Thread: PocketBook 740
View Single Post
Old 02-03-2018, 09:13 PM   #31
davidfor
Grand Sorcerer
davidfor ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.davidfor ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.davidfor ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.davidfor ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.davidfor ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.davidfor ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.davidfor ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.davidfor ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.davidfor ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.davidfor ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.davidfor ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
Posts: 24,905
Karma: 47303824
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Sydney, Australia
Device: Kobo:Touch,Glo, AuraH2O, GloHD,AuraONE, ClaraHD, Libra H2O; tolinoepos
Quote:
Originally Posted by sealbeater View Post
The unique MOON Light technology enables one to use the device in the dark or under poor lighting conditions. When this function is used, soft luminescence of the screen (comfortable for reading) is being generated.
As the others have stated, I was commenting on how the lighting works, not whether it was lit or not. And thanks to rcentros's links, the light is described as:

Quote:
MOON Light technique uses a reflective light distribution. The light-conducting layer is located over the display. The light goes through this layer and is reflected towards the screen being absorbed by the dark elements of the image and then this reflected light enters the eyes. On sensations this light is similar to the reflected light from an external source. This kind of lighting is significantly more comfortable for reading than backlit LCD displays.
With some added emphasis to show it is described as frontlit and compared to backlit devices.

Quote:
Now, perhaps you are simply being pedantic but my device is certainly an e-ink device and it certainly can be read in the dark.
No pedantry. I probably would have ignored your original statement that it was backlight. But, when you questioned the correction of your statement, you were going to get an explanation of why your statement was wrong. I was just the first to come along.
davidfor is offline   Reply With Quote