KOBO AURA HD vs the KOBO AURA and Paperwhite 1

[RobertJSawyer]

Originally Posted by Anak

Personally, I haven't read or seen any review where the reviewer actually used the device.

Welllllllllllll, it's an oldie, but I did a video review of nine different ereading devices, and I used each one extensively:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OWvbhE7tbOY

And, even with that experience, I'd never be able to assign the sort of numerical scores that were used in the review you linked to.

[jackastor]

Originally Posted by RobertJSawyer

Welllllllllllll, it's an oldie, but I did a video review of nine different ereading devices, and I used each one extensively:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OWvbhE7tbOY

And, even with that experience, I'd never be able to assign the sort of numerical scores that were used in the review you linked to.

I remember reading with Stanza on my iPhone. Thanks for the blast to the past. It certainly shows a huge number of Ereaders. I cant help but wonder what became of them? At any rate that's an impressive number Ereaders


regards

Jack

[SWCaffeinated]

Get the Aura HD. It really is the "Cadillac" of e-readers. The customization options are great, using Pocket on it is wonderful, and the pictures and fonts look extremely crisp. The only drawback is that it's a fingerprint magnet. It's the best reader out there.

[Quexos]

I vote for the Aura HD too. Although I'm mostly doing my readings on my Ipad these days.

[meeera]

"Only" 13000 page turns? So you can only read 26 heftyish books before having to plug it in? Are they serious with this being a dealbreaker?

[ersott]

I'm thinking on buying an Aura HD, now I have a PW2. How do you see the goshting compared with pw2?. Is it more pronounced in the Aura HD than in the pw2?, similar?

Do you think kobo launch this spring a new kobo Aura HD?

Thanks!

[Anak]

Originally Posted by meeera

"Only" 13000 page turns? So you can only read 26 heftyish books before having to plug it in? Are they serious with this being a dealbreaker?

I assume you totally disagree with the test results only because you like the product. That is fine. But on that particular aspect there are many better readers on the market. If 13.000 page turns is enough, you decide. They don't call it a dealbreaker but proves the Aura has a relativily low battery capacity.

Battery life (page turns; WLAN off)
Kindle PW (1): 49.188
Kobo AuraHD: 30.457
Kobo Aura: 13.083

Take a look at the total test details, it gives a (more) objective judgement why the overall ranking of the Kobo Aura is quite low.
Show all test details

But don't be angry if you disagree, after all you are happy with your purchase. In the end that's what counts.
My conclusion (for now): i don't need a new reader right now. I can wait. I do know that the Aura is expensive and the test results have - to my surprise and unexpectedly - disapoint me. I'm willing to pay up if a reader is (near) best in class or the detailed test results are very close and indifferent. For me the Aura is of the table. If I want a new Kobo device then a Aura HD or maybe even a Glo is a better choice. But comparing a HD with a Glo is comparing apples with organges. But maybe not so much. The detailed test result can help you to decide which reader to buy on the aspects you think are most important to you.

[meeera]

Anak: I don't have an Aura. But what I am saying is that whether you have to plug your reader in every 3 weeks or every 4 weeks matters not a jot to the vast majority of ereader users, who aren't routinely hiking the Appalachian trail and have access to power every night, if not 24/7.

To use that metric as a major issue in a review of modern e-ink readers does not reflect what actually matters to users. Display, usability, ecosystem (for some) - these are the core issues.

[Anak]

Originally Posted by meeera

Anak: I don't have an Aura. But what I am saying is that whether you have to plug your reader in every 3 weeks or every 4 weeks matters not a jot to the vast majority of ereader users, who aren't routinely hiking the Appalachian trail and have access to power every night, if not 24/7.

To use that metric as a major issue in a review of modern e-ink readers does not reflect what actually matters to users. Display, usability, ecosystem (for some) - these are the core issues.

I don't disagree with you that it hardly matters if you have to recharge after 3, 3.5 or 4 weeks of use. It sounds reasonable (to me) and probably does suit most users but isn't very objective as we didn't (or at least I didn't) how how many hours (or page turns) one fully charged battery really lasts.
And frankly, I was a bit disapointed when I saw the test results as I expected overall better results.

Finally we have some hard(er) data instead of an impression or opinion about the battery life and other aspects of the device. I'm not implying that impressions or opinions are wrong or unreliable but they are more complicated to judge than fact based data. The importance or relevance of the data is totally jugded by the user. You and I will judge the importance of some of the tested aspects differently and both end up with a (different?) device that suits our personal needs.

[Rizla]

I've handled a PW1, Glo and Aura HD. The Aura HD was easily the nicest. Best screen and light, and the fonts and font customization are top-notch. I hear bad things about the firmware, but I'm hearing bad things about the PW2 firmware lately. My only caveat with the Aura HD is that I'd want to get it from a local retailer in case it developed a fault.

[Josieb1]

Thanks everyone for your advice, but I'm now throwing a spanner in the works.

Hubby took me to WHSmith today so I could see and play with an Aura HD, and I did, but I have to say that I didn't find the screen any better than my 6 inch Aura, which I took with me. In fact I think my 6 inch Aura screen was better. It was brighter and just as clear as the Aura HD. I put both devices on the same font, as close to the same size as I could managae, same brightness, as much as a mirror as I could make it and the Aura HD seemed dull, much greyer than my 6 inch Aura. And with the light off there wasn't much difference either.

I do have a few pin holes, luckily not near text, but other than that maybe I do have a really good 6 inch Aura?

[peterwardgd]

yeah! stay with the Aura. I found a good one second try and its one of the best things i've ever bought. It hasn't skipped a beat since i bought it and with kobo's rather generous (bordering on the bizarre) distribution of discount codes reading has become my main pastime again.

Still cant work out why Aura sleepcover cases cost so much though?

[jackastor]

Don't forget battery life is based on a minimal amount of reading, Kobo basis it on 25 mins of reading daily. That's not real world reading either, I start to read and wow its like 2 hours past bedtime when I realize I should be asleep. and that's way more then 25 mins. Regardless Its hard to understand how these tests were done, I mean to page turn that many times would mean a long time reading. And if you read with the lighting on the unit well battery life will be depleted that much faster, same if you leave wifi on, or if you turn the unit off or sleep it. I think though that real world specs are hard to come by and for that reason alone, the E-Readers should be based on quality of text/fonts, screen size, flexibility of Book formats etc and not on battery life or page turns. Everyone reads differently, so battery life will vary dramatically in real world situations and not in who gives the best spiel on their Products battery life or page turns. Regardless if you are a hard core Kobo OR Kindle supporter or any other Reader out there!

regards

Jack

[Canuck_in_Japan]

Originally Posted by Anak

I assume you totally disagree with the test results only because you like the product. That is fine. But on that particular aspect there are many better readers on the market. If 13.000 page turns is enough, you decide. They don't call it a dealbreaker but proves the Aura has a relativily low battery capacity.

Battery life (page turns; WLAN off)
Kindle PW (1): 49.188
Kobo AuraHD: 30.457
Kobo Aura: 13.083

Take a look at the total test details, it gives a (more) objective judgement why the overall ranking of the Kobo Aura is quite low.
Show all test details

But don't be angry if you disagree, after all you are happy with your purchase. In the end that's what counts.
My conclusion (for now): i don't need a new reader right now. I can wait. I do know that the Aura is expensive and the test results have - to my surprise and unexpectedly - disapoint me. I'm willing to pay up if a reader is (near) best in class or the detailed test results are very close and indifferent. For me the Aura is of the table. If I want a new Kobo device then a Aura HD or maybe even a Glo is a better choice. But comparing a HD with a Glo is comparing apples with organges. But maybe not so much. The detailed test result can help you to decide which reader to buy on the aspects you think are most important to you.

Not having the bezel plus the minute size more than makes up for a shorter battery life in my opinion. If I can go a couple of weeks without charging then that's fine with me. Beats having to look a crumbs and dust stuck in the corners of my pages.

[aceflor]

Originally Posted by Canuck_in_Japan

Not having the bezel plus the minute size more than makes up for a shorter battery life in my opinion. If I can go a couple of weeks without charging then that's fine with me. Beats having to look a crumbs and dust stuck in the corners of my pages.

You don't have per se to look at crumbs. You could also just clean your display once in a while...

@Anak: I have problems with the notation system of Chip. How come the PRS-T3 gets a 100% in Ausstattung, but the Aura HD gets only 71 ? Seriously, without light, and with only epub and PDF, the PRS-T3 is still their benchmark ???? This makes no sense to me at all. I read the tests in detail (and without google translate, I speak German so there won't be anything lost in translation), and they are just crap. I have always had problem with Chip's Tests anyway, but here I must say they really don't know Jack.