Any Rumours About A New PaperWhite?

[pdurrant]

I'd like to see a new taller aspect ratio - 9:16 instead of 3:4. I keep my Kindle on wide margins to reduce the text width with my 3:4 voyage.

I'm disappointed that LiquaVista didn't work well enough/cheap enough for a Kindle.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by trcm

I think unless https://eink.com/modules.html release any new display panels beyond the old Carta 1.2 ones, the only new Kindles we'll see will have frippery like tinted backlights and daylight sensors. The technology just doesn't seem to have improved much in recent years.

There is one change that can be made to most Readers. The change is to stop using glass backed screens and use plastic backed screens. It would lead to a lot less damaged Readers.

So a PW5 with a plastic backed screen, and color light (alow us to set the color as well as the intensity), 16GB storage, and 16:9 aspect ration would be a good upgrade.

[trcm]

Originally Posted by pdurrant

I'd like to see a new taller aspect ratio - 9:16 instead of 3:4. I keep my Kindle on wide margins to reduce the text width with my 3:4 voyage.

Nooo, I jailbroke my PW4 just so I could reduce the margins!

[ilovejedd]

Originally Posted by pdurrant

I'd like to see a new taller aspect ratio - 9:16 instead of 3:4. I keep my Kindle on wide margins to reduce the text width with my 3:4 voyage.

I'm disappointed that LiquaVista didn't work well enough/cheap enough for a Kindle.

I wouldn't want 9:16. Way too narrow.

Something like 2:3 or 10:16 would be acceptable though (and that's around the AR for most physical books afaik).

 3:4   :  1:1.33
 2:3   :  1:1.5
10:16  :  1:1.6
 9:16  :  1:1.78

[BookCat]

I would also like to see good contrast (I've read complaints about the PW4) and a wider use of formats, such as rtf. It's easy to convert via Calibre, but many other ereaders such as PocketBooks read far more formats than kindles.

I tend to read in landscape with a wide margin quite a lot. This enables me to prop up the kindle and do other things (drink hot choc, eat, fuss cats) at the same time. I don't like it propped up in portrait. So a narrower reader would put fewer words on the page in landscape.

TTS via headphones would be fun too, especially if it somehow highlighted the part being read - this would help with immersive reading, but the voice choices would need to be good.

[pdurrant]

Originally Posted by ilovejedd

I wouldn't want 9:16. Way too narrow.

Something like 2:3 or 10:16 would be acceptable though (and that's around the AR for most physical books afaik).

 3:4   :  1:1.33
 2:3   :  1:1.5
10:16  :  1:1.6
 9:16  :  1:1.78

UK Paperbacks are (or at least the one I just pulled off my shelf is) 105mm x 178mm which works out to about 1:1.7, and the text block inside ignoring the running header) is 89mm x 151mm, also about 1:1.7. If we include the header, the text takes up 89mm x 158mm, which is 1:1.78.

So I think 9:16 would be about perfect. But I'd happily take 10:16 if it was available.

[Junket]

Aspect ratio is certain to be subjective, excepting those who are largely indifferent to the exact aspect ratio employed. Perhaps all we could all agree on is that Kindle has a lower aspect ratio (is wider) than most print books. Measuring a handful of physical books.. a lot more are 1.5 - 1.6 AR. Only a minority of books are 1.7 and that is very narrow.

IMO 2:3 (1.5 AR) would be an improvement. But I wouldn't want to go to the extreme of 1.7. The existing format is to be preferred over an extremely narrow one.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by Junket

Aspect ratio is certain to be subjective, excepting those who are largely indifferent to the exact aspect ratio employed. Perhaps all we could all agree on is that Kindle has a lower aspect ratio (is wider) than most print books. Measuring a handful of physical books.. a lot more are 1.5 - 1.6 AR. Only a minority of books are 1.7 and that is very narrow.

IMO 2:3 (1.5 AR) would be an improvement. But I wouldn't want to go to the extreme of 1.7. The existing format is to be preferred over an extremely narrow one.

Read the following from another thread. It will explain why Reader are the aspect they are. It also explain Kindles wide margins.

Originally Posted by theducks

9:16 (16:9 in portrait mode) is EXACTLY the aspect of the text on a mass market paperback
3:4 (most readers) chop off the bottom (assuming the margins have been relegated mostly to the Bezel area which just happens to be similar to the margins on said paperback)
Why muck with a aspect ratio that has been in use for 50+ years

[DuckieTigger]

Originally Posted by Junket

Aspect ratio is certain to be subjective, excepting those who are largely indifferent to the exact aspect ratio employed. Perhaps all we could all agree on is that Kindle has a lower aspect ratio (is wider) than most print books. Measuring a handful of physical books.. a lot more are 1.5 - 1.6 AR. Only a minority of books are 1.7 and that is very narrow.

IMO 2:3 (1.5 AR) would be an improvement. But I wouldn't want to go to the extreme of 1.7. The existing format is to be preferred over an extremely narrow one.

For practical reasons I would suggest 1:sqrt(2) (1:1.414), like regular European paper. This way you can read in landscape with two pages side by side with the exact same ratio as a full page portrait.

[binaryhermit]

I certainly prefer my kindle's aspect ratio over my Pixel 3a's aspect ratio... 18.5:9 I think

[Junket]

Originally Posted by DuckieTigger

or practical reasons I would suggest 1:sqrt(2) (1:1.414), like regular European paper.

On that rationale, Amazon ought to leave the format exactly as it is. You point out that A4 paper used in the EU has an AR of 1.414. But Amazon is an US based company and the standard letter paper size in the US is 8.5 x 11 which has an AR of 1.29. A close approximation to the existing Kindle AR.

You just can't please everyone all the time.

[Quoth]

It's not specifically European, it's ISO.
The Root 2 ratio allows making large panels and cutting to a mix of panel sizes etc.
USA is less than 13% of world population. The Letter size isn't mathematically logical.

There are B sizes as well as A sizes.

Maybe Aliens use 1:sqrt(2) for video as it's so mathematically logical. Laptops and Tablets at 16:9 also suit video best, not documents and desktop. I'd love a 16" laptop with 2172 x 1536.

At 300 dpi, the diagonal is about 222 mm or about 8.8" for 2172 x 1536.

[Junket]

Bezos has commented that the majority of Kindle sales are in North America. And Amazon also originates and is based in the US. That sounds a lot more like the relevant market share is 50.1% or more, than the 13% you suggest.

[Richwood]

I have the PW2, PW3, PW3 Manga and Voyage as well as the G9 and G10 32 GB Oasis models so see no need for the PW4 personally. For the next generation Kindle PW I want page turn buttons on both sides like the old K4/K5 NT models with all the current features too. Also like a Kindle with the 7.8" or 8" screen as offered on a couple of the current Kobo reader models.

[Richwood]

Originally Posted by Junket

On that rationale, Amazon ought to leave the format exactly as it is. You point out that A4 paper used in the EU has an AR of 1.414. But Amazon is an US based company and the standard letter paper size in the US is 8.5 x 11 which has an AR of 1.29. A close approximation to the existing Kindle AR.

You just can't please everyone all the time.

The old Sony 900 and 950 had a screen that was about 92mm x 157mm for an aspect ratio of 1.70 so what AR is chosen is pretty much arbitrary though I note that virtually all 6" diagonal readers seem to have adopted the same AR screen size regardless of country of design and intended market. Standardization of a given Eink screen size decreases costs due to mass production savings by the screen manufacturer.