Flush or recessed screen?

[Richwood]

Originally Posted by Ripplinger

I prefer and will only purchase a recessed screen. I like the having the bezel to hold the reader by, for me it makes it much more comfortable for long reading periods. I also think a recessed screen looks better.

But I also avoid capacitive touch ereaders, so right there flush is out for me. I use my readers outdoors in cold weather, so being able to use it with all thickness of gloves is a must (and no, I'm not about to buy 4 pairs of special gloves or ruin my warm gloves by sewing in the metallic thread in the finger tips).

I also keep my readers in a cover always and don't eat over them using them as a crumb tray, so I've never had a problem with having to clean dust or particles out from under the bezel.

I have readers with both screen types and prefer the recessed screen as less subject to damage if kept in a case with a solid (not origami) style cover as the stiff cover spaced away from the screen should provide best screen protection when closed. For flush screen units both ACDream and Fintie make folio style covers that include a raised bezel cover that gives much of the effect of a recessed screen.

As for units with infrared touch screens the last Kindle with that technology I am aware of was the Kindle Touch with a 167 PPI screen resolution. The Sony readers were all IR I believe with a highest resolution of 212 PPI. Based on response to a plastic pen used as a pointer I believe none of the current Kobo readers have IR screens though the Kobo Mini, Aura H2O original and Aura HD 7" apparently did. All also had screen with resolutions of less than 300 PPI.

[haertig]

Originally Posted by DNSB

Why are you conflating a flush screen with not having bezels around the edge of the screen?

I'm not conflating anything intentionally. Maybe I just don't understand your definition of flush.

To me, flush means a screen that goes edge-to-edge. The front display is one piece of glass. That doesn't mean the displayed image necessarily goes edge-to-edge, just the glass. Thus, the front of the display is the same level all the way across (no recess), because it is one piece of glass. There is no bezel on top of it.

And a recessed screen means to me that the outer perimeter is a bezel, usually plastic, that covers the outer edges of the display screen beneath it. That display screen may or may not go all the way to the edges - that is not inherently obvious because the bezel above it covers that from our view. Because the bezel sits on top of the screen, there is necessarily a slight drop (the thickness of the bezel) to the screen, thus it being called recessed.

[John F]

Originally Posted by Richwood

I have readers with both screen types and prefer the recessed screen as less subject to damage if kept in a case with a solid (not origami) style cover as the stiff cover spaced away from the screen should provide best screen protection when closed. For flush screen units both ACDream and Fintie make folio style covers that include a raised bezel cover that gives much of the effect of a recessed screen.

As for units with infrared touch screens the last Kindle with that technology I am aware of was the Kindle Touch with a 167 PPI screen resolution. The Sony readers were all IR I believe with a highest resolution of 212 PPI. Based on response to a plastic pen used as a pointer I believe none of the current Kobo readers have IR screens though the Kobo Mini, Aura H2O original and Aura HD 7" apparently did. All also had screen with resolutions of less than 300 PPI.

The Kobo Glo HD had an IR touch screen and was 300dpi.

[swimon126]

I think both have their own major advantage. I have the PW4 and the flush screen makes it really easy to clean/get rid of dust (fingerprints barely noticeable to my eye). I also tried out the Kobo Clara (ordered but returned) and like that the raised bezel makes it easier to hold the left and right edges even though bezel is thin. The flush screen makes this a bit harder. Not a dealbreaker though.

[Sirtel]

Originally Posted by swimon126

I think both have their own major advantage. I have the PW4 and the flush screen makes it really easy to clean/get rid of dust (fingerprints barely noticeable to my eye). I also tried out the Kobo Clara (ordered but returned) and like that the raised bezel makes it easier to hold the left and right edges even though bezel is thin. The flush screen makes this a bit harder. Not a dealbreaker though.

Just curious, why did you decide to keep the PW over the Clara?

[swimon126]

Originally Posted by Sirtel

Just curious, why did you decide to keep the PW over the Clara?

The few Clara's that I ordered back then had persistent issues with light bleeding (I'm blaming streaks of bad luck). After this I decided to give PW a go. The first PW device I received has zero lighting issues, so I decided to keep it. I do want to eventually leave the Amazon ecosystem though, so I've been backing up/converting my books on Calibre.

[ZodWallop]

Originally Posted by swimon126

I do want to eventually leave the Amazon ecosystem though, so I've been backing up/converting my books on Calibre.

That's a good idea whether you are planning on moving away from Amazon or not.

[Sirtel]

Originally Posted by ZodWallop

That's a good idea whether you are planning on moving away from Amazon or not.

Yes, and then there would be no need to stop buying from Amazon altogether. You can just buy from anyone you want. I buy my ebooks from Amazon, Google Play, Kobo, Smashwords and many other places, and read them on whatever ereader I want, Kindle, Nook or Kobo.

[Vmurph]

Flush screen is a GODSEND to people with pets. Especially cats. I can’t even begin to tell you how easily (and often) cat hairs would get wedged between the bezel and glass screen.

Before the flush screen was released, I spent more time picking cat fur out from the bezel, than I spent actually reading. Oh, and when you try to pick pet fur off the screen or from under the bezel, it causes unintentional page-turns, which only adds to the annoyance.

With flush screens, when a piece of fur appears on my screen, all I have to do is BLOW it off. It flies right off the device. With recessed screens, blowing just resulted in pushing the hair under the bezel.

————
EDIT: This also applies to dust particles, as well.
.

[GlenBarrington]

TBH, it isn't something I've concerned myself with. I've had, and enjoyed readers of both types.

[Paperbackstash]

Waterproof is a huge deal for me, so if I have to have flush to have that, then I'd have to choose flush. That said, I prefer recessed in every other way --- no glare, no smudges, better clarity, my PW3 is much better for text than my PW4

I do agree the dirt getting in the edges was irritating though. Thank God for toothpicks!

[MGlitch]

Curious as to just how folks think a recessed screen is that much more durable than a flush screen. Unless the thing hitting your ereader is larger than the screen the small recess won’t offer any worthwhile protection. And at that size whatever is hitting it likely has a density that’d either damage the device or not regardless of the screen.

Just some examples

A brick hitting your ereader will likely result in a broken ereader flush or recessed screen

A sheet of paper on the other hand won’t.

A arrow striking your screen will likely damage it regardless

A feather falling on your screen won’t damage it

etc.

TL;DR the recess of ereader screens offers no additional protection from any reasonable source of damage.

[John F]

Originally Posted by MGlitch

Curious as to just how folks think a recessed screen is that much more durable than a flush screen. Unless the thing hitting your ereader is larger than the screen the small recess won’t offer any worthwhile protection. And at that size whatever is hitting it likely has a density that’d either damage the device or not regardless of the screen.

Just some examples

A brick hitting your ereader will likely result in a broken ereader flush or recessed screen

A sheet of paper on the other hand won’t.

A arrow striking your screen will likely damage it regardless

A feather falling on your screen won’t damage it

etc.

TL;DR the recess of ereader screens offers no additional protection from any reasonable source of damage.

I'm not saying a recess screened is more durable, but to answer your question...

I would guess the most common thing hitting the screen would be the ground (a dropped reader), which would be larger than the screen.

[Ripplinger]

Originally Posted by MGlitch

Curious as to just how folks think a recessed screen is that much more durable than a flush screen.

Of course, something hitting directly on the screen will still break the screen, flush vs recessed doesn't matter there.

I always place my cell phones face down, to protect the screen, and that only works because it's in a case that keeps the glass off the desktop, it's recessed enough in a case. It's the same idea with ereaders. If you drop it and it lands face down (and survives), chances are you can avoid any scratches on the screen if it's recessed (unless dropped on rocks of course). Plus you avoid fingerprint smudges on the top glass where you hold the reader, which would have me constantly wiping it down, and it's just more comfortable to hold for me with a bezel.

And for myself, I will only use an IR touch display for an ereader, so again, a bezel is required for that.

There are many other reasons for preferring a recessed screen besides just thinking it's more durable. It's not. It mostly gets down to personal preference.

[JSWolf]

One other reason for a recessed screen even if it's a capacitive touch is that the layers will be closer together and thus, more clear and sharp. Take a look at the PW3 vs. the PW4. The PW4 has a flush screen and the layers are not as close to the screen as they are on the PW3. If you compare the PW3 and the PW4, you will see the PW3 is cleaner and sharper.