Wired (or someone) altered this EZReader picture

purl4peace · 07-09-2009, 01:05 AM

So I was checking out Gideon's reference to the Wired review of Cooler and thought I would see what they had to say about the "native son" of RobertB -- EZReader.

I was looking at the image, and though the article specifically states there is no wireless connectivity, if you look at the top status bar, it sure looks a lot like the Kindle status bar where you have the vertical bars to represent wireless signal strength and a battery to show the charge... Even the bottom looks identical to the Kindle's status line. It is like they superimpopsed a Kindle "page" into an EZReader.

Does the EZReader really have that? If so, why? and If not, why put that into the image?

http://www.wired.com/reviews/product/pr_astak_ez_reader

wallcraft · 07-09-2009, 01:45 AM

The body looks right, but the screen part of the picture is definitely from a Kindle 2. See the attached publicity shot of the K2. For one thing, only the Kindle has "locations", and the screen layout is exactly as on a Kindle 2. The 2nd image is a scan of an EZ Reader on a FB2 ebook (i.e. using CoolReader) which is closest to the K2 layout, but not very close.

wallcraft · 07-09-2009, 01:52 AM

It seems that several of the EInk Readers photographed at Wired have the Kindle 2 screen. The worst offender is the DR1000S, since it is photoshopping a 6" screen onto a 10.2" screen.

DanielCoffey · 07-09-2009, 02:38 AM

It is almost worth dropping a note to the Amazon lawyers. It is also misrepresentation of the quality of the screen too.

purl4peace · 07-09-2009, 10:53 AM

I'm glad I'm not the only one who thought so. It kind of makes you wonder WHY they are doing it... to make the device more "photogenic?" Frankly, I look at the pictures very closely on devices like this to see if it is what I would want and I would be kind of ticked off if after reading a review, the device that I got (and the resulting "screen" interface were significantly different -- particularly since I put more weight theoretically independent reviewers")

JSWolf · 07-09-2009, 10:59 AM

Wired has also crapped up the 700.

purl4peace · 07-09-2009, 11:09 AM

It makes you wonder if they actually review the items they say they review. They seem to be very "pro-kindle" but you would think that would keep them from trying to make other readers actually LOOK like the kindle.

poohbear_nc · 07-09-2009, 11:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by purl4peace

I'm glad I'm not the only one who thought so. It kind of makes you wonder WHY they are doing it... to make the device more "photogenic?" Frankly, I look at the pictures very closely on devices like this to see if it is what I would want and I would be kind of ticked off if after reading a review, the device that I got (and the resulting "screen" interface were significantly different -- particularly since I put more weight theoretically independent reviewers")

I agree totally - this is really tacky - for a supposed "independent" review! After all, for most buyers, the screen's appearance & readability are two of the key points in selecting an ereader!

Teyrnon · 07-09-2009, 11:37 AM

Strange. Just looked at several of their reviews and as has been noted above they all seem to have a Kindle screen photoshopped onto whatever body. I'm at a loss for why they'd do this. The appearance of the display is a significant part of the identity of any of these devices. To make them all look like the Kindle is deceptive at best.

This practice makes no sense; I must be missing something here.

Moejoe · 07-09-2009, 11:42 AM

Is it Wired doing this, or are they buying in stock images from somewhere? Not excusing Wired here, just wondering. Even if they are stock images, someone over at Wired must be looking at them and letting them pass. Intriguing stuff.

Shaggy · 07-09-2009, 11:43 AM

It would make sense if they were reviewing pre-production versions of the devices and the photos were just mock-ups. But the review dates on the ones I looked at were well after the devices had been released. You'd think they would have used "real" pictures instead of photoshopped ones.

DixieGal · 07-09-2009, 11:55 AM

What on earth are they thinking? Or did some editor just glance at it and approve. I could see being fooled if it looked "right," but that photo looks like it was done in "MS Paint."

junkyardwillie · 07-09-2009, 11:57 AM

Exactly, I would think it would be more trouble trying to photoshop the screens than it would be to just pull a copy of the actual device off the respective companies website or if you are doing a real review then just snap a photo of the device.

Stensie4JC · 07-09-2009, 12:14 PM

Maybe e-ink screens don't photograph well so they are just cut & pasting it to make it look better. Stupid, though, because someone was bound to notice. And no, of the current ezreader and the soon-to-be-released one, neither are supposed to be wireless. Sloppy.

Abecedary · 07-09-2009, 12:14 PM

Wired needs to be taken to task for this. What's funny is that over on the right side of these screens is a link to a Wired article titled "Faked Screenshots Show Google Chrome Frenzy". How about an article titled "Faked Screenshots Show Wired in the Pocket of Amazon"?

07-09-2009, 01:05 AM	#1
purl4peace Mommy of Many Interests Posts: 139 Karma: 660 Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Wake Forest, NC Device: Kindle DX, Sony PRS-505, Cybook Gen3	Wired (or someone) altered this EZReader picture So I was checking out Gideon's reference to the Wired review of Cooler and thought I would see what they had to say about the "native son" of RobertB -- EZReader. I was looking at the image, and though the article specifically states there is no wireless connectivity, if you look at the top status bar, it sure looks a lot like the Kindle status bar where you have the vertical bars to represent wireless signal strength and a battery to show the charge... Even the bottom looks identical to the Kindle's status line. It is like they superimpopsed a Kindle "page" into an EZReader. Does the EZReader really have that? If so, why? and If not, why put that into the image? http://www.wired.com/reviews/product/pr_astak_ez_reader Last edited by Nate the great; 07-09-2009 at 11:07 AM.

07-09-2009, 01:45 AM	#2
wallcraft reader Posts: 6,975 Karma: 5183568 Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Mississippi, USA Device: Kindle 3, Kobo Glo HD	The body looks right, but the screen part of the picture is definitely from a Kindle 2. See the attached publicity shot of the K2. For one thing, only the Kindle has "locations", and the screen layout is exactly as on a Kindle 2. The 2nd image is a scan of an EZ Reader on a FB2 ebook (i.e. using CoolReader) which is closest to the K2 layout, but not very close. Attached Thumbnails

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Wired: Why Does the New Kindle Have A Microphone?	kjk	News	20	08-05-2010 07:13 AM
EZReader Plus	Xanthe	Astak EZReader	14	07-08-2010 08:21 PM
PDF Contents Altered by Link	ahi	Workshop	2	09-18-2009 10:38 AM
New EZReader...	Mnementh666	Astak EZReader	6	06-30-2009 12:25 PM
Travel Hub taken apart and altered to be power-only cable.	wagnerian	iRex	3	11-02-2006 02:25 PM

07-09-2009, 01:52 AM	#3
wallcraft reader Posts: 6,975 Karma: 5183568 Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Mississippi, USA Device: Kindle 3, Kobo Glo HD	It seems that several of the EInk Readers photographed at Wired have the Kindle 2 screen. The worst offender is the DR1000S, since it is photoshopping a 6" screen onto a 10.2" screen.

07-09-2009, 02:38 AM	#4
DanielCoffey Connoisseur Posts: 66 Karma: 26 Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: Edinburgh, UK Device: Sony PRS-505	It is almost worth dropping a note to the Amazon lawyers. It is also misrepresentation of the quality of the screen too.

07-09-2009, 10:53 AM	#5
purl4peace Mommy of Many Interests Posts: 139 Karma: 660 Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Wake Forest, NC Device: Kindle DX, Sony PRS-505, Cybook Gen3	I'm glad I'm not the only one who thought so. It kind of makes you wonder WHY they are doing it... to make the device more "photogenic?" Frankly, I look at the pictures very closely on devices like this to see if it is what I would want and I would be kind of ticked off if after reading a review, the device that I got (and the resulting "screen" interface were significantly different -- particularly since I put more weight theoretically independent reviewers")

07-09-2009, 10:59 AM	#6
JSWolf Resident Curmudgeon Posts: 74,037 Karma: 129333114 Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Roslindale, Massachusetts Device: Kobo Libra 2, Kobo Aura H2O, PRS-650, PRS-T1, nook STR, PW3	Wired has also crapped up the 700.

07-09-2009, 11:09 AM	#7
purl4peace Mommy of Many Interests Posts: 139 Karma: 660 Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Wake Forest, NC Device: Kindle DX, Sony PRS-505, Cybook Gen3	It makes you wonder if they actually review the items they say they review. They seem to be very "pro-kindle" but you would think that would keep them from trying to make other readers actually LOOK like the kindle.

07-09-2009, 11:37 AM	#9
Teyrnon Groupie Posts: 190 Karma: 384 Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: South Eastern United States Device: jetBook, Kindle DX, Kindle 3, Kindle Fire, Nook Simple Touch	Strange. Just looked at several of their reviews and as has been noted above they all seem to have a Kindle screen photoshopped onto whatever body. I'm at a loss for why they'd do this. The appearance of the display is a significant part of the identity of any of these devices. To make them all look like the Kindle is deceptive at best. This practice makes no sense; I must be missing something here.

07-09-2009, 11:42 AM	#10
Moejoe Banned Posts: 5,100 Karma: 72193 Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: South of the Border Device: Coffin	Is it Wired doing this, or are they buying in stock images from somewhere? Not excusing Wired here, just wondering. Even if they are stock images, someone over at Wired must be looking at them and letting them pass. Intriguing stuff.

07-09-2009, 11:43 AM	#11
Shaggy Wizard Posts: 4,293 Karma: 529619 Join Date: May 2007 Device: iRex iLiad, DR800SG	It would make sense if they were reviewing pre-production versions of the devices and the photos were just mock-ups. But the review dates on the ones I looked at were well after the devices had been released. You'd think they would have used "real" pictures instead of photoshopped ones.

07-09-2009, 11:55 AM	#12
DixieGal Hi There! Posts: 7,473 Karma: 2930523 Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Ft Lauderdale Device: iPad	What on earth are they thinking? Or did some editor just glance at it and approve. I could see being fooled if it looked "right," but that photo looks like it was done in "MS Paint."

07-09-2009, 11:57 AM	#13
junkyardwillie Addict Posts: 316 Karma: 570 Join Date: Apr 2008 Device: Onyx Note Pro, Kobo H20 and iPad	Exactly, I would think it would be more trouble trying to photoshop the screens than it would be to just pull a copy of the actual device off the respective companies website or if you are doing a real review then just snap a photo of the device.

Advert

Advert

07-09-2009, 12:14 PM	#14
Stensie4JC Book Diva Posts: 76 Karma: 44 Join Date: Jul 2009 Device: Nook Color	Maybe e-ink screens don't photograph well so they are just cut & pasting it to make it look better. Stupid, though, because someone was bound to notice. And no, of the current ezreader and the soon-to-be-released one, neither are supposed to be wireless. Sloppy.

07-09-2009, 12:14 PM	#15
Abecedary Exwyzeeologist Posts: 535 Karma: 3261 Join Date: Jun 2009 Device: :PRS-505::iPod touch:	Wired needs to be taken to task for this. What's funny is that over on the right side of these screens is a link to a Wired article titled "Faked Screenshots Show Google Chrome Frenzy". How about an article titled "Faked Screenshots Show Wired in the Pocket of Amazon"?