Bored with ereaders?

[Squirsier]

Originally Posted by HarryT

The contrast ratio of eInk screens has dramatically improved over the years as screens have gone from Vizplex to Pearl to Carta. The current generation of eInk screens, Carta, has a contast ratio on a par with that of a paperback book (and that's before front-lighting makes it drastically better).

From 7:1 to 15:1 is dramatic?

Granted, that's double what it use to be.

[teija]

Originally Posted by Squirsier

After all, who needs more than 640k of RAM...

True, the RAM could be amped up a bit, but that's a given. All electronic devices over time end up suffering from "lag" compared to their modern counterparts.

So they could fix that in one generation of eReaders; double up the RAM for a nice zippy experience... then what? RAM aside, I honestly can't see the value in many other changes. Maybe battery longevity (solar powered??), but THAT is not just an eReader technology issue.

[MGlitch]

I’m pretty sure that they got white backgrounds for one generation of ereader and realized that it’s not something they should strive to achieve. Most physical books don’t hit the same bright white as a screen can hit, even eink screens.

The clamor for an invert mode for Kobo and Kindle should also be an indication of the general move away from pure white screens.

As to getting bored with an ereader, can’t say as I can relate to that. It’s way more customizable than any book will be, I never need an outside source of light, I can have more than one book without increasing the weight or size.

Why would I go back to physical media?

[barryem]

Originally Posted by HarryT

The contrast ratio of eInk screens has dramatically improved over the years as screens have gone from Vizplex to Pearl to Carta. The current generation of eInk screens, Carta, has a contast ratio on a par with that of a paperback book (and that's before front-lighting makes it drastically better).

I agree. The contrast ratio of my Paperwhite with it's front light is a lot better than that on most paper books. I read used paperbacks most of my early life and it's certainly better than those.

As for color, I read novels and most have no internal images and those few that do are nearly always black and white. For magazines there are tablets. Adding color to e-ink will certainly lower it's contrast ratio, at least for a few years, and I'd hate to see that.

And I don't agree that seeing the cover is part of the reading experience. Reading is about words. Covers are a marketing thing. Would you ask that TV manufacturers produce a set that's optimized for commercials?

There's the reading experience and there's the ereader experience and those are different things although they do overlap.

Barry

[barryem]

It occurs to me that being bored with an ereader would depend on the book I'm reading.

Barry

[Deskisamess]

And I don't agree that seeing the cover is part of the reading experience. Reading is about words. Covers are a marketing thing. Would you ask that TV manufacturers produce a set that's optimized for commercials?

I agree. That's why books made into movies end up using movie pictures for their covers, something that has always annoyed me. For a print book, I want the cover the author designed. But I don't need my e-reader designed around book covers. I want them designed around the text on the screen. Readability is the goal.

I use my iPad Pro or Mini for books with color pictures, like cookbooks and magazines, or some non-fiction. I usually do the reading on my Oasis, and look at the pictures using the iPad mini.

[Sirtel]

Originally Posted by Deskisamess

I agree. That's why books made into movies end up using movie pictures for their covers, something that has always annoyed me. For a print book, I want the cover the author designed. But I don't need my e-reader designed around book covers. I want them designed around the text on the screen. Readability is the goal.

Exactly my thoughts. Except I've encountered some author-designed covers that were pretty awful. Still, the movie-photo covers are even worse. But they probably work for casual readers who otherwise wouldn't even notice the book.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by Squirsier

From 7:1 to 15:1 is dramatic?

Granted, that's double what it use to be.

The combination of better contrast and front lighting has made a tremendous difference to readability. Don’t you remember how difficult first-generation eInk screens were to read? They were great in direct sunlight but virtually unreadable in dim indoor lighting. Modern devices, by comparison, are easy to read in any lighting conditions.

[Wearever]

Originally Posted by Deskisamess

I agree. That's why books made into movies end up using movie pictures for their covers, something that has always annoyed me. For a print book, I want the cover the author designed. But I don't need my e-reader designed around book covers. I want them designed around the text on the screen. Readability is the goal.

I use my iPad Pro or Mini for books with color pictures, like cookbooks and magazines, or some non-fiction. I usually do the reading on my Oasis, and look at the pictures using the iPad mini.

I also prefer the cover the author intended. I just like the artwork it catches my eye. I thought the original nook had the best of both worlds back then. Color covers and e-ink pages. Similar to paper books. I have IPads but also like to read on e-ink devices .

[skillachie]

Interesting post. Did not get an ereader for the novelty but the convenience and the lack of wear and tear of carrying a physical book around.

Do you think it is the "community" aspect of physical books you miss where your friends can see the books on your bookshelf, browse them and borrow them or strike up conversations?

[Deskisamess]

Originally Posted by Wearever

I also prefer the cover the author intended. I just like the artwork it catches my eye. I thought the original nook had the best of both worlds back then. Color covers and e-ink pages. Similar to paper books. I have IPads but also like to read on e-ink devices .

I'd never seen the first nook, so I looked it up. I probably would have liked it if it had been my first e-reader. Now I wouldn't care for the design and that much wasted space at the bottom where the covers show. It would have been distracting I think.

[pwalker8]

Originally Posted by ilovejedd

Yep, would like better library management as well. Probably faster CPU and more RAM, too, in order to accommodate large libraries.

Nested collections rather than a folder system (which, incidentally, was already supported on Kindles before Amazon switched to Cloud Collections). Something similar to Calibre Companion (modified to play nicer with e-ink) as a native interface would be great.

Me, three. I use Kobo's collections and series to do some organizing but it's a bit klunky.

[BilboBaggins]

I would never get bored with ereaders, nor with paper books.
I mean:

1. Paper books are wonderful when the book are my very favourite books: all Tolkien books for example, so I have them in my physical library
2. For all other book, I have them in ebook format, for space (and money) saving

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by Wearever

I also prefer the cover the author intended. I just like the artwork it catches my eye.

The author has no input into the design of the cover in traditional publishing. Covers are commissioned by the publisher.

[patrickt]

Bored with my e-reader? I don't even think about my e-reader unless something goes wrong. I read. That's what it's for.