Rumor: Did B&N Pass on a Chance to Make a 6.8″ Nook Glow HD?

[Canuck_in_Japan]

What in the world does the plastic back have to do with the e-ink screen? No offense but I think you've become a bit of a tin hat.

[Nate the great]

Originally Posted by Canuck_in_Japan

What in the world does the plastic back have to do with the e-ink screen? No offense but I think you've become a bit of a tin hat.

Did you even read my post?

And yes that was offensive. If you're just going to be insulting then you're really not contributing anything.

[latepaul]

Does it matter?

The question is, is the Aura any good. I like mine. It has its pros and cons but for me it's a good ereader. Others have been disappointed. Anyone thinking of getting one should read reviews, try one out if possible - the normal stuff.

[david_e]

Originally Posted by Nate the great

And one other thing:

I didn't call anyone a liar, and I don't appreciate that you attempted to smear me in this way.

I don't think you need any help.

You trade in rumors and speculation. It's MY speculation that the source of the rumors is your own imagination. You then do a lackluster review, that adds nothing to any of the comments that haven't already been made here, to make the non-existent story fit your premise.

You carried on about how another poster, Sameer, needed to reply to you. When I asked exactly where it was in the forum rules that anyone was required to answer anything you couldn't even accept this. Your response was, "A member might not be obligated..." 'Might not be'? The fact that you can't even admit this simple fact proves how self-serving you are.

You're someone with a personal blog. Most of the people around here seem to remember that. Perhaps you should, too.

[Nate the great]

Originally Posted by david_e

I don't think you need any help.

You trade in rumors and speculation. It's MY speculation that the source of the rumors is your own imagination. You then do a lackluster review, that adds nothing to any of the comments that haven't already been made here, to make the non-existent story fit your premise.

You carried on about how another poster, Sameer, needed to reply to you. When I asked exactly where it was in the forum rules that anyone was required to answer anything you couldn't even accept this. Your response was, "A member might not be obligated..." 'Might not be'? The fact that you can't even admit this simple fact proves how self-serving you are.

You're someone with a personal blog. Most of the people around here seem to remember that. Perhaps you should, too.

First, that nonsense about Sameer's obligation to respond was indeed nonsense. It grew out of my frustration about being ignored by Kobo, but eventually I realized it wasn't gonna happen so I got over it.

And as for the fact that I "trade in rumors and speculation", you wound me. It hurts me to be accused of the exact same activity as the WSJ, Bloomberg, Reuters, Forbes, and all the major tech blogs. And to think all that I bring to the rumors and speculation is a little analysis and the occasional debunking. *sob*

But I suppose now is a good time to confess to making up the Liquavista story. Everything from the original rumor to the confirmation from Amazon and the Chamber of Commerce filing was complete fiction. In fact, there is no company called Liquavista. I invented that as well (I can't help myself).

[david_e]

Originally Posted by Nate the great

...It hurts me to be accused of the exact same activity as the WSJ, Bloomberg, Reuters, Forbes, and all the major tech blogs...

Never pull back your own curtain and let people have a peek, such grandiosity is best left hidden away in the dark.

[Katsunami]

Originally Posted by taming

Let me think about this, do we believe your conjecture , or do we believe Sameer Hasan, the Director of Product Management for Kobo Devices, who said that they had been working with their partners on this device for a year. You can read between the lines when a question is not clearly answered, but it is a big step to essentially call someone a liar.

From Sameer in Post 18 in this thread

LOL. What Kobo says doesn't mean anything.

I've worked in several support and advisory functions. Sometimes I told a customer (or better, *had* to tell customers) things that were not true because of company policy. Like: "No, we do not know exactly if and when a successor to product X will be released, as we are not the R&D team. At this point, we have no information about an impending product release."

This answer would eventually end up on the internet as the truth because some representative of Company X said so.

All the while I knew the successor would be announced exactly two weeks later. Or that there never would be a successor. Or something.

I expect this to be the same with any company. Of course Kobo will *never* admit that they jumped on the chance to get a batch of screens that where not intended for them originally, and rushed a design to put them to market ASAP, or worse, just bought the reader as it was designed for Barnes and rebranded it after adjusting their firmware to run on it.

[Nate the great]

Originally Posted by Katsunami

LOL. What Kobo says doesn't mean anything.

I've worked in several support and advisory functions. Sometimes I told a customer (or better, *had* to tell customers) things that were not true because of company policy. Like: "No, we do not know exactly if and when a successor to product X will be released, as we are not the R&D team. At this point, we have no information about an impending product release."

This answer would eventually end up on the internet as the truth because some representative of Company X said so.

All the while I knew the successor would be announced exactly two weeks later. Or that there never would be a successor. Or something.

I expect this to be the same with any company. Of course Kobo will *never* admit that they jumped on the chance to get a batch of screens that where not intended for them originally, and rushed a design to put them to market ASAP, or worse, just bought the reader as it was designed for Barnes and rebranded it after adjusting their firmware to run on it.

This is very true, and I can't believe I forgot it.

It is such an accepted fact that company reps will spout the company line that I don't even regard it as lying. A company line might not be factually correct but it is treated as the accepted truth.

This reminds me of a funny story about Qualcomm, Mirasol, and Pocketbook.

A press release leaked in December 2010 that Pocketbook was working on a device with a Mirasol screen called the Pocketbook Mirasol eReader.

I broke the story and had confirmation from Pocketbook as well as technical details, but Qualcomm never admitted that the partnership existed. As far as they were concerned the leaked press release never happened.

I can still recall the times I met with the Qualcomm people and the way they denied the facts. It still gives me a chuckle.

[Katsunami]

"Noooooo, of course not Sir! We haven't *ever* seen this problem with product X. You're the very first one!"

*Books the 7th repair today for Product X concerning Known Problem Y. Sigh. And it's only Tuesday. Expect to book 40 repairs before the end of Friday... And that's only me....*

Don't get me started. I'm glad not to work in a support function anymore.

[Canuck_in_Japan]

Originally Posted by Nate the great

Did you even read my post?

And yes that was offensive. If you're just going to be insulting then you're really not contributing anything.

Yes, I did read your post.

This ereader was not the planned device that Kobo would claim. Instead the design and build quality suggests that timing was more important than quality.

I can point out many flaws about Kobo, but one thing they have always gotten correct is that Kobo has hired Ideo to design the Kobo hardware. This firm has been working with Kobo since the very beginning, and Ideo is the reason that all Kobo hardware (except for the Aura HD) has a quilted backside, a rubberized shell, and a generally aesthetically pleasing appearance.

The Aura HD, on the other hand, feels and looks like the shell was made from cheap plastic. Instead of the quilted backside, this ereader has a funky weird double ridged backside that I am still trying to understand. It is clearly inferior in design and materials, and I think that is a telling clue in support of the rumor.

Basically you're suggesting that because the back is different than the quilted back then it obviously must be a reader that was not designed by Kobo but by Nook. Which is pretty crazy talk because the design of the screen should have nothing to do with the back. If a reader has a back with a crease in it then it could just as easily have a back with a normal quilting-that would not have taken any time at all to change.

[Nate the great]

Originally Posted by Canuck_in_Japan

Yes, I did read your post.


Basically you're suggesting that because the back is different than the quilted back then it obviously must be a reader that was not designed by Kobo but by Nook. Which is pretty crazy talk because the design of the screen should have nothing to do with the back. If a reader has a back with a crease in it then it could just as easily have a back with a normal quilting-that would not have taken any time at all to change.

That's not what I wrote at all. You really didn't read my post.

Edit: And BTW, Kobo didn't develop the screen. They merely bought it from E-ink, just like they bought the shell to put the screen in and paid a manufacturer to assemble it all.

[latepaul]

So if I understand correctly the rumour is that B&N were planning to make a 6.8" Nook but decided not and so the screens were offered to Kobo instead and they used them to make the Aura. Is that correct?

What I don't get about this is that would eInk really go ahead and make these screens - hundreds of thousands as I understand - without a firm commitment i.e. some sort of contract? It would seem to be very foolish to spend that amount of money without some guarantee they could cover their costs. Someone upthread implied that this sort of thing does happen so I'm prepared to believe it's possible but it seems at the very least financially very precarious way to do business.

[Nate the great]

Originally Posted by latepaul

So if I understand correctly the rumour is that B&N were planning to make a 6.8" Nook but decided not and so the screens were offered to Kobo instead and they used them to make the Aura. Is that correct?

What I don't get about this is that would eInk really go ahead and make these screens - hundreds of thousands as I understand - without a firm commitment i.e. some sort of contract? It would seem to be very foolish to spend that amount of money without some guarantee they could cover their costs. Someone upthread implied that this sort of thing does happen so I'm prepared to believe it's possible but it seems at the very least financially very precarious way to do business.

Nook Media might have had a contract to buy the screens and then backed out. NM would have had to pay penalties but it's not impossible for them to have simply changed their mind.

[latepaul]

Originally Posted by Nate the great

Nook Media might have had a contract to buy the screens and then backed out. NM would have had to pay penalties but it's not impossible for them to have simply changed their mind.

And would the fact that Kobo came along relieve NM of having to pay the penalties?

[evanft]

Originally Posted by latepaul

And would the fact that Kobo came along relieve NM of having to pay the penalties?

No. I've seen that happen before in my industry.