Good time for Oasis?

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by Sirtel

Again, it matters to YOU. It matters to ME not one whit, because I never use any of my ereaders with the light off. I never even look at any screen with the light off, not once.

But with the light off is how screen should be compared.

[Sirtel]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

But with the light off is how screen should be compared.

In the scientific sense, maybe, but that's not what matters to me. Knowing what an unlit screen looks like gives me no information whatsoever about its quality. I want to know what a screen looks like in the similar environment to that which I usually read in. Light off is definitely not the similar environment.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by Sirtel

In the scientific sense, maybe, but that's not what matters to me. Knowing what an unlit screen looks like gives me no information whatsoever about its quality. I want to know what a screen looks like in the similar environment to that which I usually read in. Light off is definitely not the similar environment.

If an unlit screen is poor I won't buy it. If I was buying a Kindle and my choices were the PW3 or PW4, it would be the PW3.

[Sirtel]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

If an unlit screen is poor I won't buy it. If I was buying a Kindle and my choices were the PW3 or PW4, it would be the PW3.

Well, all unlit screens, without any exception, look poor to me.

As to the PW3 OR the PW4, I want neither, even for free. NO BUTTONS!

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by Sirtel

Well, all unlit screens, without any exception, look poor to me.

Did you ever own a Reader without a front light?

[Sirtel]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

Did you ever own a Reader without a front light?

Of course, but then I didn't know any better. I sometimes take those old readers out and look at them, and wonder how I could ever read on them.

Perhaps in full sunlight there would be no difference, but I never read in sunlight. I never am in sunlight if I can avoid it, and I usually can.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by Sirtel

Of course, but then I didn't know any better. I sometimes take those old readers out and look at them, and wonder how I could ever read on them.

Perhaps in full sunlight there would be no difference, but I never read in sunlight. I never am in sunlight if I can avoid it, and I usually can.

I used to have an LED light from Ikea that clipped onto the headboard and I was able to read in bed without a front light. I don't mind no light on. I have good enough light to see perfectly well when I do.

[howyoudoin]

Originally Posted by Sirtel

It is absolutely untrue when you say the Libra H2O has a better screen than the Oasis 3.

I have no reason to lie about this. I have had both at the same time to compare them, and I did find the Libra H2O display to be very very slightly better than the Oasis 3 one in daytime. The air gap in the Oasis made all the difference. The difference was tiny enough to be negligible, but not so tiny as to lead me to conclude in the opposite direction.

I trust you when you say that your eyes find the Oasis display to be better. And the fact that I find the opposite to be true only strengthens the fact that the eye test is a very subjective test that carries little weight other than to form personal preference. Neither your eye test nor my eye test is indicative of the factual truth.

[howyoudoin]

Originally Posted by MGlitch

As far as I know there’s no actual like for like devices where the only difference is flushed vs recessed screens.

If you have two devices with the same eink display of the same size, ppi, generation, then you have like for like devices where the only difference would then be the layering on top, or lack of.

The Oasis 3 and Libra H2O are an example. The only difference between them in daylight is the extra glass layer on the Oasis.

[howyoudoin]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

I disagree that the H2O loses out because of lack of the orange light. I have the Libra 2 and I don't use the orange light. I quite like the ligh on the H2O. I do think it's better then the light on the Libra 2.

Well, fair enough. That is very subjective, like the need for buttons. I prefer the orange light because my bedside light is 2700K and I like to have the amber lighting on on the device to make the page seem white as paper. Plain white lighting looks very bluish in those circumstances. Turning off the internal lighting completely is not very satisfactory to me because the page seems very greyish.

[howyoudoin]

Originally Posted by Sirtel

You forget that the PW5 has a newer Carta screen, with (supposedly) better contrast. This may negate any differences due to the top layer.

BTW, I've had an ereader with an IR screen - the Kindle Basic 2014. I was not impressed by the screen. It was neither particularly white nor particularly contrasty. So that's another myth that IR screens are always better than capacitive.

The Aura H2O has better contrast than even the the Libra H2O and Oasis 3. The whites are whiter and the blacks blacker. It only loses out on ppi. I have not owned the Aura H2O2, but if I remember correctly that added the capacitive layer and looked worse than it’s predecessor.

The Kindle basic 2014 had a trash display no doubt. Amazon had started to skimp out on quality of screens at that point.

[MGlitch]

Originally Posted by howyoudoin

If you have two devices with the same eink display of the same size, ppi, generation, then you have like for like devices where the only difference would then be the layering on top, or lack of.

The Oasis 3 and Libra H2O are an example. The only difference between them in daylight is the extra glass layer on the Oasis.

And even in your example there isn’t agreement on which is better. You think one thing others disagree. Just as you’ve no reason to lie (which Sirtel never said you did*) others don’t have a reason to either.

*there is a difference between saying something which isn’t true for others and lying.

[Quoth]

Originally Posted by howyoudoin

The Aura H2O has better contrast than even the the Libra H2O and Oasis 3. The whites are whiter and the blacks blacker. It only loses out on ppi. [snip]

I have the original H2O, IR touch. It's whiter / better contrast on ambient light than:

• PW3
• Flush PW4 (slightly poorer PW3)
• Original Libra (slightly better than PW4, similar PW3)
• Flush Sage
• Flush Elipsa

However the other are all fine. You need them side by side and the difference is not enough to show up easily on honest photography.
I'd struggle to see much difference between recessed Libra (original), Flush Sage (later N778, not 1st N777) and Flush Elipsa.
The Sage N778 and Elipsa seem to have the active screen in contact with top layer, no bezel shadow at any angle. The photos I've seen of the N777 review Sage seem to suggest the display is slightly below the top flush layer as a shadow is visible.

Comparisons with front light on don't count, so you need good ambient light to compare as the front light doesn't entirely turn off on the Kindle PW3.

Obviously older ereader screens (I have or had all of Nook Simple Touch, Sony PRS-350, Sony T1, Kobo Touch, PW2, Kindle Basic (no light), Cover Story) are all a bit poorer or a lot poorer. The DXG uses a newer screen to DX and so does KK3 to KK2. I have those two and they are not as good as H2O original, but not bad because there is no touch layer. Older screen models are a lot greyer.

So some flush screens may be poorer, but some may be similar to recessed capacitive screens.
The IR H2O is certainly poorer to use for touch, but it may be implementation or CPU speed rather than the technology. Traditionally before ereaders existed it was lowest resolution, capacitive next and resistive far better, but not as good a digitiser.
A system for a digitiser stlyus can lie behind the screen, but needs an electronic stylus (though some have no batteries and can get power from the gadget, though that is poor for battery life on eInk)

[cgsmom]

Wow, did this post really go down the rabbit hole. In reality the only thing that matters is which screen the purchaser prefers. Even if I buy a reader that has a better screen by some scientific test, if it doesn't look better to me, I don't want it.

Plus, buttons are VERY important to a lot of people. If everyone had the same criteria, we would all buy the same reader, just sayin'.

[Bookstooge]

Originally Posted by cgsmom

....Plus, buttons are VERY important to a lot of people. If everyone had the same criteria, we would all buy the same reader, just sayin'.

Yep, buttons all the way. It's why I've stuck with my first gen Oasis so long!