azw3 vs mobi vs prc/pdb on a Kindle - Page 3

eschwartz · 02-08-2016, 09:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dwig

Ancient, yes, but I wouldn't call it "lousy". MOBI was arguably the best of the early ebook formats. It certainly was the best survivor and had a much more desirable feature set than the other dominant format of that era, the Apportis DOC (also known under various later names such as PalmDOC), which was only slightly more advanced that TXT.

MOBI is an early implementation of the original Open EBook specification, which was based on a subset of HTML3.2 and didn't specify a container, only the format of the source documents. MOBI files were compiled into a binary file which allowed them to get past the limitations in the PalmOS's PDB (Palm DataBase) format. EPUB was born as v2 of the OEB spec with a standardized wrapper (specialized ZIP archive). It is based on a newer iteration of HTML with its companion CSS. MOBI did get "out of date" in terms of its feature set.

Yes, let me rephrase that.

"MOBI is an ancient format and (although king of the hill in its time) is in many ways lousy by modern standards."

notimp · 02-09-2016, 01:59 AM

"AZW3 is an ancient format and (although king of the hill in its time) is in many ways lousy by modern standards. (.KFX)"

There, we have come full circle.

Also this community - much too eagerly - accepted to loose all formating features we had available with .mobi - when JBPatch could still be installed, in favor of a much tighter dependency on Amazons "undocumented features" to do any real sort of acceptable typsetting or layouting on the device.

But to their credit - there was no real alternative at the time. Amazon controls the Firmware Update cycle - and thats it. Also Amazon actively moved against giving endusers control over margins, or hyphenation that is done on the device - for user- or publisher created content.

And sometimes a consensus in here is created so some people dont have to talk about specifics or the format history.

And then again - segmentation. If we look at the azw3 (kf8) format entirely segmented - its all flowers and rose petals - but if we take usability, user accessible layout options and easy of use considerations in to account - starting from the arbitrary "JBPatch still worked" starting point - it's pretty much a story of regression.

Of course - if you want to change a cover, now thats where azw3 and the independent development scene really shine. Now THATS progress (sarcastically spoken).

(edit: Dont use .mobi as an archival format though. Use .azw3 or .epub.)

(edit 2: KPVBooklet and KOReader might be a workout - even usability wise, to get a better reading experience on jailbroken Kindles. Start reading here: https://www.mobileread.com/forums/sho...d.php?t=243532 )

The real issue here by the way is, that Amazons reading environment on Kindles has some serious flaws.

Hyphenation for them (in the old paradigm) isnt a priority - although it really - should have been from the beginning. And in their new paradigm (.kfx) hyphenation and the best inter word spacing is exclusively reserved for their .kfx titles. No open format on Kindles probably will ever be able to support it.

Hyphenation/inter word spacing and an optimal outcome is strongly related with better control over margins - but Amazon refuses to grant that to their Users. We had it with JBPatch at one point in time - but Amazon cracked down on it aggressively.
-

The need for (variable) inter Line-spacing is strongly related to "font used". Amazon itself hasnt even begun to conceptualize this. Their three settings (small, medium, large) can be seen as having been optimized for their default font - if at all. Amazon to this day hasnt been able to standardize font size "brakets" meaning - even their own font families have differing line heights. Inter Line-Spacing should be much more adjustable than it is (same as with margins) - but it isnt.
-

User added fonts and adding hyphenations through a concept called soft hyphens - are an ordeal on Kindles - that is better stomached fast, before thinking to much about it - because Amazons "solution" to this mess is "reserve the better implementation for their proprietary file format (little chance of being reverse engineered any time soon)" - and call it a feature (maybe use the prepackaged "publisher font?", hey - value we provide...) -

something that wasnt discussed within this community at all - even some time after the .kfx release.
-

Its really a mixture between being objectively evil and dont knowing what is important to get a better reading experience - on Amazons part.

Also - their default fonts suck. Really. Ask anyone in here.

JSWolf · 02-09-2016, 07:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dwig

Ancient, yes, but I wouldn't call it "lousy". MOBI was arguably the best of the early ebook formats. It certainly was the best survivor and had a much more desirable feature set than the other dominant format of that era, the Apportis DOC (also known under various later names such as PalmDOC), which was only slightly more advanced that TXT.

MOBI is an early implementation of the original Open EBook specification, which was based on a subset of HTML3.2 and didn't specify a container, only the format of the source documents. MOBI files were compiled into a binary file which allowed them to get past the limitations in the PalmOS's PDB (Palm DataBase) format. EPUB was born as v2 of the OEB spec with a standardized wrapper (specialized ZIP archive). It is based on a newer iteration of HTML with its companion CSS. MOBI did get "out of date" in terms of its feature set.

Sorry, by MS Reader format (LIT) was better than Mobi. LIT was what became ePub. Mobi was never the best. LIT was the best before ePub came along.

JSWolf · 02-09-2016, 07:29 AM

What I don't get is if you think Kindles are poor in terms of typesetting, why not go to a different Reader that uses RMDSK to handle the typesetting? RMDSK will do what you want done. It will do kerning, ligatures, variable space between words, & hyphenation.

jhowell · 02-09-2016, 07:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by notimp

Hyphenation for them (in the old paradigm) isnt a priority - although it really - should have been from the beginning. And in their new paradigm (.kfx) hyphenation and the best inter word spacing is exclusively reserved for their .kfx titles. No open format on Kindles probably will ever be able to support it.

Amazon recently released a beta version of their Kindle Previewer that supports enhanced typesetting. I think it will be possible to make use of that to convert our own books to KFX for side-loading.

It's not quite what you are asking for, but at least the creation of KFX will no longer be an Amazon exclusive.

dwig · 02-09-2016, 09:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JSWolf

Sorry, by MS Reader format (LIT) was better than Mobi. LIT was what became ePub. Mobi was never the best. LIT was the best before ePub came along.

"Best" is a value judgement and different reviewers assign different rankings based on how they weight the various attributes.

If you place a high weight on market acceptance, number of books available, number of readers supporting, and number of libraries/stores delivering, you'll see that over the 40+ years that ebooks have existed the most successful formats have been MobiPocket (all versions combined) and ePub (2 & 3). TXT deserves recognition for length of support, but little else. After Mobi and ePub, the next most successful format would likely be ApportisDOC/PalmDOC, though it only reigned for relatively short period.

JSWolf · 02-09-2016, 04:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dwig

"Best" is a value judgement and different reviewers assign different rankings based on how they weight the various attributes.

If you place a high weight on market acceptance, number of books available, number of readers supporting, and number of libraries/stores delivering, you'll see that over the 40+ years that ebooks have existed the most successful formats have been MobiPocket (all versions combined) and ePub (2 & 3). TXT deserves recognition for length of support, but little else. After Mobi and ePub, the next most successful format would likely be ApportisDOC/PalmDOC, though it only reigned for relatively short period.

This has nothing to do with most widely used. Back then LIT was the best format technically. It was the per-curser to ePub. Mobi was always a mess.

eschwartz · 02-09-2016, 04:41 PM

@notimp,

AZW3 is a superior format to MOBI on technical and usability merits.

The fact that the Kindle ereader has JBPatch hacks which work on MOBI books but not AZW3 books, does not say anything about the inherent nature of MOBI vs. AZW3.

AZW3 is superior to MOBI, whether you are using it in calibre, KindleUnpack, the various tablet/smartphone apps, Kindle for PC, or any E-Ink model.

Let me repeat: MOBI/AZW3 are formats, JBPatch is a reader application addon.

You are being orthogonal.

02-09-2016, 01:59 AM	#32
notimp Addict Posts: 248 Karma: 892441 Join Date: Jul 2010 Device: K2i	"AZW3 is an ancient format and (although king of the hill in its time) is in many ways lousy by modern standards. (.KFX)" There, we have come full circle. Also this community - much too eagerly - accepted to loose all formating features we had available with .mobi - when JBPatch could still be installed, in favor of a much tighter dependency on Amazons "undocumented features" to do any real sort of acceptable typsetting or layouting on the device. But to their credit - there was no real alternative at the time. Amazon controls the Firmware Update cycle - and thats it. Also Amazon actively moved against giving endusers control over margins, or hyphenation that is done on the device - for user- or publisher created content. And sometimes a consensus in here is created so some people dont have to talk about specifics or the format history. And then again - segmentation. If we look at the azw3 (kf8) format entirely segmented - its all flowers and rose petals - but if we take usability, user accessible layout options and easy of use considerations in to account - starting from the arbitrary "JBPatch still worked" starting point - it's pretty much a story of regression. Of course - if you want to change a cover, now thats where azw3 and the independent development scene really shine. Now THATS progress (sarcastically spoken). (edit: Dont use .mobi as an archival format though. Use .azw3 or .epub.) (edit 2: KPVBooklet and KOReader might be a workout - even usability wise, to get a better reading experience on jailbroken Kindles. Start reading here: https://www.mobileread.com/forums/sho...d.php?t=243532 ) The real issue here by the way is, that Amazons reading environment on Kindles has some serious flaws. Hyphenation for them (in the old paradigm) isnt a priority - although it really - should have been from the beginning. And in their new paradigm (.kfx) hyphenation and the best inter word spacing is exclusively reserved for their .kfx titles. No open format on Kindles probably will ever be able to support it. Hyphenation/inter word spacing and an optimal outcome is strongly related with better control over margins - but Amazon refuses to grant that to their Users. We had it with JBPatch at one point in time - but Amazon cracked down on it aggressively. - The need for (variable) inter Line-spacing is strongly related to "font used". Amazon itself hasnt even begun to conceptualize this. Their three settings (small, medium, large) can be seen as having been optimized for their default font - if at all. Amazon to this day hasnt been able to standardize font size "brakets" meaning - even their own font families have differing line heights. Inter Line-Spacing should be much more adjustable than it is (same as with margins) - but it isnt. - User added fonts and adding hyphenations through a concept called soft hyphens - are an ordeal on Kindles - that is better stomached fast, before thinking to much about it - because Amazons "solution" to this mess is "reserve the better implementation for their proprietary file format (little chance of being reverse engineered any time soon)" - and call it a feature (maybe use the prepackaged "publisher font?", hey - value we provide...) - something that wasnt discussed within this community at all - even some time after the .kfx release. - Its really a mixture between being objectively evil and dont knowing what is important to get a better reading experience - on Amazons part. Also - their default fonts suck. Really. Ask anyone in here. Last edited by notimp; 02-09-2016 at 02:51 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Kindle: AZW3 instead of MOBI?	Phssthpok	Devices	7	04-21-2015 03:41 PM
PDB/PRC support in i62/M92	Manolo	Onyx Boox	3	12-18-2012 06:31 AM
PDB -> PRC	junior	Reading and Management	13	05-12-2008 01:19 PM
PDB or PRC converters on Linux?	Dajala	Alternative Devices	2	04-14-2008 06:11 AM

02-09-2016, 07:29 AM	#34
JSWolf Resident Curmudgeon Posts: 79,795 Karma: 146391129 Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Roslindale, Massachusetts Device: Kobo Libra 2, Kobo Aura H2O, PRS-650, PRS-T1, nook STR, PW3	What I don't get is if you think Kindles are poor in terms of typesetting, why not go to a different Reader that uses RMDSK to handle the typesetting? RMDSK will do what you want done. It will do kerning, ligatures, variable space between words, & hyphenation.

02-09-2016, 04:41 PM	#38
eschwartz Ex-Helpdesk Junkie Posts: 19,421 Karma: 85400180 Join Date: Nov 2012 Location: The Beaten Path, USA, Roundworld, This Side of Infinity Device: Kindle Touch fw5.3.7 (Wifi only)	@notimp, AZW3 is a superior format to MOBI on technical and usability merits. The fact that the Kindle ereader has JBPatch hacks which work on MOBI books but not AZW3 books, does not say anything about the inherent nature of MOBI vs. AZW3. AZW3 is superior to MOBI, whether you are using it in calibre, KindleUnpack, the various tablet/smartphone apps, Kindle for PC, or any E-Ink model. Let me repeat: MOBI/AZW3 are formats, JBPatch is a reader application addon. You are being orthogonal.

Advert

Advert