The Nook with Glowlight

[Asawi]

Originally Posted by ProfCrash

They should be comparing the Nook with the KT WiFi, I don't care with or without ads. They didn't because the Kindle is less expensive.

Sure they did! Kindle Touch WiFi without ads is $139.

[BongoBong]

Originally Posted by afv011

The B&N page indicates



Anyway, I think it is still plenty good and should give users weeks of use between charges.

I don't know. With the glowlight that only gives around 15 hours of reading, which really isn't much more then some tablets that can get 10 plus hours on a single charge.

It is weird though that apparently this version gets only half the read time as the non glow light version even when its not using the light though. I can't imagine how there could be such a huge difference between the two.

Glad to see this start to come out for ereaders though. It's a function I have definitely been waiting for. If I could get a nook up here in Canada there is a good chance I would have updated my original Kobo for this. But may be worth waiting for a few more to come out and drive down the cost.



This is another lighting technology that hopefully will be out soon as well. Seems to use only 1 led and looks to give more consistent lighting.

[afv011]

Originally Posted by BongoBong

I don't know. With the glowlight that only gives around 15 hours of reading, which really isn't much more then some tablets that can get 10 plus hours on a single charge.

It is weird though that apparently this version gets only half the read time as the non glow light version even when its not using the light though. I can't imagine how there could be such a huge difference between the two.

Glad to see this start to come out for ereaders though. It's a function I have definitely been waiting for. If I could get a nook up here in Canada there is a good chance I would have updated my original Kobo for this. But may be worth waiting for a few more to come out and drive down the cost.



This is another lighting technology that hopefully will be out soon as well. Seems to use only 1 led and looks to give more consistent lighting.

It doesn't work like that. If they say "60 days with 1/2 hour reading" doesn't mean that you get 30 hours of straight reading, you have to account for the stand-by time. By the same token, you should get more than 15 hours of reading with the light on. I think there is a mistake on the literature, in some places it indicates the battery is the same and you should get the same battery life with light off, but then in other places it indicates different battery life expectations. I am more inclined to think the battery life should be the same with light off, there is no reason it should not be the case if the batteries are the same.

[murraypaul]

Originally Posted by afv011

It doesn't work like that. If they say "60 days with 1/2 hour reading" doesn't mean that you get 30 hours of straight reading, you have to account for the stand-by time.

Power drain in standby mode should be very low, the device isn't doing anything.
If they are saying 30 days@1/2 hour, you are unlikely to get much more than 15 hours total.

[afv011]

Originally Posted by murraypaul

Power drain in standby mode should be very low, the device isn't doing anything.
If they are saying 30 days@1/2 hour, you are unlikely to get much more than 15 hours total.

Really? So how do you explain the nook touch getting 150 hours when doing page turns every minute? By your logic it should get only 60 hours.

With up to two months on a single charge, the All-New NOOK has the longest-battery life in the industry and superior battery performance to Kindle 3. In our side-by-side tests, under the exact same conditions, continuous use of the device resulted in more than two times Kindle's battery life. While reading at one page a minute, the All-New NOOK battery lasts for 150 hours where the Kindle battery, using the same page-turn rate, lasts for only 56 hours (both with Wi-Fi off).

Source

[BeccaPrice]

Originally Posted by afv011

What's wrong with the nook?

I'ma confirmed Kindle user, and an Amazon girl, but I do have to admit that the Nook has better technical specs, as a piece of hardware.

Trouble is, when you're buying an ereader, you're buying into more than just the hardware.

Amazon has a better ecosystem, however, and I really really hate the idea of using a credit card number to validate books. What happens if I have to change the credit card number? do I have to remember which credit card I used to purchase which book? (well, no, *I* won't, because I'm a friend of Alf's, but I really don't like the idea.)

And Amazon customer support simply can't be beat.

[murraypaul]

Originally Posted by afv011

Really? So how do you explain the nook touch getting 150 hours when doing page turns every minute? By your logic it should get only 60 hours.

Because with eInk readers time spent reading is irrelevant, what uses power is changing pages. If you read fast, and change pages often, the battery will last less hours than if you read slowly and change pages less often.
When eInk readers were introduced, battery life was described by number of page turns, but that wasn't 'user friendly' enough, so they invented a 'lasts X weeks' calculation based on a standard reading speed. 1 turn a minute for 150 hours is 9000 page turns, which from memory is about what the PRS-505 claimed when it was introduced.
It used to be that they quoted based on 1 hours reading per day, but as battery life dropped, they changed to use 1/2 hour instead, so they could still claim months of battery life.
A device with an active light, however, does use power all the time it is on.
Who reads for 1/2 an hour a day every day?

[afv011]

Originally Posted by murraypaul

Because with eInk readers time spent reading is irrelevant, what uses power is changing pages. If you read fast, and change pages often, the battery will last less hours than if you read slowly and change pages less often.
When eInk readers were introduced, battery life was described by number of page turns, but that wasn't 'user friendly' enough, so they invented a 'lasts X weeks' calculation based on a standard reading speed. 1 turn a minute for 150 hours is 9000 page turns, which from memory is about what the PRS-505 claimed when it was introduced.
It used to be that they quoted based on 1 hours reading per day, but as battery life dropped, they changed to use 1/2 hour instead, so they could still claim months of battery life.
A device with an active light, however, does use power all the time it is on.
Who reads for 1/2 an hour a day every day?

Still, your premise that you get only 15 hours of continuous reading is wrong, you certainly get more - the nook touch gets 2.5 times as much (150 hours as opposed to 60), and the same should apply with the light, though maybe not to the same degree (x2.5) - but still certainly more than 15 hours.

[afv011]

Originally Posted by murraypaul

A device with an active light, however, does use power all the time it is on.
Who reads for 1/2 an hour a day every day?

I don't know, people who have 15 minutes commute and only read on the train? People who are busy with other stuff in their life, like kids and such?

[slm]

Originally Posted by murraypaul

Because with eInk readers time spent reading is irrelevant, what uses power is changing pages. If you read fast, and change pages often, the battery will last less hours than if you read slowly and change pages less often.
When eInk readers were introduced, battery life was described by number of page turns, but that wasn't 'user friendly' enough, so they invented a 'lasts X weeks' calculation based on a standard reading speed. 1 turn a minute for 150 hours is 9000 page turns, which from memory is about what the PRS-505 claimed when it was introduced.
It used to be that they quoted based on 1 hours reading per day, but as battery life dropped, they changed to use 1/2 hour instead, so they could still claim months of battery life.
A device with an active light, however, does use power all the time it is on.
Who reads for 1/2 an hour a day every day?

The "no power unless you turn pages" theory is wrong for touch ereaders. The touch mechanism uses power all the time, partly to generate infrared beams.

[afv011]

Originally Posted by slm

The "no power unless you turn pages" theory is wrong for touch ereaders. The touch mechanism uses power all the time, partly to generate infrared beams.

And the CPU, memory and Co. are still running and sucking juice, at lower levels, but certainly not off.

[FizzyWater]

Hmmm, sounds appealing at first, but I can't help thinking of Sony's PRS-700. Is the "built in screen protector" that same extra layer that fudged the readability. There were "reviews" that said it wasn't all that different back then, too...at first. I thought the PRS-600 was fine...until I tried to read on it somewhere other than Sony's dazzlingly lit store. I sold it within 3 months and read on my old PRS-300 until the PRS-650's came out.

[afv011]

Originally Posted by FizzyWater

Hmmm, sounds appealing at first, but I can't help thinking of Sony's PRS-700. Is the "built in screen protector" that same extra layer that fudged the readability. There were "reviews" that said it wasn't all that different back then, too...at first. I thought the PRS-600 was fine...until I tried to read on it somewhere other than Sony's dazzlingly lit store. I sold it within 3 months and read on my old PRS-300 until the PRS-650's came out.

It's supposed to be a different kind of technology, but until it's in the hands of consumers nobody can really tell. The reviews and videos posted so far look promising though. I am keen to try it out.

[Joykins]

This sounds interesting. I will have to check this out.

I don't think anyone--by which I mean me--would read 15 hours total with the light on per charge cycle unless they are mole people living in unlit tunnels or such. As the occasional nighttime wind-down while the spouse is sleeping, or as a passenger in a darkened vehicle--sure. These are the times I use my iPhone or nook/kindle with clip-on light. But this is sporadic use.

[ucfgrad93]

Originally Posted by Joykins

This sounds interesting. I will have to check this out.

I don't think anyone--by which I mean me--would read 15 hours total with the light on per charge cycle unless they are mole people living in unlit tunnels or such. As the occasional nighttime wind-down while the spouse is sleeping, or as a passenger in a darkened vehicle--sure. These are the times I use my iPhone or nook/kindle with clip-on light. But this is sporadic use.

Agreed. It is nice to have a built in light, either like this or the Kindle lighted cases. It is one less thing to have to pack, keep charged, remember to bring, etc. It is well worth the hit in battery life, in my opinion.