Aura h2o or voyage

[BearMountainBooks]

Originally Posted by Josieb1

I don't really understand it properly but they are two different types of touch screen

All Kobo's except the 6inch Aura are Infrared Touch

The 6 inch Aura and the Kindle Paperwhite are Capactive Touch. The Kindle Touch used an IR screen,

This is a link which I found on Google that explain the difference when looking at mobile phones (I assume Infrared is resistive)

http://www.knowyourmobile.com/produc...e-vs-resistive

Oh, okay. Thanks!

[Josieb1]

Originally Posted by Hypernova

Thanks Josie.

I also sideload all my books but that's actually the reason why I'm not so concern with having a Kindle; I just convert all my epubs. I'm not sure yet if I'd prefer the denser Voyage or larger screen H2O. I'd like 6" Aura size to be honest, but I don't think H2O size would bother me either. SD card is a big plus, no question about that. I ran out of space on my PW1 as well.

Hypernova this is a comparison of the Aura and the H20, both at Max brightness, both with same font, but different stories. Taken with my iPad. It's 5.45 pm here and the sun has gone down, it's still light but will be dark shortly.

[booklover6]

Originally Posted by Josieb1

Hypernova this is a comparison of the Aura and the H20, both at Max brightness, both with same font, but different stories. Taken with my iPad. It's 5.45 pm here and the sun has gone down, it's still light but will be dark shortly.

I see a huge difference.

[robko]

Originally Posted by Josieb1

This is a link which I found on Google that explain the difference when looking at mobile phones (I assume Infrared is resistive

Infared is not resistive. Infared relies on physically breaking the IR beam(s) that is constantly being beamed across the screen. When the receiver on one side of the screen is no longer detecting a beam it triggers that the screen has been "touched" (you don't actually need to make contact with the screen for this to work -- at least with the older version; the new H2O has an updated IR with less bevel to screen depth, so the beams may be closer to the screen now and make this practically difficult). Works the same as the beams you see in movies protecting the crown jewels that somebody is trying to steal .

[BearMountainBooks]

Originally Posted by robko

Infared is not resistive. Infared relies on physically breaking the IR beam(s) that is constantly being beamed across the screen. When the receiver on one side of the screen is no longer detecting a beam it triggers that the screen has been "touched" (you don't actually need to make contact with the screen for this to work -- at least with the older version; the new H2O has an updated IR with less bevel to screen depth, so the beams may be closer to the screen now and make this practically difficult). Works the same as the beams you see in movies protecting the crown jewels that somebody is trying to steal .

Because it is a constant beam does it use more battery than the other kind?

We have a cat door bell that works on this idea. The cats break the beam and we know they are waiting to come in. When the beams break, it rings a bell. We did this because we adopted feral cats and we were attempting to get them on an eating schedule. The bell works. The cats, not so much.

[Hypernova]

Originally Posted by Josieb1

Hypernova this is a comparison of the Aura and the H20, both at Max brightness, both with same font, but different stories. Taken with my iPad. It's 5.45 pm here and the sun has gone down, it's still light but will be dark shortly.

I meant to say that I like the (device) size of Aura. The screens are much better on H2O part so yeah the Aura is out of my consideration for now.

Thanks anyway!

[Josieb1]

Originally Posted by Hypernova

I meant to say that I like the (device) size of Aura. The screens are much better on H2O part so yeah the Aura is out of my consideration for now.

Thanks anyway!

I love the small size of the Aura and I must admit if they bring out a updated version I'll be one of the first in line. I don't understand why they gave it such a bad screen. It's fine in the day, in sunlight and daylight but it's not great in bad light when you need the light.

[Chi Cygni]

Originally Posted by sparklemotion

I'll help you pick the cover!

PS - Pack your bags. I'll see you soon.

Hee hee, super! Been browsing left and right for a cover for my new future h2o (I rest my case) help most appreciated

PS - meet you at midnight

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by booklover6

I see a huge difference.

I also see that both are too bright.

[robko]

Originally Posted by BearMountainBooks

Because it is a constant beam does it use more battery than the other kind?

Doesn't seem to. The capacitive has an electrostatic field over the screen (according to wikipedia) so my guess is it's a wash in practical usage. Even with an IR e-ink if you leave it on (set it to not sleep or power down) battery life is long.

Originally Posted by BearMountainBooks

We have a cat door bell that works on this idea. The cats break the beam and we know they are waiting to come in. When the beams break, it rings a bell. We did this because we adopted feral cats and we were attempting to get them on an eating schedule. The bell works. The cats, not so much.

Same principle (except that the e-reader should be a little better behaved )

[sparklemotion]

Originally Posted by Chi Cygni

Hee hee, super! Been browsing left and right for a cover for my new future h2o (I rest my case) help most appreciated

PS - meet you at midnight

I'm your girl for picking out cases. I have lots (and lots) of experience.

PS - I hope we have some sort of warning before they come from the ward to get us.

[Canuck_in_Japan]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

I also see that both are too bright.

Reading comprehension. Both are set to max brightness.

[meeera]

Nobody reads at max brightness in the dark, and excessive brightness will wash out the fonts, so the image isn't really relevant to real life situations. You also can't really compare readers at max brightness when the max brightness levels are different - what they need to be is equivalent brightness. I also see a lot of colour artifact from the camera, which is distracting.

[Josieb1]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

I also see that both are too bright.

Yes that's because I deliberately photographed them on full brightness. The camera was the iPad, not the best. Anyway the member the photo was for has seen it now. However you photograph it the H20 has a better screen than the 6 inch Aura. Even the Glo has a better screen than the 6 inch Aura!

[Prestidigitweeze]

Originally Posted by prestidigitweeze

Originally Posted by Prestidigitweeze View Post
The difference between UIs isn't massive, but I do find it irritating when Amazon flashes ads and/or books I despise, and when it guides me through content like a patriarchal hand gloving the tiny hand of an infant. You want to draw back and say, "Look, I know what I'm doing."

Originally Posted by HarryT

What are you referring to? Kindles don't have ads unless you make the deliberate decision to buy an "ad-supported" version, and they certainly don't "guide you through content".

First: 1. Kindles that don't have ads are pricier, which makes the base price less attractive. 2. People have been discussing the pros and cons of the Voyage vs. the H2O and pricing is one of the factors being considered. 3. Therefore complaints about ads on Kindles with ads are valid for people who don't want to spend lots of money to be free of them.

Second: It is certainly true that, on non-Amazon devices, the kindle app does inflict lists of books that Amazon thinks you should buy. And unlike similar lists on the Kobo (which I also dislike), Amazon's can't be dismissed and seem to make depressing determinations as to what might interest the user. I have yet to notice a single book cover inflicted by the Kindle app that belongs to a book I'd ever want to read, whereas Kobo at least manages to show choices that aren't insulting. Seeing those putrid books when I'm searching for a specific one on my smartphone plunges me into an appalling and bromide-leaden universe.

Re your response to the phrase "guides me through content":

I know you don't intend this, and I don't mean to imply that your POV is anything less than valid, but sometimes I feel as though I'm talking to that P.G. Wodehouse character who responds to metaphors by explaining they aren't literally true.

A: "The grass is always greener on the other side of the fence."
B: "No, it isn't. Both sides are the same color."

"Guide the user through content" doesn't necessarily mean to beat the user to death with a condescendingly child-friendly UI (which Amazon doesn't do). It can also imply restricting the user from doing various things (such as removing ad tiles or other elements from the e-reader's main page, intricately changing layout to the point of setting the baseline, etc.). Broadly speaking, the phrase can mean many things and my (vaguely stated, I'll grant you) use was hardly intended to be literal.

In my view, the most manipulative thing Kobo does is this: on the device's main page, it makes you search "the library" of their bookstore rather than your own library by default. You have to change the setting manually every time. People with hundreds or thousands of books on their Kobo are far more likely to perform title searches on content they own than to go shopping at the Kobo store every ten minutes. No one who uses their e-reader for intensive research can possibly be pleased with that decision on Kobo's part. One should be able to change the search default in the prefs.

But as stated above, that one instance of user disenfranchisement on the Kobo is matched by several such instances on the Kindle app (and the Kindles I've demo'd since the KK).

It's still quite likely I'll buy a Voyage. But if I do, I'll buy it fully aware of what it can and cannot do; what it will and won't allow.

The distinction is obviously trivial to many informed users; I don't intend to imply that the Kobo's user experience is inherently better than the Kindle's. I'm only telling you what's important to me, and that I find the Kindle's limitations annoying.

* * * *

The following rant has nothing to do with your comments. It addresses an aspect of conversations about potential product features that I find dismissive.

Every user's needs are potentially important. One thing I don't particularly care for is the assertion of ad populum to dismiss users' complaints: "Most Kindle users will never care about that feature, so your complaint about its absence is invalid. The Kindle's current set of features are the best it could have because so many people enjoy and use the Kindle as it is."

Nonsense. No one here has conducted an international poll regarding the preferences of millions of Kindle users. Amazon might not want to implement changes for a number of reasons -- some of them practical, some of them proprietary -- but it isn't useful for anyone to speak for Amazon before a consensus on a given feature has even formed.