Quote:
Originally Posted by delphin
NO -
This is like arguing that my old beat up 640 x 480 12 inch laptop screen is better than a 60 inch 1080p HD display because it looks better from 2 feet away.
Duuuuuh! 
In this case BOTH screens are 600x800, but the 650 is a little larger so it should be view from slightly farther back.
If you view the 650 from farther back than the 350 so that the subtended angle in your field of vision is the same, and set them so they are displaying the same number of characters per line, then they will look the same.
If ANYTHING the 350 should actually be slightly LESS sharp under these conditions because the smaller pixels of the 350 will suffer more due to the slight intrinsic graininess of the e-ink pigment capsules. |
Except that these aren't TVs. The reason I got the 350 in the first place is because I was reading the Kindle only to think that my vision was going bad. I literally went to BB and compared all the devices and could instantly tell which screens had the same poor resolution and which screen, the 350, had a superior resolution. Yes, if you read from 2 feet away you might not be able to tell the difference. At just over 1 foot I can easily see the difference and there are many times when I would be reading at that distance regardless of font or reader size! Sometimes I can even see the limitations of the 350 screen and wish for the iPhone's 300 dpi resolution.
To be honest I don't see why everyone makes a big deal about this. If the lower resolution doesn't bother you then it's not an issue. If it does bother you then there's really only one obvious choice. But trying to argue that they should be viewed at different distances is horse&$@t. If you want to use TV viewing distances, I used an online calculator to calculate the seating distance per inch of diagonal screen to 0.4 feet. If we actually examined users, I can postulate with almost perfect certainty that, on average, 650 users aren't holding their devices 0.4 feet farther than 350 users.