Touch Touch vs Glo - Page 2

kaikara · 01-03-2013, 03:14 PM

Just got a glo and it is slightly more crisp then the touch. I do find that the glo screen is not as sensitive as the touch. I have to swipe or touch harder to register a page turn then on my touch. Strangely the glo feels heavier even though it is only 3g heavier then my touch. It might just be the way the weight is distributed on the device. Light is a huge plus though and great for my getting older eyes.

everklear · 01-03-2013, 03:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kobokobe

With the light off, it is slightly better than the Touch. Kobo claims that the light does not drain the battery, and I have found that to be true. My battery life on the Glo (light always on) seems to be at least as good as the Touch. I've read other Glo users attest the same as well.

By the laws of physics, there has to be some drain on the battery. It appears to be reasonably small, based on what I've observed with the Glo I bought for my wife.

kaikara · 01-03-2013, 03:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by everklear

By the laws of physics, there has to be some drain on the battery. It appears to be reasonably small, based on what I've observed with the Glo I bought for my wife.

Does the Glo have a larger battery then the Touch? This would give you the same time between charges as a touch when using the light.

stewacide · 01-03-2013, 03:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kobokobe

With the light off, it is slightly better than the Touch. Kobo claims that the light does not drain the battery, and I have found that to be true. My battery life on the Glo (light always on) seems to be at least as good as the Touch. I've read other Glo users attest the same as well.

I suspect they increased the battery side, from the order of ~1000mah on the Tough to ~1500mah on the Glo. With the battery off in both cases the Glo should last ~50% longer.

kobokobe · 01-03-2013, 03:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by everklear

By the laws of physics, there has to be some drain on the battery. It appears to be reasonably small, based on what I've observed with the Glo I bought for my wife.

Of course, the light must be powered by the battery, I merely meant that the drain on the battery seems more or less negligible.

Quote:

Originally Posted by stewacide

I suspect they increased the battery side, from the order of ~1000mah on the Tough to ~1500mah on the Glo. With the battery off in both cases the Glo should last ~50% longer.

Wasn't aware that the difference was so large. I'm not sure that my Glo lasts ~50% longer than my Touch, so maybe the light uses more juice than I thought. Although the conclusions I've drawn was most certainly not from any controlled experiment, especially considering I sleep my Glo (as opposed to turning it off entirely) much more often than the touch. But I think the consensus on this forum was that the glo light was very power efficient at the least.

stewacide · 01-03-2013, 05:08 PM

I'm just guessing on the Glo's battery capacity, based on the Paperwhite having a 1500mha battery.

kobokobe · 01-03-2013, 05:19 PM

Yikes, maybe I should try reading. I was wondering why I haven't seen those numbers before.

Nothingness · 01-03-2013, 10:22 PM

In my memory serves me right, the Glo has a tad more powerful CPU as well, so it's a tad faster than the Touch.

filmo · 01-03-2013, 11:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kaikara

I do find that the glo screen is not as sensitive as the touch. I have to swipe or touch harder to register a page turn then on my touch.

You can turn pages without touching screen hard or soft only need to break IR light beam. Maybe trying to say slightly longer touch is needed for page turn with glo. With many updates over time for Kobo Touch readers, length of touch and response has changed more than once as they tried to reduce double page turns. Regardless of how they change this for better or worse I adapt in a day or 2 of use.

GeoffR · 01-03-2013, 11:41 PM

The Glo CPU is 1000MHz vs 800MHz for the Touch, but does this actually make the Glo faster or is the extra speed needed just to render pages for the Glo's higher resolution screen at the same rate as the Touch?

I would have thougt that the extra work needed to render and display pages at higher resolution combined with the higher CPU frequency would make the Glo use more power than the Touch, even with the light off.

stewacide · 01-04-2013, 08:28 AM

I find the Glo DRAMATICALLY faster at pulling up the ToC. Takes forever on the Touch, but is instant on the Glo. I can only assume it's being cached in memory on the Glo, which likely has more memory to work with.

Page turns seem to be slightly faster on the Glo as well, but they were already fast.

John F · 01-04-2013, 08:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stewacide

I find the Glo DRAMATICALLY faster at pulling up the ToC. Takes forever on the Touch, but is instant on the Glo. I can only assume it's being cached in memory on the Glo, which likely has more memory to work with.

Page turns seem to be slightly faster on the Glo as well, but they were already fast.

What file type are you reading? I just tried 2 side-loaded epubs, and the TOC took 2-3 seconds to come up.

stewacide · 01-04-2013, 08:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by John F

What file type are you reading? I just tried 2 side-loaded epubs, and the TOC took 2-3 seconds to come up.

Comes up almost instantly for me on the Glo even with +20 page ToCs using sideloaded epubs (e.g. news feeds)

filmo · 01-04-2013, 12:36 PM

When Kobo Touch was first available with faster processor it was assumed by some that it would have shorter battery life than slower Kobo Wifi. This proved not to be true because of faster processing data base and page turns then going into as good or better low power state waiting for page turn or other input. As important are unknown improvements maybe lower power draw graphic and wifi ICs.

ArmorDog · 01-04-2013, 12:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by filmo

You can turn pages without touching screen hard or soft only need to break IR light beam. Maybe trying to say slightly longer touch is needed for page turn with glo. With many updates over time for Kobo Touch readers, length of touch and response has changed more than once as they tried to reduce double page turns. Regardless of how they change this for better or worse I adapt in a day or 2 of use.

I also found that the Glo seemed to require more pressure. I know you're just breaking IR beams above the screen but it could be that the Glo is tuned to require more beams broken so my finger needs to be squished flatter by the pressure.

On the Touch I was used to giving a very light tap.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Transfer annotations from a Touch to a Glo	filthyPierre	Kobo Reader	2	12-20-2012 08:08 PM
GLO, touch screen problem after leaving it sleeping.	JCMS	Kobo Reader	9	12-16-2012 10:37 PM
help on nook simple touch glo light.	jolfc	Barnes & Noble NOOK	3	12-04-2012 12:41 AM
Glo 2.1.5 sync shootout: Touch vs. Glo	oj829	Kobo Reader	2	11-03-2012 08:33 PM
Glo vs Touch	rpiotr	Kobo Reader	27	10-31-2012 05:45 AM

01-03-2013, 03:14 PM	#16
kaikara Zealot Posts: 110 Karma: 347050 Join Date: Jun 2011 Device: Kobo Glo, Kobo Touch, Kobo Vox	Just got a glo and it is slightly more crisp then the touch. I do find that the glo screen is not as sensitive as the touch. I have to swipe or touch harder to register a page turn then on my touch. Strangely the glo feels heavier even though it is only 3g heavier then my touch. It might just be the way the weight is distributed on the device. Light is a huge plus though and great for my getting older eyes.

01-03-2013, 05:08 PM	#21
stewacide Groupie Posts: 196 Karma: 1086780 Join Date: Jul 2012 Device: Kobo H2O Ed. 2, Glo HD, Glo, Touch	I'm just guessing on the Glo's battery capacity, based on the Paperwhite having a 1500mha battery.

01-03-2013, 05:19 PM	#22
kobokobe I am what I am Posts: 179 Karma: 52789 Join Date: Sep 2011 Location: An enormous, polar bear infested igloo that we call north of the 49. Device: Kobo Glo, Kobo Touch	Yikes, maybe I should try reading. I was wondering why I haven't seen those numbers before.

01-03-2013, 10:22 PM	#23
Nothingness Zealot Posts: 111 Karma: 7574010 Join Date: Oct 2012 Location: Canada Device: Kobo Glo, Kobo Aura H2O Limited Edition	In my memory serves me right, the Glo has a tad more powerful CPU as well, so it's a tad faster than the Touch.

01-03-2013, 11:41 PM	#25
GeoffR Wizard Posts: 3,821 Karma: 19162882 Join Date: Nov 2012 Location: Te Riu-a-Māui Device: Kobo Glo	The Glo CPU is 1000MHz vs 800MHz for the Touch, but does this actually make the Glo faster or is the extra speed needed just to render pages for the Glo's higher resolution screen at the same rate as the Touch? I would have thougt that the extra work needed to render and display pages at higher resolution combined with the higher CPU frequency would make the Glo use more power than the Touch, even with the light off.

01-04-2013, 08:28 AM	#26
stewacide Groupie Posts: 196 Karma: 1086780 Join Date: Jul 2012 Device: Kobo H2O Ed. 2, Glo HD, Glo, Touch	I find the Glo DRAMATICALLY faster at pulling up the ToC. Takes forever on the Touch, but is instant on the Glo. I can only assume it's being cached in memory on the Glo, which likely has more memory to work with. Page turns seem to be slightly faster on the Glo as well, but they were already fast.

01-04-2013, 12:36 PM	#29
filmo Wizard Posts: 1,326 Karma: 1077205 Join Date: Jun 2011 Device: Kobo Touch, Sony T1, Kobo Mini	When Kobo Touch was first available with faster processor it was assumed by some that it would have shorter battery life than slower Kobo Wifi. This proved not to be true because of faster processing data base and page turns then going into as good or better low power state waiting for page turn or other input. As important are unknown improvements maybe lower power draw graphic and wifi ICs.