Thread: Kindle 3 or Nook
View Single Post
Old 10-06-2010, 04:22 PM   #46
bill_mchale
Wizard
bill_mchale ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.bill_mchale ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.bill_mchale ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.bill_mchale ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.bill_mchale ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.bill_mchale ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.bill_mchale ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.bill_mchale ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.bill_mchale ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.bill_mchale ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.bill_mchale ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
Posts: 1,451
Karma: 1550000
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Maryland, USA
Device: Nook Simple Touch, HPC Evo 4G LTE
Quote:
Originally Posted by ProfCrash View Post
Amazon allowed it on the Kindle 1. Then they got rid of it. Probably because there were a ton of problems with indexing the like and because the K2 could hold 2 GB worth of material. The K3 can hold 4 GB worth of material. Dropping the SD slot in favor of additional memory made the K2 thinner and lighter, something that is important to lots of people.
You know I hear this particular claim a lot, but I wonder how true it is? Lots of ebook readers that are fairly light, including the new Sony PRS-650 (which has both an SD reader and a Memory Stick reader) are fairly light... in fact, the PRS-650 is (according to the MR Wiki) lighter than the Kindle3. So is the Kobo which also has an SD card reader.. and the difference in the thickness of the Sony and the Kobo conpared to the Kindle is essentially negligible (Kobo .04 inches thinner and Sony .04 inches thicker). A user replaceable batter I can see having a negative impact, but my guess is that removing the SD card reader was a cost cutting move by Amazon.

--
Bill
bill_mchale is offline   Reply With Quote