350 not the same as 650

[kartu]

If anything, 350 should be FASTER because of the smaller screen, not other way round.

[igorsk]

Originally Posted by cwappy

Anyway, I wonder if anyone cares to comment on these differences, especially how much slower the 350 is, which I've never heard before on here (and I've been lurking for weeks).

Are you sure you've got a 350 and not 300? The 350 and 650 have almost the same hardware, so there shouldn't be a big difference in speed. Try resetting, maybe that will help. Otherwise it might be a faulty unit.

[CraftyDan]

kartu,

The screen is smaller but the resolution is the same, so it should be a wash.

igorsk,

Just spit-balling here, but aren't the differences in hardware interfaces that are missing? (audio, SD, memstick) Knowing that Sony built their firmwares from the same framework, it could be possible that the x50 framework was optimized for the 650's configuration. It may run slower when it doesn't have parts it's optimized for -- perhaps the briefest of pauses when notices that one of the interfaces hasn't replied recently and ponders the error.

yes, that would be a cosmetic bug in the firmware -- one that only a side-by-side comparison would reveal -- but one that's unnoticeable enough to make it through formal testing. I'm not saying this is a present bug, just saying it MIGHT.

[CraftyDan]

While I don't discount the possibility of a speed difference, I've owned a 350 for a few months now and played with the pair in a store. I've come to the conclusion:

1. if there is a difference, it's at the edge of perception. Keep in mind, once you perceive a subtle problem, it often "feels" worse than it really is -- just one of the tricks our mind plays on us.

2. I like fast page turns and 350's rate is acceptable. I like fast UIs, and the menu sometimes leaves a lot of room for improvement. since I don't spend much time in the menu, I rarely get annoyed by it.

[igorsk]

Originally Posted by CraftyDan

Just spit-balling here, but aren't the differences in hardware interfaces that are missing? (audio, SD, memstick) Knowing that Sony built their firmwares from the same framework, it could be possible that the x50 framework was optimized for the 650's configuration. It may run slower when it doesn't have parts it's optimized for -- perhaps the briefest of pauses when notices that one of the interfaces hasn't replied recently and ponders the error.

No, I seriously doubt it. On the 350 the drivers for missing hardware are simply not loaded, so if anything, that should make it run (negligibly) faster. The Linux kernel used on the two models is exactly the same.

[CraftyDan]

igorsk,

in a perfect world where all code is flawless, I'd agree with you -- but I know better.

I've seen in my career where a driver NOT loaded slowed or stalled other processes. Usually these are the obvious bugs -- rarely make it past unit test and never past an integrated test -- but there could be a very subtle bug that costs an extra few microseconds every call that could add up to a tiny, tiny lag. it would be hard to see it without comparing "with" and "without" the driver active.

I agree with your assessment that the symptoms don't make sense, but cwappy seems to have done all due diligence. As a devout empiricist, I firmly believe when a test is correctly executed then the test isn't wrong because the results don't match the theory.

[cwappy]

Originally Posted by delphin

Part of the reason for that high price you found so objectionable is the millions of dollars each year that manufactures like Sony and Amazon must pay to process needless returns from folks who buy 3 of something intending all along to return 2 and keep only 1.

As for the supposed differences in sharpness . . .

The 650 and 350 have the exact SAME 800x600 screen resolution.

In the 350, having the same number of total pixels packed into a smaller physical sized screen gives it a higher pixel density per inch (DPI) so it will look a little sharper at the same viewing distance.

On the other hand, if you hold the 350 slightly closer, and the 650 slightly farther back, so the apparent size of the screen and text is the same in your field of vision, then they should be exactly the same sharpness.

So though the screen on the 650 is larger, you don't get more pixels, only a larger viewing area for the same number of pixels.

The 650's larger screen does let you hold the reader farther back which may allow some to read comfortably without glasses, but for young people with good close-in vision, the 350 should give almost exactly the same viewing experience for less money.

I can understand what you are saying about returns, although that certainly hasn't stopped Amazon from rapidly bringing down the price of their ereaders. However, in my case I'm keeping the 350, selling the Kindle to my dad, and then selling the 650 either on this forum or on eBay. So, no loss to anybody.

The same resolution with a smaller screen is certainly the cause of the sharper text, and the main reason I'm keeping the 350. I could live with the other two, but since I have a choice... The other two reasons are 1) I got it with that $50 off sale so it was cheap, and 2) I like how portable it is.

[cwappy]

Originally Posted by Asawi

I don't get how page turns can be much faster than on my 350... *snip*
The actual page turn is instant for me, once it starts to turn. There is a very short lag before it actually starts to turn though. VERY short, and maybe the 650 doesn't have that at all? But, like I said, I really can't imagine it being noticeably faster than my 350. Maybe there is a difference from unit to unit and I was lucky to get fast one?

I'm perfectly happy with the way my 350 performs. It's just that when you have both side-by-side you notice a short lag in everything you do compared to the 650. If I didn't have it right there I wouldn't notice it.

That short lag between page turns IS shorter on the 650, now you mention it. That's probably what it is. I should come up with a video of what I'm talking about.

[cwappy]

Originally Posted by Ripplinger

There's a few threads around, one very recently, where some comparisons were done and the conclusion was that having a darker frame around the reader made the text appear darker, such as when comparing a black 650 to a silver 350. So it could just be that optical illusion going on there. I believe what they finally did was make a cutout frame for both readers from the same color paper to really judge them fairly, and then they could see no difference.

My 350's screen does look darker, but with that silver frame I have often wondered if it was a trick, since it's so reflective. I'll have to get a case that wraps around it all and maybe then it will look nicer. I wish they had come out with a black or blue model in the US.

[cwappy]

kartu: I would tend to agree, but as CraftyDan said the resolution is the same. I suspect the hardware in the 350 is a little slower than the 650/950 to keep costs down, being Sony's low-end and most budget friendly model. But, as it's been said already, unless you have them side-by-side you probably won't notice it. As a side note, thanks for PRS+. I have it installed on both and it was a big factor in my deciding to keep a Sony vs. Kindle.

igorsk: It's definitely a 350. It says so on the box and the back of the device. I have tried resetting several times and it makes no difference.

CraftyDan: You are right about one thing: I had the 350 for a couple weeks before getting a 650 and had zero issues with the way it operated. Even after getting a 650 I had to play with it for a weekend before switching back to the 350 and then it was OH! this isn't as snappy! Some people may not notice this. When you are switching back and forth between these and a Kindle for a week, it becomes very obvious, but certainly not a deal breaker. I DID decide to keep the 350 after all.

Also, if I have a moment I may come up with a video showing what I'm talking about, since I still have all three readers with me.

[doreenjoy]

Originally Posted by cwappy

It's not faster than a Kindle 3, believe me. In pages turns, compared to a 650, it's slower. And the 650 is a hair slower than the Kindle. I actually didn't notice it until I got my 650 (three weeks after I got the 350 and K3, due to supply problems), and then the difference became obvious.

This isn't my experience at all.

do you have exactly the same books on all 3?

[kartu]

Originally Posted by CraftyDan

The screen is smaller but the resolution is the same, so it should be a wash.

Yes, but micro-capsule size is (most likely) the same.


PRS+ 2.0.10alpha will contain fb2toepub converter, so it will be possible to check if there is a difference between 350-650 performance wise, by converting the same book.

[Polyglot27]

Okay, both the 350 and the 650 have the same resolution of 800 x 600 pixels. I have loaded the same book (Psmith in the City by P G Wodehouse, lrf format) on both readers and what do I find? The display at M size on the 650 shows the same screen as the 350 at S size. I mean the same number of lines on a page and the same number of letters on each line. I now realize that the M on the two machines show the absolute visual size. In other words, you get a smaller number of words on the screen of the 350 at M size but visually the letters are the same size as on the 650.
I have not noticed any great difference between the two in screen color or page turn speed.

[kartu]

Polyglot27

DPI on 350 is 200, on 650 it's 167. Reader software honors it.
I wrote how to make 350 render text as scaled down 650 here. (use google translate). (it would works only with custom firmware)

[CharlieBird]

I've been really torn about getting a 650 since I like my 350 so much.

The only thing like better about the K3 is the built-in light itself (it seems a softer, not so white) and the fact that it turns off when the device goes to sleep shortly after I do.

Thanks to this thread I've decided to wait and see what Sony comes up w/later in the year.
d