nothing for anybody.

The opinions which have been expressed on this forum to the effect that the person has seen the 700 and doesn't like it for reasons X, Y, Z are excellent because they give concrete examples.

And it's important for the positive opinions to be voiced as well.

I'm not down on anybody expressing negative opinions, just on people who express them as hyperbole, just as I would get down on anybody who said something to the effect of "The 700 is the best reading device ever invented and I couldn't imagine anybody not liking it nor could I imagine anybody being able to improve it!" That wouldn't help anybody either.

And the bottom line, as many of us have said, is that each individual has to see it in person to make a decision, and for people who have to purchase it sight unseen, be sure to buy it from a place which will take returns, in case they don't like it.

[Server]

Originally Posted by ColdSun

1. The 700's screen contrast, for whatever reason, is not as good as the 505

When used with proper reading angle (ie. 30° - 40°) And proper lighting,
you shouldn't have a problem. If you are reading in low light, you should
select level 2 brightness with the built in LED light switch. As a former
Optician, everything else is visual acuity (or lack thereof) related.

Originally Posted by ColdSun

2. The 700 has some glare issues due to the extra layers above the screen

Once again, proper reading angle is a must for the luxury of
a touch screen!

Originally Posted by ColdSun

3. The 700 has an updated UI and many improvements to the usability over the 505
4. The 700 is touchscreen

This is an understatement. The UI is hands down, the best I've seen!
Touch screens are the future, and it would not surprise me the least to see
the rest of the eInk gang doing likewise.

Best Features thus far:
- (Re)-Searching capabilities / FrontPage Iconed eBooks / Zoom! / Notes!
/ Music / 2 levels of LED Brightness / Photos / v-Keyboard! / Stylus or
Finger gesturing / Magnetic Leather Cover / Landscape / Portrait reading
/ etc etc...

But hey, don't take my literal word for it, its just my objective
(hands-on) opinions...

[ColdSun]

Originally Posted by Server

When used with proper reading angle (ie. 30° - 40°) And proper lighting,
you shouldn't have a problem. If you are reading in low light, you should
select level 2 brightness with the built in LED light switch. As a former
Optician, everything else is visual acuity (or lack thereof) related.

Please explain how your reply changes the fact that the contrast on the 505 is better? Are you telling me just because I can read a 700, it should be OK for me? Sure! That's true. I can read the 505 better though. Due to the contrast. In the dark, I don't think there is much difference in the two.

Once again, proper reading angle is a must for the luxury of
a touch screen!

Thats great! Except I don't want a touchscreen to begin with. Also, I don't want to swap my better contrast for the touchscreen and "proper reading angle." It was hard enough to stop using my VGA PDA with backlight to go to e-ink to begin with. If I'm going to do that, I want the most paper-like display I can get. I'm sure the 700 is fine for you, but I choose the 505.

This is an understatement. The UI is hands down, the best I've seen!
Touch screens are the future, and it would not surprise me the least to see
the rest of the eInk gang doing likewise.

There are a lot of innovations in screen technology on the horizon. I'm sure touchscreens will improve with e-ink in the future. Honestly, I'm more interested in the built-in light though. I read just about every night in bed before I sleep. If they made 6" ebook reading devices using an LCD screen that had a backlight, I likely still wouldn't have an e-ink device.

Best Features thus far:
- (Re)-Searching capabilities / FrontPage Iconed eBooks / Zoom! / Notes!
/ Music / 2 levels of LED Brightness / Photos / v-Keyboard! / Stylus or
Finger gesturing / Magnetic Leather Cover / Landscape / Portrait reading
/ etc etc...

But hey, don't take my literal word for it, its just my objective
(hands-on) opinions...

Sounds more like a Sony add. Hey, at least I bought a Sony!

[Ervserver]

I got a kick out of this from the gizmodo

if you buy this, you are dumb.

Originally Posted by Trek

I guess you won't enjoy this latest review much then =) :

http://gizmodo.com/5097999/sony-prs+...l-improvements

[dhbailey]

That's the sort of non-objective comments which are actually simply hyperbole and make that sort of review worthless in my opinion.

Unfortunately, someone who is curious about the 700 will have such links turn up when they google the 700 and may figure that the device actually is worthless, when in fact it is a fine device, even if the screen is different in appearance from the 505.

[Liviu_5]

Originally Posted by Ervserver

I got a kick out of this from the gizmodo

Love that quote One more site on the avoid list- not that I used it before, but now I know to actively avoid it and strongly negatively mention it if needed.

[obanta]

Originally Posted by dhbailey

That's the sort of non-objective comments which are actually simply hyperbole and make that sort of review worthless in my opinion.

/me points to dead horse. Go ahead and keep beating it...

(Just my opinion, of course. God forbid this is viewed as objective fact and gets yet another 'hyperbole' response.)

[Server]

in response... (to COLDsun)

Yes, the luxury of a touch screen does have some impact on the contrast of
text. There I said it. No doubt enhancement can be made but from my
own summation, the reason why the S7 didn't cost $500 or $600 is because
they didn't go with a touch panal that would put off con$umer
marketability. As popularity continues, future models will have truer
text 'artform' with the crispi-ness you so desire.

Until then, and IN THE MEAN TIME, the rest of use 7s' will enjoys the
benefits ahead of the curve. Go ahead call us early adopters
(ie. "brave ones")

As for Gizmodo, they would have been critical with anything, thats how they
make news - newsworthy... it sells to be negative. Thought you knew this.

COLDSUN: "Please explain how your reply changes the fact that the contrast on
the 505 is better? Are you telling me just because I can read a 700, it should
be OK for me? Sure! That's true...."

Please take a gander over HERE

[ColdSun]

Looks fine, except my 505 screen looks better. Nuff said.

[Liviu_5]

Originally Posted by ColdSun

Looks fine, except my 505 screen looks better. Nuff said.

Nobody denies that. I like the 505 screen, but to me it is almost the same as with a page display - I can read it but that's about it, I cannot read the whole book since the slow page turning and navigation takes away all pleasure.

So again if you are happy with the 505 nobody forces you to get a 700 and it seems that Sony - wisely - will support the 505 for a while the way Nokia and its independent developers for example still supported the 770 even when the 800 was introduced.

Hopefully a PRS 705 or 800 will improve the screen closer to the lofty 505 one...

[amgoforth]

Originally Posted by Ervserver

I got a kick out of this from the gizmodo

Well I always suspected I was numb. Now I guess I know for sure. Just I go out and celebrate, or hang my head in shame?

[dhbailey]

Originally Posted by obanta

/me points to dead horse. Go ahead and keep beating it...

(Just my opinion, of course. God forbid this is viewed as objective fact and gets yet another 'hyperbole' response.)

Huh? I'm confused -- because I point out that certain statements aren't objective and are hyperbole I'm beating a dead horse? I don't get it, just as I don't get your final comment. There's nothing of hyperbole about the first statement, just as there's nothing of opinion about it either. You're just making a statement.

I also don't see how your message carries the conversation forward in any meaningful way.

[Kris777]

CNET Review with video and pictures below:
http://reviews.cnet.com/e-book-reade...9.html?tag=box

The good:
The PRS-700 is sleeker than the Kindle; faster processor speeds up the device; new touch-screen interface offers better ergonomics and is easier to use; with the addition of an optional memory card (SD or Memory Stick Pro), it's capable of storing thousands of electronic books; font size is adjustable; decent battery life; displays Word and PDF files (and zooms them), shows most image files, and plays MP3 and AAC audio; built-in LED lighting isn't great but allows you to read in the dark.

The bad:
New touch screen is more glare-prone and doesn't have as much contrast as Amazon's Kindle or Sony's PRS-505; built-in lighting is from the screen periphery is not true backlighting; eBook Library software isn't available for Mac owners; there's no support for Audible audio books; and no built-in wireless access.

The bottom line:
The PRS-700 takes one step forward for Sony digital readers--and a couple leaps back.