Kobo Spa

[DNSB]

Originally Posted by Sirtel

Count me among the "we".

Going by the support from various posters for their colour eInk devices, would you find it correct for someone to post "We love colour eInk. We need colour eInk. We want more colour eInk devices. We don't see any need for a 7" non-colour eInk."

Perhaps "some posters on MobileRead agree with me" would be more correct.

[JSWolf]

What we need is more choice for Kobo Readers. Some want color. Some don't. Some want a larger screen. Some don't. So what we need is a Libra 2 replacement to help give users more choice. We also need a better 8" and 10.3" BW Readers (with proper batteries). Also, an 8" color screen would give some what they want. Then we'd have enough choice for what users want.

[John F]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

What we need is more choice for Kobo Readers. Some want color. Some don't. Some want a larger screen. Some don't. So what we need is a Libra 2 replacement to help give users more choice. We also need a better 8" and 10.3" BW Readers (with proper batteries). Also, an 8" color screen would give some what they want. Then we'd have enough choice for what users want.

Some want buttons, some don't. Some want symmetric some don't. Some want 5" some don't. Some want a plastic substrate some don't. Some want a bigger battery some don't. Some want a thicker reader some don't, ...

[issybird]

Originally Posted by scegghy

Who knows?

We know that GoodeReader doesn't know. They make stuff up and when like the stopped clock they're right occasionally, it's because they stole it from a reputable source. So the rule of thumb is always to disbelieve them when they claim to be breaking a story.

I wish people wouldn't cite them as a source, link to them or click on links to them. It's not much, but cutting down on clicks would hurt them in the aggregate. At the least, if you're going to use them as a source, provide a copious enough quote so that people don't need to click to find out what they said.

[Cactus Chef]

Originally Posted by issybird

We know that GoodeReader doesn't know. They make stuff up and when like the stopped clock they're right occasionally, it's because they stole it from a reputable source. So the rule of thumb is always to disbelieve them when they claim to be breaking a story.

I wish people wouldn't cite them as a source, link to them or click on links to them. It's not much, but cutting down on clicks would hurt them in the aggregate. At the least, if you're going to use them as a source, provide a copious enough quote so that people don't need to click to find out what they said.

They occasionally work as a decent "amplification" outlet, provided they include the original source, and you ignore any of the speculative crap GER has added. I've posted a couple news articles in the past that I got alerted to from them, but I then dug through the article and got the original source to post directly from the horse's mouth.