Touch New Nook Cnet Hands on video

[fekish]

I got an answer through email from Barnes:
Thank you for your inquiry.

We are glad to know about your interest in our all-new NOOK 2nd edition.
The new NOOK second edition is pretty much similar to the NOOK Color in
terms of usability basics. This device does have the capability of
reading NOOK eMagazines. In addition, if you have personal PDF's that
you would like to transfer into the NOOK Color, you will simply need to
sideload the files from your computer into your NOOK Color. You can
resize the cover and pages while reading your eMagazine or personal PDF
by pinching and zooming to make it smaller or larger.

Unfortunately, at this time, we do not have a video tutorial for the
NOOK 2nd edition yet.

[AnemicOak]

If the Nook touch does PDFs like the Nook Color it's not even going to do something as basic as remember last page read, the NC's PDF experience (unless you use a third party app) isn't very good. With EZ-PRF ($0.99) loaded it's much, much better, but I don't think the "touch" is going to work with apps from the nook store at least not that I've read.

[boswd]

Originally Posted by AnemicOak

If the Nook touch does PDFs like the Nook Color it's not even going to do something as basic as remember last page read, the NC's PDF experience (unless you use a third party app) isn't very good. With EZ-PRF ($0.99) loaded it's much, much better, but I don't think the "touch" is going to work with apps from the nook store at least not that I've read.

I've got a feeling if PDF Docs are going to be important to you, the new nook may not be the device for you.

I'm sure it'll handle novels in PDF format just fine, my nook classic does a wonderful job with them, text reflow etc. but if maps, graphs etc. a tablet is always going to be your best bet, if not then the Sony 950.

[anamardoll]

Originally Posted by toddos

There's your problem, trying to read PDF. That's not a valid ebook format.

Was this tongue in cheek?

Who says that PDF is not a valid ebook format? I will strongly disagree with that. PDF has major issues as a format, but it is an ebook format that offers advantages in certain areas and it must be accommodated in a solid eReader.

Wanting landscape viewing for PDF reading is not inappropriate, imho.

[toddos]

Originally Posted by anamardoll

Was this tongue in cheek?

Who says that PDF is not a valid ebook format? I will strongly disagree with that. PDF has major issues as a format, but it is an ebook format that offers advantages in certain areas and it must be accommodated in a solid eReader.

Wanting landscape viewing for PDF reading is not inappropriate, imho.

Nope, not tongue in cheek at all. PDF is a horrible, horrible, proprietary, unmanageable format that publishers use when they're lazy. IMHO, more ebook readers should have intentionally bad or no PDF support in order to make publishers realize that when they use PDF they betray their hate for their readers.

While you and others do have a point that PDFs are useful in some non-fiction books (data-heavy books with lots of sidebars and such), that assumes a paper-centric view. There's no reason ebooks of that ilk couldn't be more interactive, or rendered in HTML (I'd rather more readers support raw HTML than PDF).

PDF is for magazine designers who can't think digitally and require pixel-perfect layout control like they have on paper. Those designers should stick to their dying glossy-papered magazines and leave the digital realm to people who get it.

[anamardoll]

I could not disagree more, but I suspect it's because I use PDFs very differently from how you do.

PDF is valuable because if you need a certain page layout, PDF can guarantee that layout. It's a freeze on the information contained in the document, as it relates to all the other information.

I have many graphics-heavy books (i.e., comic books) that are in PDF. I would be extremely upset if eReader manufacturers just announced they weren't going to support them because of an ideology about what is/isn't a true eReader format.

Saying "render it in HTML" does not fix the issue in all cases where PDF is necessary. Heck, I don't think it would fix the issue in MOST cases.

(Reminds me of those arguments that a color eReader isn't a REAL eReader because it's not in eInk. Pffft. )

[toddos]

Originally Posted by anamardoll

I could not disagree more, but I suspect it's because I use PDFs very differently from how you do.

PDF is valuable because if you need a certain page layout, PDF can guarantee that layout. It's a freeze on the information contained in the document, as it relates to all the other information.

I have many graphics-heavy books (i.e., comic books) that are in PDF. I would be extremely upset if eReader manufacturers just announced they weren't going to support them because of an ideology about what is/isn't a true eReader format.

Saying "render it in HTML" does not fix the issue in all cases where PDF is necessary. Heck, I don't think it would fix the issue in MOST cases.

(Reminds me of those arguments that a color eReader isn't a REAL eReader because it's not in eInk. Pffft. )

Your requirement for "a certain page layout" is paper-thinking. That's not how the digital world is supposed to work. Of course we see the same thing every day on the web, sites with fixed-width, fixed-font size layouts (or worse, Flash-based layouts. Ugh) attempting to get a pixel-perfect representation of a paper design that simply doesn't work on the web where end users have control over rendering and can have different browser sizes, different font faces and sizes, different browsers with different-but-valid interpretations of specifications, different plugins like greasemonkey or Stylish that allow the user to directly modify web pages, etc. The web (and ebooks as an extension of that) is not a world where designers can have pixel-perfect control, nor should it be, and designers who attempt to shoehorn a paper design into the digital world are Doing It Wrong(tm). Users/readers should have control over rendering, and the designer's layout should only be an initial guideline.

As for comic books, those are all images. They should be in image-based comic book formats like CBR or (preferably) CBZ. More ereaders should support at least CBZ (support CBR has licensing issues, since it uses RAR for compression which is not an open spec), but unfortunately the Nook doesn't. That is the kind of thing that ereader developers should work on, rather than trying to support the unsupportable PDF.

And "render[ing] it in HTML" can fix the issue, if you redefine the issue. Rather than asking for a paper-like layout, ask what is it that you really need -- tabular data, indexable data, linkable data, etc. And then ask why that can't be done with HTML (hint: it can). I can't say I've ever seen a PDF that couldn't have been better-written as HTML.

[toddos]

Also, I don't just think PDF is an invalid ebook format. I also think it's an invalid document format in general and should never, ever, ever be used for any reason ever.

[anamardoll]

I disagree and perhaps I should leave it at that instead of a further derail, however a couple of thoughts:

1. I'm amused that you and you alone have perfect insight into how the digital world is "supposed to work". How fascinating. I must not have gotten the memo.

2. Saying that a specific layout is desirable is not automatically "paper thinking" and saying that it is seems to me to be begging the question. You feel that users should have complete control over the format and that the artist's intentions are a mere guideline; I disagree. Good luck with getting everything else in the world on board with that. (How are you coming on getting the Mobile Read forum precisely how you want it on your computer? Or is the forum also bound by "paper thinking"?)

3. I've used CBZ and CBR formats in the past and I think they have issues that will have to be resolved. For the moment, I prefer PDFs for many of my comic books.

4. Saying that PDF is "unsupportable" is ridiculous. Undesirable to you, maybe, but I have an eReader that supports PDFs quite to my liking at the moment.

Thank you for the interesting conversation - I'm afraid we'll have to agree to disagree. I don't support very many of your foundational assertions.

Also, I don't just think PDF is an invalid ebook format. I also think it's an invalid document format in general and should never, ever, ever be used for any reason ever.

Well, you have the right to your opinion. I like the format for certain, specific applications and wouldn't buy an eReader that didn't support it. If nothing else, it's a legacy format that many of my items are in that I don't want to rebuy/reformat.

[AnemicOak]

Originally Posted by toddos

Also, I don't just think PDF is an invalid ebook format. I also think it's an invalid document format in general and should never, ever, ever be used for any reason ever.

LOL, I'll remember that next time I need to send prepress files to my printer.

[anamardoll]

Originally Posted by AnemicOak

LOL, I'll remember that next time I need to send prepress files to my printer.

You and your paper thinking. Get off my lawn.

[toddos]

Originally Posted by AnemicOak

LOL, I'll remember that next time I need to send prepress files to my printer.

So long as that PDF is simply an intermediate step between your manuscript and a piece of paper, that's fine for paper book production. If your printer then takes that PDF and tries to call it an ebook, that's wrong.

Also, why isn't your printer using LaTeX? That's a far superior layout format than PDF.

[anamardoll]

Originally Posted by toddos

Also, why isn't your printer using LaTeX? That's a far superior layout format than PDF.

I'm not enough of a format enthusiast to be able to speak definitively on LaTeX, but:

The superiority of one format over another is almost always subjective.

Betamax was "superior" to VHS, until the customers started pointing out that they didn't mind a drop in picture and sound quality if it meant they could record more than an hour's worth of video and thereby not have to stay home and juggle tapes in order to get the evening's sporting event recorded. (And the movie enthusiasts didn't much enjoy having to get up and switch out tapes as the movies started getting longer than an hour.)

Therefore, VHS was superior to Betamax for those customers who treasured the hour+ recording times over the audio/video quality. Other customers kept their Betamaxes, even after the format war was largely won, because they wanted the audio/video quality more.

No one can say which format was "superior" because ultimately the subjective customer desires weren't the same for every customer.

Your opinions are being expressed in a very dogmatic fashion.

[SCION]

After viewing the video again, I thought more about that bottom part of the home page (What to read next). That feature is for recommendations from your "friends" or what they're talking about. What if you don't have any friends? What appears in this place?

[anamardoll]

Originally Posted by SCION

After viewing the video again, I thought more about that bottom part of the home page (What to read next). That feature is for recommendations from your "friends" or what they're talking about. What if you don't have any friends? What appears in this place?

That's a good question. The only "Nook Friends" I have are my husband and step-daughter, and we already know what each other are reading.....