Affordable used ereader?

[Quoth]

Originally Posted by Aleron Ives

Is that because more people are just reading on their phones?

A slim majority have always read ebooks on non-eink (before 2005 only on LCD). Originally PDAs (Palm OS, Windows CE), then phones (Win CE and Symbian later after Kindle 1st released, iOS & Android), then tablets. There were dedicated ereaders before the 2005 eInk, even in one 1998 which was precursor of epub 2. Amazon was selling ebooks before the Kindle ereader existed and bought the leading ebook seller (Mobipocket) in 2005.

Most people either don't know eink exists or can't see the point of it. Also phone screens have got much bigger and better compared to twenty years ago.

[neil_swann80]

Originally Posted by Quoth

A slim majority have always read ebooks on non-eink (before 2005 only on LCD). Originally PDAs (Palm OS, Windows CE), then phones (Win CE and Symbian later after Kindle 1st released, iOS & Android), then tablets. There were dedicated ereaders before the 2005 eInk, even in one 1998 which was precursor of epub 2. Amazon was selling ebooks before the Kindle ereader existed and bought the leading ebook seller (Mobipocket) in 2005.

Most people either don't know eink exists or can't see the point of it. Also phone screens have got much bigger and better compared to twenty years ago.

I've read studies suggesting e-ink devices aren't any better for your eyes than reading on modern LCD/OLED screens. I find this hard to accept from my own experience, with ereaders being far more comfortable for longer reading sessions.

I guess where ereaders may definitely have the edge is battery life and a better reading experience across different lighting conditions.

[Quoth]

There are now very good LCD screens, my 23″ 4K monitor is just like using paper. Superior to any of my eink ereaders.

However I've not yet seen such a quality on a phone or tablet. We now have an Apple store in the local Mall. I don't see that quality there. It's nearly non-existent on TV screens, though better ones are not too shiny.

There are two separate main issues, apart from massive charge run time:
1) Is the OLED or LCD screen actually harmful to your eyes?
2) Is it more relaxing using only reflected ambient light, eink.

1) If the brightness is adjusted properly there is no harm to eyes, not even from blue light. It's possible that it's activity on a device rather than blue light that affects sleep according to recent studies.

2) A 220 dpi to 300 dpi resolution and ambient light and really only being able to use it to read (games & video & Internet awkward even if supported) is as relaxing as a paper book. Using a front light, even if amber tinted seems to reduce that advantage as does "dark mode".

Shiny screens cause headaches. Most eink panels are matte finish, most phones & tablets are shiny.

A big issue with tablets and phones is shiny screens. I've not bought a laptop, monitor or even CRT in nearly 30 years that had a shiny screen. Matte finish seems rare on phones and tablets. The problem is that any reflection is at a different distance to the text. You'll unconciously refocus on that if the screen moves or the reflected object moves. That will give an eyestrain headache. That's been known for decades and thus there is advice about not siting computer screens where there will be moving reflections.

Many cheap laptops and screens still are very shiny because it's far cheaper and the demo images in the show room look better.

[Renate]

In 1989 my first computer monitor was a 14" B&W VGA for $140.
Back then you would have had to spend some serious money to get a color CRT with perfect convergence.
1994 I paid $1000 for a color Sony 17" CRT. It was about 2 feet deep!
A year ago I paid $170 for a 29" ultrawide.

Making a B&W LCD/IPS/OLED display today would be pointless.
You can't see color finges at normal viewing distances.

Here's a deal, a 25" Mira display for $630. It's cracked.
https://www.ebay.com/itm/256015589844

[Quoth]

Originally Posted by Renate

Making a B&W LCD/IPS/OLED display today would be pointless.
You can't see color finges at normal viewing distances.

No, but they shouldn't be shiny.
The displays I use (except laptop) are all small enough vs DPI that I have the "cleartype" or equivalent sub-pixel addressing off. It only works for high contrast mono text and inherently gives red and blue edges to text.

No colour fringing at all on on my QHD, UHD, 15" 1600 x 1200 laptop (2002) and 15.6" 1920 x1080 (2016) laptop. The newer 17" 1920 x1080 (2022) laptop is poorer. It should either be 15" or QHD. It maybe suits people that marginally need reading glasses and don't wear them. The 22" 1920 x 1080 I was offered 2 days ago is more an office TV than a computer monitor. And it boggles me that there are TVs, laptops and monitors that are only 720 or 768. Can't read an A4 PDF or see proper HD video. It might make sense for 10" or so, but not at 15" to 32".

Not hard to find cracked sellers of S/H goods. Even sometimes new stuff in the local shop I'd think who is dumb enough?

As an aside, Lidl repeatedly have multiple models of DAB radios (with poor FM after thought with not enough memories and terrible ergonomics). DAB was turned off two and a half years ago in Ireland, only ever had State Radio and 45% coverage and isn't coming back. But far crazier stuff in the local shops, never mind online. The last Snuff, Cigar & Tobacco shop in Limerick opened as a Snuff factory in 1870. They still sell snuff, cigars, pipe tobacco as if it's 1823. However half the shop is now posh teas, caddies, teapots, spirit stoves etc. Sensible diversification?

[Quoth]

Originally Posted by Renate

A year ago I paid $170 for a 29" ultrawide.

In real terms in UK, a decent 1950s radio (before 1955 FM) was more expensive than a 55" 4K screen today.
1955 saw the UK get 2nd TV channel (405 lines, approx 360 of 377 visible due to overscan) and FM Radio (only duplicate of AM BBC). The new two channel TVs were mostly rented. 12" was common size and 17" was huge! I've not worked out cost with inflation. Some models in 1950s had auto brightness, FM Radio (only 3 dealer tuned presets) and a corded remote with volume and "next". The next button fired a giant solenoid (CLUNK) that advanced the big rotary preset tuner (13 positions) one position. I repaired one, once in 1970s, which is how I know. The 405 Line TV was turned off in UK & Ireland in 1985. The Irish 625 & 405, depending on region, only started in 1962 (technically the night of 31st Dec 1961). UK 405 in 1935, turned off 1939-1946. UK 625 maybe in 1967? I forget. I did stay up late to watch the moon Landing in 1969 on mono 625 lines.

[Renate]

Originally Posted by Quoth

Not hard to find cracked sellers of S/H goods.

A Poke4 Lite for $90 with a broken screen?
But what really gets me is people trying to sell brand new stuff at twice the current price of the manufacturer direct (who still sells it).

Originally Posted by Quoth

They still sell snuff, cigars, pipe tobacco as if it's 1823.

In the US this would all be CBD and marijuana.

[Quoth]

Originally Posted by Renate

In the US this would all be CBD and marijuana.

In 1823 or 1870?

When did Coca-Cola have cocaine?

Are Cuban cigars back in USA or still only smuggled?

[Quoth]

Originally Posted by Renate

A Poke4 Lite for $90 with a broken screen?
But what really gets me is people trying to sell brand new stuff at twice the current price of the manufacturer direct (who still sells it).

Caveat Emptor is certainly still a thing.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by Quoth

I agree it seems common and an inherent bug, though fiddling with formatting is supposed to fix it. I took my S/H T1 back and got a full refund. It obligingly demo'ed the bug at the counter.

The PRS-T2 is far better. Works with a 32G SD card behind a nice little hatch in the rear. Passed it on to a grandchild. Better than a Nook Simple Touch, older Kindle Basic (before 2021) or Paperwhite 1. Far better than a Kobo Touch version C, though the original Kobo Aura HD H2O is good and also takes SD card.

I suspect a S/H PRS-650 is better, because the PRS-350 I have is totally reliable.

I have a 650. It needs a new battery. The T1 battery is a lot more OK.

My T1 is a lot better then the 650 because someone modified the RMSDK reading app to add in a clock and the ability to side load your own fonts.

[kyrilson]

unclaimedbaggage.com and goodwill.com often have used ereaders for low cost. Those might be good options for you. As long as you're patient and keep an eye out, I'm sure you can find something that will work for you pretty cheap.

[rcentros]

Originally Posted by neil_swann80

I've read studies suggesting e-ink devices aren't any better for your eyes than reading on modern LCD/OLED screens. I find this hard to accept from my own experience, with ereaders being far more comfortable for longer reading sessions.

I've read that also. Probably depends on your eyes. Mine definitely prefer E-Ink screens over LCD ones for extended reading.

[Quoth]

Originally Posted by rcentros

I've read that also. Probably depends on your eyes. Mine definitely prefer E-Ink screens over LCD ones for extended reading.

I certainly agree for any of my portable LCD screens. I showed the P47L elongated shiny screen 4.7" eink to a few people and all thought it preferable to reading on a phone. A phone is rarely at the correct brightness for ambient. The P47L has no frontlight or touch (no annotation or dictionary or WiFi so touch isn't needed except for internal links, which sort of work with keyboard nav).

As I mentioned, comfort isn't the same as harm. Obviously screen shininess is only one aspect of comfort (which can cause slight temporary harm of eye strain due to refocussing and then a headache). My desktop LCD is only as comfortable as paper or eink because: it's not portable, there is no daylight, room lighting and screen brightness (8%) and contrast carefully adjusted, it's got no colour or brightness shift as you move your head (more advanced than IPS), and decent DPI (4K on 23″). I'd not read a novel on any of my phones or tablets, but I could on my desktop screen, except the chair is optimised for typing, not reclining with a book; I'd rarely sit long in an ordinary office chair or dining table chair to read.

[rcentros]

Originally Posted by Quoth

...My desktop LCD is only as comfortable as paper or eink because: it's not portable, there is no daylight, room lighting and screen brightness (8%) and contrast carefully adjusted, it's got no colour or brightness shift as you move your head (more advanced than IPS), and decent DPI (4K on 23″). I'd not read a novel on any of my phones or tablets, but I could on my desktop screen, except the chair is optimised for typing, not reclining with a book; I'd rarely sit long in an ordinary office chair or dining table chair to read.

Without turning up the brightness on LCD screens I have trouble reading from them. The contrast isn't high enough for me with low brightness. (Probably an issue with my eyes.) It's the same with eReaders, I have to have the brightness up fairly high or I squint. ("Warm" light helps here.)

[Quoth]

Originally Posted by rcentros

Without turning up the brightness on LCD screens I have trouble reading from them. The contrast isn't high enough for me with low brightness.

Oddly while decent monitors and TVs have a lot more picture / image settings than brightness (often image data brightness and backlight separately), all phones and tablets I have just have a single awkward brightness control, and stupidly, it dims the main screen when you load the control. Idiot Android design.