Firmware update for PRS-500 available - EPUB!

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by AprilHare

My Sony Reader went into the mail today (Saturday 21/11/2009 09:35 AEDT - GMT+11) and was told it will take 7 - 10 working days to wing its way to Laredo, Texas, USA from Australia.
Yes, I am suffering from the early stages of liseuse tremens...

I just hope that you are not having eBook reader withdrawals. Having liseuse tremens is fine. Hopefully, you'll be able to do without bright lights by the time you get your 500 back.

[craigwillie]

Originally Posted by EMP

Same here. The Sony guy said they have it but their repair website was behind in updating the status but it would be corrected in 12 hours. That was 24 hours ago and still no change.

I had the same issue. (UPS delivered, but Sony had no record of it.). Finally got a knowledgeable CSR, he said some of the initial work orders were put in as exchanges rather than upgrades and they had to issue a new work order number.

The CSR found the new work order associated with my PRS-500, and found it was completed and shipped out on Friday.

Once it ships out you should receive an email with the tracking number. Mine indicates I will receive mine back on Monday. Exactly 7 days.

[evdberg]

Just found this thread ... but am I the only one that finds it weird that Sony wants us to send in the unit for a firmware upgrade? They gave previous updates in the past, so why not now? Obviously I am not really happy with this because I live in the Netherlands ... maybe igorsk will take a look at the difference and compile an upgrade for outside-the-us customers of the 1st gen reader?

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by evdberg

Just found this thread ... but am I the only one that finds it weird that Sony wants us to send in the unit for a firmware upgrade? They gave previous updates in the past, so why not now? Obviously I am not really happy with this because I live in the Netherlands ... maybe igorsk will take a look at the difference and compile an upgrade for outside-the-us customers of the 1st gen reader?

It likely is something the updater will not handle so it must be done directly on the chip/hardward.

[JSWolf]

My guess is that it is a hardware update as well as a firmware update.

[AprilHare]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

I just hope that you are not having eBook reader withdrawals. Having liseuse tremens is fine. Hopefully, you'll be able to do without bright lights by the time you get your 500 back.

It's meant to be wordplay on delirium tremens not a problem with bright lights Hopefully I'll get the PRS-500 back before the withdrawal symptoms get worse

[radius]

Originally Posted by EatingPie

Can you explain what you mean here?

Justification is actually quite a simple algorithm. It was one of my first programming projects!

Also, I have been using LRF exclusively for 3 years, and have never had eye strain. And the books I generate from are often exactly the same HTML as ePUBs.

Mainly I'm curious as to how justified ePUBs would cause eye strain.

-Pie

It doesn't cause me eye strain per se, but I find that fully justified text on such a low resolution display as the Sony's is unattractive.

The reason for this is since the pixel count of the display is low, small text doesn't look good to me so I'm forced to use larger text. With the larger text, there are fewer words per line so there is less opportunity for justification algorithms to adjust spacing in an attractive way.

Also, it looks to me like the Sony LRF renderer either doesn't adjust inter-letter/intra-word at all or has very tight constraints when doing so, making it even more difficult to space the words attractively.

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by radius

It doesn't cause me eye strain per se, but I find that fully justified text on such a low resolution display as the Sony's is unattractive.

The reason for this is since the pixel count of the display is low, small text doesn't look good to me so I'm forced to use larger text. With the larger text, there are fewer words per line so there is less opportunity for justification algorithms to adjust spacing in an attractive way.

Also, it looks to me like the Sony LRF renderer either doesn't adjust inter-letter/intra-word at all or has very tight constraints when doing so, making it even more difficult to space the words attractively.

Exactly the issue with current e-readers. That's why I hate fully justified text. It actually causes eye strain because of the inconsistent spacing due to the discrete pixel size and resolution.

[EatingPie]

Originally Posted by kennyc

Exactly the issue with current e-readers. That's why I hate fully justified text. It actually causes eye strain because of the inconsistent spacing due to the discrete pixel size and resolution.

I read at "M"edium on the Sony, and have no issues at all with eye strain using LRFs. And I have cataracts in one eye.

I am also quite skeptical of the "discrete pixel size/resolution" statement. Books have a chosen font size, and it does not vary throughout the book (for normal text). The exact same algorithm for justifying a paper book can be used for electronic books.

However, most to the point, I don't see any studies blaming spacing as a contributing factor to eye strain. The Mayo Clinic actually lists the following as the primary causes of eye strain:

* Extended use of a computer or video monitor
* Reading for extended periods
* Exposure to bright light or glare
* Straining to see in very dim light

While increased font size can reduce straining, I have found no corroborating documentation that spacing or justification style causes eyestrain.

-Pie

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by EatingPie

I read at "M"edium on the Sony, and have no issues at all with eye strain using LRFs. And I have cataracts in one eye.

I am also quite skeptical of the "discrete pixel size/resolution" statement. Books have a chosen font size, and it does not vary throughout the book (for normal text). The exact same algorithm for justifying a paper book can be used for electronic books.
....

-Pie

Yes, the limited/discrete pixel size does cause a problem by not allow the kerning that is done with print books and in PDFs. The eye strain comes from the irregular spacing and re-positioning of the eyes.

[EatingPie]

Originally Posted by kennyc

Yes, the limited/discrete pixel size does cause a problem by not allow the kerning that is done with print books and in PDFs. The eye strain comes from the irregular spacing and re-positioning of the eyes.

Except that kerning also causes an irregular rate of scan across the page... though far more subtly.

While it is not implemented in the Reader, it can certainly do kerning. Pagemaker -- which is so old now, it probably could run wholesale on the Reader! -- had several kerning adjustments. Any electronic font renderer can do it... if the programmers program it.

It's likely not implemented because the primary motivation isn't there. (Give you one guess!) Paper books use more regular spacing to optimize the use of pages -- the less paper the less the book costs to make. "So fit as many words on a page as you can" isn't a huge priority for Readers. And that's probably why there isn't hyphenated word breaks at the margin.

I am still not entirely convinced that this causes eye strain. But I ain't going to bet the farm on it by any means. And if it causes you eye strain, it very likely causes it for others.

-Pie

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by EatingPie

Except that kerning also causes an irregular rate of scan across the page... though far more subtly.
...
I am still not entirely convinced that this causes eye strain. ...

-Pie

You are mistaken. Printed pages are different than digital displays, particular limited resolution digital displays.

[MikeRo]

Originally Posted by kennyc

You are mistaken. Printed pages are different than digital displays, particular limited resolution digital displays.

Could you expand on limited resolution digital displays? A 5 inch e-ink device such as the PRS-300 has 200 pixels per inch. The maximum resolution of the human eye in good light and at common reading distances is around 600 pixels per inch. I wouldn't call a device that can produce resolutions at one third the maximum we can perceive under ideal conditions to be a "limited resolution display".

[radius]

Originally Posted by MikeRo

Could you expand on limited resolution digital displays? A 5 inch e-ink device such as the PRS-300 has 200 pixels per inch. The maximum resolution of the human eye in good light and at common reading distances is around 600 pixels per inch. I wouldn't call a device that can produce resolutions at one third the maximum we can perceive under ideal conditions to be a "limited resolution display".

Before buying a reader, I also thought that 200 dpi would be high enough for a display, but now that I own one (best electronic gadget I have ever purchased) I find the "low" resolution display really bothers me. It is far too easy to see the individual pixels and stair-stepping on diagonals.

I think this may mainly be caused by the font rendering because my MacBook (1280x800, 13") is only about 116 dpi but the display looks far better to me. I bet the combination of sub-pixel rendering (edit: compared to limited grey scale), and the amount of effort that Apple puts into typography makes a big difference. As good as Freetype is, I don't think it compares with the proprietary renderers yet.

It might also be because comfortable computer using distance is farther away than my comfortable book reading distance.

But regardless of why it is that I end up having to use much larger letters that I would prefer, my comments above still stand.

[Jellby]

Resolution is not the only factor contributing to visual quality, there is anti-aliasing ("blurring" the staircase edge to make them look smooth), hinting (making sure all vertical lines in a font look the same, if that is what the designer meant), dithering (for images), etc. These are controlled by software (or maybe hardware chips), not by the screen.