m92 "silver bullet" warranty case?

[janek]

Originally Posted by Mono

Janek,
I will repeat, what I have already wrote.

The pdf file you are refering to is very bizarre file! If I try print it via pdf printer the output pdf becomes 1000 times bigger than original.

Also, the fact, that several pdf readers and e-books can open it does not mean that it is valid pdf. There may be a question, what means valid pdf, but it should be pdf standard by ISO. Adobe may have and prabably has some additions and modifications to the standard.

Simply. This file misbehaves and because of that maybe is not valid pdf file. It is strange that Adobe reader can read it and Adobe SDK in Onyx e-reader cannot.

Mono, I don't think you got my point. This is not about a file being technically "valid", but it is about reasonable expectations of a user. A user has no obligation to know a thing about pdfs. If it opens, then it works, that's user end's test for validity.

Sure, did Onyx warn their customers that some PDFs just dont work (which is a fact), the issue would be none. But since they:
1. Failed to produce a reader that has functionalities at par with most other readers,
2. Failed to warn customers that they did,
3. Advertise their product as able to read "arbitrary documents in pdf format" (look at their website),
they simply take the responsibility for consequences.

[Mono]

Janek,
do you think that if you put to your car petrol which is wrong and your car fails to work or even your engine is broken, the producer of car is liable? (Because his car does not work on wrong petrol and he did not warn you that not all petrols you buy at petrol station allows your car to run...).

Of course the owner of petrol station is liable not the producer of the car.

Applicated to our case. The maker of given pdf is most probably "responsible" for producing pdf that is not correct pdf and because of it disables it being read on certain devices - e.g. Onyx M92 and maybe others...

OK. Back to earth.
What is the point of the bizarre pdf story? As a user I have two options:
1) Do not buy a reader or return it to the producer under warranty (let us expect producer will accept it as warranty case, even thought, to my opinion, it is not)
2) Do not read bizarre pdfs, which are a little fraction of all pdfs and/or somehow "fix" bizarre pdfs, so that they are readable.

What do you recomend to those who decide for 1)? Which 10" e-reader would you recomend for reading such files and scribbling and annotating?

I know none, but maybe some exist.

[janek]

Originally Posted by Mono

Janek,
do you think that if you put to your car petrol which is wrong and your car fails to work or even your engine is broken, the producer of car is liable? (Because his car does not work on wrong petrol and he did not warn you that not all petrols you buy at petrol station allows your car to run...).

If I'm officially told that I should use "petrol" without any further denominations, rather than "unleaded 95-octane petrol", then yes, producer is liable.

Originally Posted by Mono

OK. Back to earth.
What is the point of the bizarre pdf story? As a user I have two options:
1) Do not buy a reader or return it to the producer under warranty (let us expect producer will accept it as warranty case, even thought, to my opinion, it is not)
2) Do not read bizarre pdfs, which are a little fraction of all pdfs and/or somehow "fix" bizarre pdfs, so that they are readable.

What do you recomend to those who decide for 1)? Which 10" e-reader would you recomend for reading such files and scribbling and annotating?

Why should I tell anyone what to do? I believe people should be allowed to make informed decisions, and that is it. If they know that device is sometimes malfunctioning and still buy it, it may be because there are other reasons that outweigh that. I for one use it because it improves my workflow, even if I cannot be completely sure that it will really do what the maker promises. But the day it stops (say it turns out I need to spend too much time figuring how to use this or that pdf), i'll just dump it, even if I have to use Kindle or (horribile dictu) iPad instead.

[Knorke]

Originally Posted by Mono

...

What do you recomend to those who decide for 1)? Which 10" e-reader would you recomend for reading such files and scribbling and annotating?

I know none, but maybe some exist. ..

I know none (really none), too . Even the M92 is not able to work correctly with the annotations. In some cases the reader has problems to display pages with pictures in a adequate time and so on. I'm more and more frustrated about so many bugs and I can understand janek very good. Are we really the only guys who want to work with the device?

see thread
https://www.mobileread.com/forums/sho...d.php?t=187509

[mSSM]

Originally Posted by janek

If I'm officially told that I should use "petrol" without any further denominations, rather than "unleaded 95-octane petrol", then yes, producer is liable.

You don't, by accident, happen to be from the US?

Just wondering, because there apparently you can sue companies, because they didn't specify that you shall not dry your pets in a microwave oven.

Hey, why don't you put rocket fuel into your car? It somehow classifies as petrol too, does it not?


Well, as others have said: you have a non-standard file which is called "PDF". Considering that it is non-standard, the question is whether you can actually call it a PDF. But hey, you are going to find a way to justify your petty arguments!

[janek]

Originally Posted by mSSM

You don't, by accident, happen to be from the US?

Just wondering, because there apparently you can sue companies, because they didn't specify that you shall not dry your pets in a microwave oven.

Hey, why don't you put rocket fuel into your car? It somehow classifies as petrol too, does it not?

Well, do I have to be an expert in rocket fuels to drive a car?
Do I have to be an expert in file formats to use ebook readers?

Originally Posted by mSSM

Well, as others have said: you have a non-standard file which is called "PDF". Considering that it is non-standard, the question is whether you can actually call it a PDF. But hey, you are going to find a way to justify your petty arguments!

If there's no standard how can you call a file non-standard? Perhaps thats a way to justify your petty arguments!

[Mono]

Janek,
there is the standard for pdf. What more would you wish than ISO standard?

Back to the fuel and car example. I didn't mean the case when you put different fuel than expected! I meant the case when you put fuel marked unleaded 95 in a car that requiers unleaded 95. Many things may happen. There might be, by error, completely different fuel - like petrol (nafta) labeled natural 95. It has happened to my friend. :-( Or there might be something similar to unleaded 95, but unintentionaly or intentionaly poluted (petrol, water, ....) or it simply does not meet the standards (engine works, but the consumption is higher or it lowers the life-span of the engine.) This all happens in real world, at least in my country - and I would be surprised, it wouldn't happen in your country (based on the salt-gate - for those who do not know - the "salt" meant for making the snow and ice to melt was repackaged and distributed as real salt for eating.... Large amount of "salt" had been converted into salt during several years, before it was discovered....). Is the producer of the car liable for all/any of those incoveniences? Of course not! It is the liability of the petrol distributor or petrol producer.

OK, I understand your frustration that M92 does not do the job for you. My only recomendation is to return it and buy something else. The problem is, there is no else, if you want 10" e-ink reader.

PS.
If I decide to buy the 2nd one, I may buy it from you for full current price. So, you do not have to go to the court with very unsure result...

[janek]

Originally Posted by Mono

Janek,
there is the standard for pdf. What more would you wish than ISO standard?

Back to the fuel and car example. I didn't mean the case when you put different fuel than expected! I meant the case when you put fuel marked unleaded 95 in a car that requiers unleaded 95. Many things may happen. There might be, by error, completely different fuel - like petrol (nafta) labeled natural 95. It has happened to my friend. :-( Or there might be something similar to unleaded 95, but unintentionaly or intentionaly poluted (petrol, water, ....) or it simply does not meet the standards (engine works, but the consumption is higher or it lowers the life-span of the engine.) This all happens in real world, at least in my country - and I would be surprised, it wouldn't happen in your country (based on the salt-gate - for those who do not know - the "salt" meant for making the snow and ice to melt was repackaged and distributed as real salt for eating.... Large amount of "salt" had been converted into salt during several years, before it was discovered....). Is the producer of the car liable for all/any of those incoveniences? Of course not! It is the liability of the petrol distributor or petrol producer.

OK, I understand your frustration that M92 does not do the job for you. My only recomendation is to return it and buy something else. The problem is, there is no else, if you want 10" e-ink reader.

PS.
If I decide to buy the 2nd one, I may buy it from you for full current price. So, you do not have to go to the court with very unsure result...

I think we exhausted the topic and going in circles now. Your analogy is wrong, because Onyx said the reader is capable of doing any pdf, and all other pdf readers take the file with no problems. So it is as if your (say) Porsche refused to run on fuel all VWs, Mercedes and Toyotas run on, despite Porsche announcing it will.

BTW Did I ever say I'm going to sue anyone? It'd be Booxtor in my case, and I have no intention of harming Booxtor :P

[Mono]

I am not sure if Onyx says any pdf. Even if so, than is pdf which is not in accordace with the ISO standard (the only standard being) "any pdf". And can it be called pdf at all if it is not in accordance with the official standard?

And do you base your proof that all other pdf readers can read it only on few trials you made? Maybe you should try those e-ink readers Booxtor mentioned (those that have problems with some type of scanned books). I do not know if they work OK with this particular file, but it is at least probable that they too will have a problem with it.

I understand your frustration. I also would prefer if M92 works 100%, it does not, but I do not know better solution for my type of work. So, I am happy that there is at least something like M92.

[JohnGalt]

Originally Posted by janek

You probably knew that flash sites do not work on iPad before you bought it, didn't you? And you knew it because Apple made no claims that they do. To the contrary, if I recall.

Did Onyx warn users that some pdfs will not work?

It's not limited to flash. There are more than a few sites that just don't work well with my iPad - gmail and safari are a horrible combination for instance. There are thousands of web pages that don't work well with certain browsers. There are W3 consortium standards in place, and yet some pages still won't open in Firefox, some prefer Chrome, and some work best in Internet Explorer. I wouldn't say any of those browsers are defective, nor would I say that a user would be unreasonable to expect their browser to open any given website. The fact is that there are differences in files and browsers and not any one browser can be expected to open all web pages. It's no different with an ereader.

[Knorke]

Originally Posted by janek

It looks like m92 is unable to read certain pdf files. A user on this forum posted a pdf file readeable in regular Adobe Acrobat which just fails to open on m92....

Back to the problem: I've created a small test pdf file with the same security set up as the problematic file from the polish forum. My m92 has no problem to open it. My testfile you can find here:

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/97906838/tes...dard_sec_4.pdf

--> The security is not the elementary problem.

Perhaps the M92 has a problem with the page numbering? The first page is named "a", after that "b" and so on. Than comes "i", "ii", ..., then 1,2,3 and so on. Can someone produce a pdf file with such page numbers to test it?

Thanks.

[Mono]

I create documents with changing numbering schema (manuals, research reports,..) like "i", "ii", ..., then 1,2,3 and so on and no problem.

I guess, there is some other type of copy protection. Otherwise I cannot explain that when printed to pdf printer it becomes 1000 times bigger-from aprox. 2 MB almost 2 GB.

It is not a normal pdf with normal protection diallowing to change it. There is (probably intentionaly) something weird.

[Knorke]

Originally Posted by Mono

I create documents with changing numbering schema (manuals, research reports,..) like "i", "ii", ..., then 1,2,3 and so on and no problem.

I guess, there is some other type of copy protection. Otherwise I cannot explain that when printed to pdf printer it becomes 1000 times bigger-from aprox. 2 MB almost 2 GB.

It is not a normal pdf with normal protection diallowing to change it. There is (probably intentionaly) something weird.

Ok, thanks. Another stupid question: How could you print it to pdf? When I try this I get an error:

...
This PostScript file was created from an encrypted PDF file.
Redistilling encrypted PDF is not permitted.
%%[ Flushing: rest of job (to end-of-file) will be ignored ]%%
%%[ Warning: PostScript error. No PDF file produced. ] %%

[janek]

Originally Posted by JohnGalt

It's not limited to flash. There are more than a few sites that just don't work well with my iPad - gmail and safari are a horrible combination for instance. There are thousands of web pages that don't work well with certain browsers. There are W3 consortium standards in place, and yet some pages still won't open in Firefox, some prefer Chrome, and some work best in Internet Explorer. I wouldn't say any of those browsers are defective, nor would I say that a user would be unreasonable to expect their browser to open any given website. The fact is that there are differences in files and browsers and not any one browser can be expected to open all web pages. It's no different with an ereader.

I have not seen in my entire life a web page that just fails to open. They are displayed incorrectly, perhaps with some content missing, but note that here we are discussing the case of a complete failure to open a file.

[janek]

Originally Posted by Knorke

Ok, thanks. Another stupid question: How could you print it to pdf? When I try this I get an error:

...
This PostScript file was created from an encrypted PDF file.
Redistilling encrypted PDF is not permitted.
%%[ Flushing: rest of job (to end-of-file) will be ignored ]%%
%%[ Warning: PostScript error. No PDF file produced. ] %%

The protection can be removed by removing certain parts of the file. Google's your friend in this case. But beware, in certain jurisdictions (the US) the very attempt to do so is a criminal act, even if you have paid for the file.