Pocketbook InkPad Lite (9.7")

[DNSB]

Originally Posted by Quoth

Certainly faster and certainly better contrast than a DX. But hardly likely much better contrast than the DXG unless the light is on.

As far as I am aware, the DXG used an eInk Pearl display so the Carta display used in the InkPad Lite should have a definite advantage in the contrast ratio.

[ottischwenk]

Originally Posted by DNSB

As far as I am aware, the DXG used an eInk Pearl display so the Carta display used in the InkPad Lite should have a definite advantage in the contrast ratio.

The light guide worsens the contrast, so that the Carta advantage disappears again.
It only gets better with the lights on.

[Quoth]

Originally Posted by ottischwenk

The light guide worsens the contrast, so that the Carta advantage disappears again.
It only gets better with the lights on.

I meant with the lights on. With the same decent ambient light the PW3 and no front light has not much better contrast than the DXG because the light guide and the capacitive touch both reduce the brightness. Though those probably have little effect on actual contrast as the blacks also will be darker.

[Dr. Drib]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

Bugger screen? BS! It's 9.7" which is smaller then 10.3". That is really stupid to say it has a bigger screen.

Exactly. They don't seem to know how to use comparatives.

[Dr. Drib]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

This is a downscaled little brother to the Inkpad X. So the screen size comparison should be to the Inkpad X and not other Pocketbooks. Besides, the description says nothing about other Pocketbooks with smaller screens.

We disagree about many things, but I sure as hell agree with you on this.

I'm tired of the way some companies pussy-foot* around the facts as if walking through a field full of recently deposited cow-patties.

"Just gimme some truth!"




* move stealthily or warily.
"they make a great show of pussyfooting through the greenery"

[rkomar]

Originally Posted by Dr. Drib

We disagree about many things, but I sure as hell agree with you on this.

I'm tired of the way some companies pussy-foot* around the facts as if walking through a field full of recently deposited cow-patties.

"Just gimme some truth!"




* move stealthily or warily.
"they make a great show of pussyfooting through the greenery"

It's an ereader with a big screen for those who don't want to pay the high price for the Inkpad X. It's probably aimed at people who just want to read using an "easy-eye" (i.e. big) font. PocketBook already has models with the latest and greatest displays, as well as models with cheaper displays for those on a budget. This would fall into the latter category. They are up front with the specs and price, so I don't understand some of the outrage here.

[salamanderjuice]

Originally Posted by rkomar

It's an ereader with a big screen for those who don't want to pay the high price for the Inkpad X. It's probably aimed at people who just want to read using an "easy-eye" (i.e. big) font. PocketBook already has models with the latest and greatest displays, as well as models with cheaper displays for those on a budget. This would fall into the latter category. They are up front with the specs and price, so I don't understand some of the outrage here.

If this was really cheap you'd have a point. But $300 can also get you an original Remarkable with a 10.3" display with a much higher 227ppi. Admittedly it's a bit shit at ePubs but good at PDFs and will also do handwritten notes. The Likebook P10 is also 10", has a 200ppi display and can be found in the $300-$350 range. Saving a few bucks for a significantly worse screen is a bad tradeoff. If this was $200 I could see some value.

[Quoth]

Or same number of pixels as 10.3", but 300 dpi at about €250 for 7.8" Likebook Mars which auto crops PDFs.

The €220 approx 7" 300 dpi Kobo Libra is better than the Kindle DXG 9.7", which is same resolution screen as this, for PDFs. A 150 dpi is crazy low resolution.

[ottischwenk]

Originally Posted by Quoth

Or same number of pixels as 10.3", but 300 dpi at about €250 for 7.8" Likebook Mars which auto crops PDFs.

The €220 approx 7" 300 dpi Kobo Libra is better than the Kindle DXG 9.7", which is same resolution screen as this, for PDFs. A 150 dpi is crazy low resolution.

I used this announcement as an opportunity to buy a Likebook P10 for € 247 (almost the same price).
In addition, it fits exactly into the side compartment of my Windows tablet bag (Likebook Alita is a bit too wide for that).

[rcentros]

Originally Posted by Dr. Drib

Exactly. They don't seem to know how to use comparatives.

I still don't see why you or JSWolf make the leap to thinking they're comparing this eReader to the Inkpad X model. I read the blurb and thought they were comparing this "bigger" screen to eReaders that had "smaller" screens, like their Inkpad 3, 3 Pro and all their 6" readers (not to mention their competitors screens that are smaller). I don't think they're trying to deceive anyone. Why would they want to sell this reader at the expense of their more expensive Inkpad X?

That said, the specs for this reader are underwhelming and I'm not interested in a bigger reader anyhow.

[rcentros]

Originally Posted by rkomar

It's an ereader with a big screen for those who don't want to pay the high price for the Inkpad X. It's probably aimed at people who just want to read using an "easy-eye" (i.e. big) font. PocketBook already has models with the latest and greatest displays, as well as models with cheaper displays for those on a budget. This would fall into the latter category. They are up front with the specs and price, so I don't understand some of the outrage here.

I'm having a little trouble understanding that as well. I don't understand the point of this reader but it's not like they're hiding anything about it. I also don't quite understand why they put in a nice lighting system for a reader that seems so out of date. But it was their decision. Maybe the $300 price will drop after release.

[ottischwenk]

Originally Posted by Quoth

because the light guide and the capacitive touch both reduce the brightness. Though those probably have little effect on actual contrast as the blacks also will be darker.

No, the brightness is not reduced, but the (missing outside) light is scattered - thus also the dark areas are brightened - the contrast is reduced.
No energy is lost, only a minimal fraction is converted into thermal energy.