Upgrading from Kindle DX

[xxtraloud]

Hello Folks,

I would just like some quick feedback because I am thinking of upgrading from Kindle DX to a M92 or possibly M96 or PB ink.

I am mostly happy with the DX because I read mostly text 2 column pdf and it works perfectly with a 3rd party software. However it is slow when I have to zoom in and out when I want to look at a graph and switch back and fourth from 2 column read to full page, and also slow at browsing long documents.

Now the M92 is relatively cheap now and I am wondering if it will be an improvement over the DX. How much better is the M96 compared to the M92? Has anybody tried the PB ink?

Again I only use an e-reader for this one purpose so most other functionality are not a concern.

[markom]

I don't think that M92 can be quicker in that regard, but it's a lot better for other reasons like scribbling with exporting, multitasking, wi-fi, sd card slot etc.

Another option if endnotes and graphs were too small for our vision would be using magnifying glass or simply simultaneously using auxiliary tablet/eink for colors, scribbling, dictionaries (as I've been doing) or in your case quicker zooming and browsing.

I usually don't use 2-column mode for 2-column pdfs though (letters are too big for my liking that way and I can just see a quarter instead a half of the page), but I rather read it in landscape zoomed in without margins (fit-to-content-width in KPV kindlepdfviewer), like I would read any one-column A4/letter sized pdf there.
It takes about one and a half second for full screen refresh at flipping through pdf page (again four screens per page, back and forth, as at using 2-column portraite mode).

If zoomed without margins then the letters would even appear slightly bigger than on the A4 sheet of paper, so usually there is no need of zooming-in, but it's no problem to zoom-in by pressing alt+next/prev and then use joystick for panning (panning steps also adjustable).
Zoom level can be adjusted by shift+next/prev e.g. 16% or 32% and then by pressing alt+next/prev successively it goes up or down by 16% or 32% until desired magnification.

Of course DX is not as quick at flipping or at zooming as average tablet is, but I don't find it too slow for my needs (as some might do).

It takes about two seconds to enter 2-column mode that is usually good enough for magnification without a need for any further zooming and panning (if graph or text is not spread across two columns).

It takes about three seconds for zooming in 200-300%, about 2 seconds per screen for panning and second and a half to get back to fit-to-width landscape, fit-to-page portraite or 2-column view.
For quick jumping to other pages we can use go-to-page function, TOC, or numbers 1-10 for 0%, 10%, 20% ... 100% of the book.

[EldRick]

I once had a DX for a couple of weeks before returning it, due to slooooow buggy software, particularly for PDFs.
Almost anything would be a huge improvement, and the M96 is excellent by comparison - it is half a decade more modern - faster, much better higher-resolution screen, and far better software and performance.

[japinder]

+1

I believe a Kindle, especially DX (because of the large screen size) is best for file types like epub, mobi etc. However it might not be the best fit for PDFs, unless you do some editing beforehand on the PC, or resort to mods like Duokan etc.

General purpose/open ereaders like M92/M96 are more extensible as compared to the closed nature of Kindle & just give you more options, that's all.

[xxtraloud]

I have been using KPV for my DX and I am happy with the software, however I see that M92 and DX are roughly based on the same CPU and same screen, so that's why I was asking.

Also I think the DX is better built, at least I don't see all these hardware problems in the DX section.

[markom]

Originally Posted by japinder

+1

I believe a Kindle, especially DX (because of the large screen size) is best for file types like epub, mobi etc. However it might not be the best fit for PDFs, unless you do some editing beforehand on the PC, or resort to mods like Duokan etc.

General purpose/open ereaders like M92/M96 are more extensible as compared to the closed nature of Kindle & just give you more options, that's all.

With installed KPV app (KindlePdfViewer based on muPDF, GPLv3) thereon(takes just a few minutes if you already know how to do it) DX-G is as good for reading scanned pdfs (also djvu ! epub ! cbz) as M92 or any 10" eink there, because they use similar 150 dpi Pearl screens without a light and comparable hardware.

There is no need for pdf editing of any kind (on the PC beforehand) for reading A4/letter size pdfs on Kindle DX when using KPV reader, because we can get magnified A4 pdf letters compared to paper by simply using KPV's landscape mode without margins, or we can even reflow pdf scan image itself if we want it (image reflow is more important for smaller Kindles 3, 4, 5 and Kobos though).

M92 is better because of its pdf annotation capabilities using its pen, multitasking option, for its wi-fi and sd card slot, not because it is better at reading scanned pdfs itself (i.e. pdf zooming capabilities, flipping speed, gamma correction, folder management etc.).

Kindle DX or M92 in landscape are of the same width as DPT-S1 in portraite and the same 150 dpi.

So, e.g. when zoomed without margins in landscape I can get bigger letters on DX than those on DPT-S1 in portraite and just have to use next page button to get to the other half of pdf page in a second and a half.

For ocr-ed scans there is fit-to-content-width option and for pdf scans without ocr layer there is quick 2-point graphical margin crop (separately for left and right pages if needed).

Ocr-ed pdfs can also be underscored using joystick and then pages with underscored sentences quickly accessed using the list of all previously underscored parts.

[Dr. Drib]

Originally Posted by EldRick

I once had a DX for a couple of weeks before returning it, due to slooooow buggy software, particularly for PDFs.
Almost anything would be a huge improvement, and the M96 is excellent by comparison - it is half a decade more modern - faster, much better higher-resolution screen, and far better software and performance.

Yes, the Kindle DX used an earlier-generation screen.

Unfortunately, the screens on both the ('newer') Kindle DX-G and the Onyx M96 are the same in terms of pixels.*

I say 'unfortunately,' only because the technology - regarding the screens on both devices - is about as up-to-date as grandma's bloomers.




* = Please feel free to correct any inaccuracies.

[mbovenka]

Originally Posted by Dr. Drib

I say 'unfortunately,' only because the technology - regarding the screens on both devices - is about as up-to-date as grandma's bloomers.

It's not *that* bad. Both use a Pearl screen (as far as I know, the DXG was even the first reader to do so). Carta is only now seeing widespread use in the new crop of readers.

[theodric]

Originally Posted by EldRick

faster

That's debatable. My Kindle DX renders PDF and MOBI page flips at twice the speed of my M96. I can post a video for the doubters.

Originally Posted by EldRick

much better

I don't see any hardware difference. The Kindle renders detail on images better, but there's striated noise in the background. The M96 dithers hard, producing crisper but less-nuanced views.

Originally Posted by EldRick

higher-resolution screen

1000x824 vs 1000x825. You're absolutely right, it is higher-resolution.

Originally Posted by EldRick

and far better software

Extremely debatable. The Kindle is memory-restricted and struggles to be anything more than an e-paper reader. The M96, through inexplicable choices on Onyx's part, can barely claim to be an Android tablet. (Baked-in custom version of Google Play Services that can't be replaced, limiting me from installing many applications? Why? And also why is the "house" button a menu button? Got a volume discount on house buttons or something?)

Originally Posted by EldRick

and performance.

Overall, true. More RAM certainly helps.

The M96's build quality is crap, the software is crap, the performance is unspectacular, and the stupid (and expensive-to-replace) stylus that the so-called-touchscreen requires - which Onyx didn't even have the foresight to provide the capability to dock inside the unit - is the nail in its coffin for me. Eff this expensive piece of junk.

I think, given a do-over, I wouldn't have bought either of them. My iPad remains my favourite reading device. The Kindle app on iOS will display externally-sourced files including PDFs (unlike on pretty much any other platform) and the rendering performance of the iPad blows everything else out of the water. You can use it in the dark, too.

[xxtraloud]

I am so puzzled as how the DX-G can be faster than the M96 at rendering simple PDF which just text, care to do a test with a 2 column scientific article?

[EldRick]

Let's not overlook the fact that the DX is about as comfortable to hold as a tombstone - it is massively Heavy. The buttons are basically useless and get in the way of holding it, and the size is Huge.
It's nice, for 2009 technology.

[ST-One]

Originally Posted by EldRick

Let's not overlook the fact that the DX is about as comfortable to hold as a tombstone - it is massively Heavy. The buttons are basically useless and get in the way of holding it, and the size is Huge.
It's nice, for 2009 technology.

I think the DX is very nicely designed; it certainly looks a hell of a lot better than the Onxy. The build-quality is way better. You can hold it quite comfortably and I don't think it's too heavy at all.

With higher resolution, a bit more steam under the hood, and a capacitive touch screen this would still be a very nice reader.

[theodric]

Originally Posted by xxtraloud

I am so puzzled as how the DX-G can be faster than the M96 at rendering simple PDF which just text, care to do a test with a 2 column scientific article?

Very happy to. I don't have JSTOR access anymore, but if you'd like to point me to a representative file I'll grab it and video the results.

Update: it's not a two-column text-only scientific paper, but this pretty much represents my experience with all PDFs on this device https://vine.co/v/O7jTqU2wj1E

[xxtraloud]

thanks theodric, that's disappointing to say the least. Could you try with this?
http://www.des.ucdavis.edu/faculty/m...alEcol2004.pdf

and if you have KPV show me how the two compare zooming in a graph for example and scrolling through pages? How can the M96 be so slow? Is the built in pdf reader slow?

I mean if you compare a CPU of today with one of 4 years ago you should see some difference.

[markom]

Originally Posted by xxtraloud

... How can the M96 be so slow? Is the built in pdf reader slow?

I mean if you compare a CPU of today with one of 4 years ago you should see some difference.

I remember it took Icarus three seconds in landscape to Kindle DX' one sec.

https://www.mobileread.com/forums/att...0&d=1334707173

It took 15 sec. on Kindle DX (white) KPV reader to flip through those 11 pages of IversonGlobalEcol2004 pdf (portraite, fit page, full refresh), when I've pressed button next or prev 11 times successively in a few seconds, and it took 17 sec. for fit-to-page-width (and fit-to-content-width too) or about second and a half per screen.

In landscape fit-to-content-width (i.e. no margins) it took 13 seconds (similar successive pressings of next page button) for three pages (three screens per page because there was an inch of the page always left for third screen in this zoom), so about second and a half per screen at full refresh.

To flip through three pages in 2-column mode (12 screens, full refresh) it took 28 seconds.
It took about second longer to get to another page, so about 2 seconds per screen to get to another quarter of the page and 3 seconds for next page (first quarter).