Quote:
Originally Posted by DiapDealer
Absolutely. For my own part, I never intended to suggest otherwise. I'm merely tired of those whose eyes prefer reading on eInk clinging uselessly to the idea that their preference is somehow ... natural(?) ... or organic(?). Even if they're in the majority ... what would be the relevance? Preferences aren't required to have justification. Nor should they need vindication in numbers. Like what you (rhet) like without attempting to assign some sort of "natural order of things" quality to your choice.
|
That's perfectly understandable, and I also hope that with time, there will be fewer people going around telling those who prefer LCD devices that their preference is wrong and LCD cannot possibly be good. Whatever works!
I think there
is a certain amount of fear among those of us (obviously not everyone) who have tried LCD devices and found them unsuitable, regardless of app or settings, for longer reading sessions, that if too many people start using multi-purpose devices / LCD devices for reading, eInk readers, which for many of us offer the best reading experience imaginable, will simply stop being offered. That fear, subconscious or not, may be what makes some people vocally defensive of eInk to the point of attacking LCD device suitability for everyone.
I've read two books on my iPad. It's doable, especially with sepia background and turning brightness to a point where it's not too bright but still offers enough contrast (for me that's around 50% - I've tried to read at lower brightness but just cannot) but I reach the stage of eyes starting to water heavily and "floaties" arriving a whole lot sooner than with eInk (or paper, although eInk seems even better these days). On the other hand, my mother is perfectly happy with my old 1st generation iPad for reading and has no complaints. So I'm quite aware it's a very personal thing!