kobo aura or kobo glo hd? worth an upgrade

[Rizla]

I read the Aura screen is not as clear because of the flush bezel so I think you'd find the Glo HD screen better. I had a problem with the Glo HD because the page turns were laggy. Others are saying they are not getting it and some are saying they are. IMO that's the big issue. Actually none of the more recent e-readers are as fast as the older e-readers. Maybe carta is slower than pearl and carta isn't much better than pearls.

Anyway the only downside to the glo hd is maybe its laggy. I had it but a lot of people say they don't and a lot say they do. Read about it in the big thread in the kobo sub forum and ask them. Apart from the lag and all other things considered I would say that the Kobo glo hd is the best mainstream 6" reader reader in the market. Shame about the lag. Hopefully its fixed and was not present on all devices.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by Rizla

I read the Aura screen is not as clear because of the flush bezel so I think you'd find the Glo HD screen better.

I don't see why a flush screen should make the screen less clear. It certainly doesn't on the Kindle Voyage, which uses the same screen as the Glo HD.

[davidfor]

Originally Posted by HarryT

I don't see why a flush screen should make the screen less clear. It certainly doesn't on the Kindle Voyage, which uses the same screen as the Glo HD.

A lot of people who have compared the older Glo with the Aura say that the Glo is the sharper screen. But, the specs suggest that the Aura should be the better one. The only suggestion as to why is that the extra layer for capacitance touch is the cause. I haven't had an Aura in my hands enough to judge. I also haven't had the opportunity to directly compare them with any of the Kindles.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by davidfor

A lot of people who have compared the older Glo with the Aura say that the Glo is the sharper screen. But, the specs suggest that the Aura should be the better one. The only suggestion as to why is that the extra layer for capacitance touch is the cause. I haven't had an Aura in my hands enough to judge. I also haven't had the opportunity to directly compare them with any of the Kindles.

A capacitive touch screen is just a chemical coating on the screen. It really shouldn't have any noticeable effect on visibility.

[Ripplinger]

Originally Posted by HarryT

A capacitive touch screen is just a chemical coating on the screen. It really shouldn't have any noticeable effect on visibility.

There have been many reports about the Aura having less sharp text compared to the older Glo in the Kobo forum. The thinking is the capacitive layer combined with the light layer is the cause. Many have also seen a sort of scratch-pattern more noticeable along the top of some Auras that adds to it that you don't see on any other reader. I don't own an Aura (I hate capacitive touch, doesn't always play nice with my skin), but so many reports can't be wrong, and since Kobo readers have had sharp text before with all their infrared devices, assumption is whatever is different is likely to be the cause.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by Ripplinger

There have been many reports about the Aura having less sharp text compared to the older Glo in the Kobo forum. The thinking is the capacitive layer combined with the light layer is the cause. Many have also seen a sort of scratch-pattern more noticeable along the top of some Auras that adds to it that you don't see on any other reader. I don't own an Aura (I hate capacitive touch, doesn't always play nice with my skin), but so many reports can't be wrong, and since Kobo readers have had sharp text before with all their infrared devices, assumption is whatever is different is likely to be the cause.

I suspect the light diffuser is the more likely culprit, rather than the capacitive touchscreen.

Personally I've found capacitive touchscreens to be far more accurate than IR. I really struggled with the touchscreen on my Kobo H2O; I found it extremely difficult to select small hyperlinks such as those for footnotes.

[soulfuldog]

Originally Posted by HarryT

I suspect the light diffuser is the more likely culprit, rather than the capacitive touchscreen.

Since the Aura is the only Kobo with the problem of the screen being darker and text less sharp, and it is the only Kobo with a capacitive screen, it seems far more likely that its the capacitive touch screen that is causing the problem?

Amazon clearly had some issues with the it too, as was shown with the first PW, but have improved things with the PW2 and the Voyage. Whereas Kobo have made the decision to return to IR touch screens by updating the Glo to the Glo HD instead of updating the Aura.

[Ripplinger]

Or possibly not either layer on its own but how the 2 are combined in the manufacturing process is to blame. As soulfuldog said, it is the only capacitive touch reader Kobo makes. All the other models with infrared and the built-in front light don't have the problem.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by soulfuldog

Since the Aura is the only Kobo with the problem of the screen being darker and text less sharp, and it is the only Kobo with a capacitive screen, it seems far more likely that its the capacitive touch screen that is causing the problem?

Amazon clearly had some issues with the it too, as was shown with the first PW, but have improved things with the PW2 and the Voyage. Whereas Kobo have made the decision to return to IR touch screens by updating the Glo to the Glo HD instead of updating the Aura.

Amazon improved the light diffuser; the touchscreen didn't change. As I said, it's just a coating on the screen.

[Rizla]

Shame about the lag on the Glo HD. Hope they fix it, as apart from that, there is nothing on the market that compares to it. Bang for buck, it's a great value e-reader if you need a new 6" reader.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by HarryT

I did find the IR touchscreen on the H2O to be much less accurate than the Kindle's capacitive touchscreen, but if the OP is happy with the touchscreen on an older Kobo (which I believe is also IR?) he should be happy enough with the H2O's.

Amazon has one Kindle with IR touch. If there were inherent issues with IR touch, Amazon would not be using it.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

Amazon has one Kindle with IR touch. If there were inherent issues with IR touch, Amazon would not be using it.

I didn't say that there were "inherent issues with IR touch"; I said that I'd found the IR touchscreen on my H2O to be less accurate than the touchscreens on my Kindles.

[Chi Cygni]

My 3 eurocents. I compared Kobo Aura with flushed screen next to my PW 1 in a shop and PW 1 had better screen - darker and sharper fonts. I now have H2O and as JSWolf said it is the first time I feel like reading a book, not screen. I almost never highlight anything so I don't even know if it is laggy as it is irrelevant to me. H2O has excellent screen.

[LeJon]

Originally Posted by wakkaday

h20 is heavier (than glo hd and aura) and is the screen better than aura

i think i will have to trial it out in store

I had the Kobo H2O (Now sold) and it feels much heavier compared to other 6" readers so make sure you don't mind the size if your considering it. The H2O is also slower than Kindles and the screen looks uneven at high brightness setting.

I say go for the Kobo Glo HD or wait for the upcoming Kindle. No point getting the Aura with older screen tech.

[howyoudoin]

I have to disagree with the claim about the unevenness of the screen of the H2O. IMO it is the best screen currently on the market and makes the Paperwhite screens look like shoddy compromises in comparison.