Quote:
Originally Posted by sonyreaderfan
Well, I have affinity for Marco Arment because of the software he created, Instapaper. For me, it's THE killer app for iPad and e-ink readers. (I download the epubs to load on my Sony Reader.) If you haven't used it, I recommend it highly for people to try it out. www.instapaper.com
I don't think the review is fanboyish. First he starts off his review giving a link to a very favorable review of Nook 2. He also gives specifics of why the Kindle's font is better than Nook 2's. He also knocks the Kindle for lack of touchscreen and the archaic interface. OTOH, the comment, "so lack of font is a feature, got it." Now, that's fanboyism.
But, if you have EVIDENCE or text from reviews (you know, textual proofs) that Nook 2 contrast is just as good as Kindle's, I'd like to see it. |
hmmm did you actually read the first part of the review?
The Kindle 3 and Nook Simple Touch cost about the same, weigh about the same, feel about the same, and have the same-generation, same-resolution e-ink screen. (The weight and thickness are both technically different, but the difference isn’t meaningful during use.) The bezels are about the same color and thickness. They both even use the otherwise rare PMN Caecilia font by default, and both display pictures of famous dead authors as “screensavers” when they’re asleep.
Barnes & Noble has copied so many facets of the Kindle that they clearly want consumers to think that this is a Kindle. They’re unquestionably trying to cause confusion in the market, presumably to increase their chances. I’m not a fan of this approach to competition; there’s enough potential differentiation that the runner-up needn’t outright copy the market leader so blatantly.
If that is not having tainted pre determined conclusion I don't know what is.
besides the fact he's just flat out wrong on so many levels.