Thread: Is the extra .8'' on the H2O worth the extra $$ ?
View Single Post
Old 10-07-2015, 08:16 AM   #9
John F
Grand Sorcerer
John F ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.John F ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.John F ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.John F ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.John F ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.John F ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.John F ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.John F ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.John F ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.John F ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.John F ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
Posts: 7,966
Karma: 71261339
Join Date: Feb 2009
Device: Kobo Clara 2E
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sweetpea View Post
I've read those kinds of PDF files on my 6"... I did remove all the margins though (most of those margins are huge!). It doesn't have to resize that much then. Especially not if you have a 6.8" reader.
Not trying to be argumentative, just for discussions sake ...

I measured one of my technical pbooks: 9.5" diagonal with a ratio of 1.80 (printed area, the actual page diagonal is 11.25).

That sounds like more than "not that much" to me.

The paper book had a nice easy to read font size. When I tried the Windows PDF resize to 6.8", the font was much smaller than what I would normally read at; I could read it fine, but I don't think I would want to read at the size for long periods of time.

Just looking at the numbers, 9.5" --> 6.8" seems like a much larger jump than 6.8" --> 6.0". In the end, if I was only going to be reading larger fixed layout PDF documents a lot, and I had to stick to eink, and I had to keep it 6.8 or under than, for me, I would go with the H2O; but than if it was me, I wouldn't have all those restrictions as hard requirments .
John F is offline   Reply With Quote