Kobo glo or aura - what's the difference? ereader newbie!

[Dr. Drib]

Originally Posted by Indecisive

Well, I revisited this thread because a poster asked that I return eventually to say how I liked it - the other thread was to ask people's opinion on whether it could have been something else. So I decided to give an update here saying my time was brief with a photo as a bit of a joke about our short time together. Didn't really start threads all over or anything.

Yes, I've learned I need to get a case for it. Thank you. I'll be checking the forum threads for case suggestions.

And I didn't let them play with it. But I also don't keep a safe in England for when I visit.

This is your quote, from your other thread, on this issue:

"I have a suspicion the problem may lie with my beloved tech loving nieces and nephews I was staying with. I just don't have the heart to garnish their allowance."

You may not have let them play with it, but as you can see, when other people start handling things, accidents can sometimes happen.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by rahulsh1986

Kobo Aura is the latest edition, based on Linux platform, is slightly larger at 5.9" x 4.5" x 0.3" and with 4gb memory instead of the 2 gb memory.

Aura also has better battery life and comes with pre-installed games like chess.

I personally prefer Kindle though. Just a suggestion. It is primarily because Amazon has a large collection and comes with offers every now and then. There are also Indie authors that publish there.

But, if you know how to strip Amazon DRM, then you can buy from Amazon and read with Kobo.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by nathan.grewal

Aura is prettier, less blue frontlight, and better battery.

You left out two important differences. The screen on the Aura is higher resolution. 1024x756 vs. 800x600 and a faster processor.

[davidfor]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

You left out two important differences. The screen on the Aura is higher resolution. 1024x756 vs. 800x600 and a faster processor.

The thread is comparing the Glo and the Aura. They have the same resolution and screen size. As to the processor, the Kobo specs state both as simply "1GHz" but I'm pretty sure they have same processor.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by davidfor

The thread is comparing the Glo and the Aura. They have the same resolution and screen size. As to the processor, the Kobo specs state both as simply "1GHz" but I'm pretty sure they have same processor.

OK, I've taken a closer look and here's what I've found...

Glo:
114 x 157 x 10 mm.
Aura:
150 x 114 x 8.1 mm.

Glo:
6" XGA Pearl E Ink touchscreen; 1024x758 resolution; 16-level grey scale.
Aura:
6" High-res, low-glare Pearl E Ink ClarityScreen with low-flash waveform; 1024 x 758, 16 level grey.

Glo:
185g
Aura:
174g

Glo:
2 GB Option to expand up to 32 GB with a Micro SD card.
Aura:
4 GB Option to expand up to 32 GB with a Micro SD card.

Glo:
Over 1 month with Wi Fi turned off
Up to 70 hours of continuous usage with ComfortLight on.
Aura:
Over 2 months based on 30 minutes of reading a day with ComfortLight turned on or off, and Wi Fi turned off

Glo:
$129.99
Aura:
$149.99

[HarryT]

The screens are the same, Jon. Perhaps you're thinking of the Aura HD, which has a larger 6.8" screen?

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by HarryT

The screens are the same, Jon. Perhaps you're thinking of the Aura HD, which has a larger 6.8" screen?

But the Aura has a low flash waveform which I would think would mean less ghosting.

[DaleDe]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

But the Aura has a low flash waveform which I would think would mean less ghosting.

I would agree, The Aura screen is the same as the Aura HD only smaller and lower resolution. It has the improved waveform resulting in less need to refresh and a more ruggedized clarity screen. this is a difference from the Glo.

Dale

[davidfor]

Originally Posted by HarryT

The screens are the same, Jon. Perhaps you're thinking of the Aura HD, which has a larger 6.8" screen?

Originally Posted by JSWolf

But the Aura has a low flash waveform which I would think would mean less ghosting.

Actually you're both right and I was wrong. I didn't look back through the thread. The first post is from April last year. The Aura wasn't released until September 2013. The OP must have been referring to the Aura HD which was released in April 2013. Unless there was a time machine involved.

[JSWolf]

How is the Aura HD compared to the Aura for the screen flash or lack thereof?

[DaleDe]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

How is the Aura HD compared to the Aura for the screen flash or lack thereof?

I believe they are the same. They both advertise the Clarity Screen.

Dale

[davidfor]

Originally Posted by DaleDe

I believe they are the same. They both advertise the Clarity Screen.

But only the Aura has the updated waveform.

The Aura only doesn't have a fixed number of pages before refresh. From memory, it only refreshes at the chapter/file breaks.

[jackie_w]

The Glo/AuraHD have 6 selectable full page-refresh settings, 1-6 pages. The Aura 6" has 4 selectable settings - 1-, 5-, 10-pages or every chapter. If you prefer something 'non-standard' there is also the option to manually edit the Kobo config file with a text editor.

When set to anything other than 1-page, ghosting on the Aura 6" is noticably less than the earlier Kobos (and all my previous non-Kobo readers, for that matter).

[SoSo]

Originally Posted by Stahlratte

I completely agree. Kobo Glo gets the job done, period. You can always search for something A LITTLE BIT better, but what's the point? The size is perfect, ComfortLight technology lets you read in any environment, all necessary ebook functions are there, you can just focus on the book contents and extending your library, and Kobo Glo wouldn't disappoint you in any way. Budget, minimalistic, perfect.

If you have found an ideal partner that satisfies you on many levels and makes you happy, what's the point of keeping looking for "someone better"?

The bottom line is, if you need an ebook reader for reading and not just for the sake of getting the latest device, both Glo and Aura will do the job. I just don't see any additional value in spending an extra bucks for Aura - I'll rather buy a couple of additional books for my library.

The only direction the existing [e-ink with front light] technology can and will be developing is adding more fuctions, more features, creating more sophisticated and power-consuming devices, and eventually merging ebooks ereaders with tablet PCs. There is no other option. The same has already happened with pretty much any digital device so far. Kobo will be launching new devices each year (announcing them at Computex expo in summer and then officially launching in the fall), trying to show it's something revolutionary and one-of-a-kind, but in reality it's just borrowing functions and ideas from other computer-related areas in order to keep the stock market development stable and shareholders happy.

If you really see an additional value in Aura, then get it. If you own a Kindle ebook reader and got stuck with its limitations (incl. DRM protection and Amazon store), then get rid of it ASAP and buy yourself either Kobo Glo or Aura, while they are still out there. But if you think that even Aura does not fulfill your needs, then you are not after an ebook reader for reading purposes; you should get yourself a tablet PC and start playing Angry Birds instead.

A full year after this message, I still think the same. I used the Glo almost daily since I bought it. Excellent reader and, again, its the battery autonomy that nails it more than anything else. You dont care if a Apple Mini is full of features. A e-reader is meant to be compact, ultra-light and long lasting battery.

The Glo battery really last twice as long as the Aura or Aura HD (the main kobo site : Glo - 70 hours vs Aura - 2 months * which is 30 minutes per day which is 30 hours) (they are a little here, lol)

So, yes, get the Glo while they last. You wont ever see a clean, plain, minimal, ad-free with the front-light functionality e-ink reader like the Glo again. All other future models from Kobo will be inferior (more definition (for a book ?), more useless functions, bigger processor, better this or that but then even shorter battery life than the Aura, necessarily).

[davidfor]

Originally Posted by SoSo

The Glo battery really last twice as long as the Aura or Aura HD (the main kobo site : Glo - 70 hours vs Aura - 2 months * which is 30 minutes per day which is 30 hours) (they are a little here, lol)

The battery spec for the Glo on the Kobo site is a bit weird:

Over 1 month with Wi Fi turned off**
Up to 70 hours of continuous usage with ComfortLight on***

With the notes:

**Battery life is measured with Wi Fi turned off.
***Actual results are based on individual usage and may vary.

The first line suggests more than 15 hours of battery life (assuming the 30 minutes a day that is used elsewhere). The second line implies a LOT longer if the light is on. And the word "continuous" suggests that if I turn the light on and keep it on, then it lasts 70 hours. But, if it is turned on and off, it will be a shorter.

My experience with my Glo suggest maybe 40 hours. That is with the WiFi on, the light on about 50% of the time and allowing sleep after 15 minutes and never power off. From comments in the Kobo forum, I think the Aura HD is about the same. I can't think of comments about the Aura.