PRS 900 owners

[LaLa4363]

Can a previous 600 owner tell me if there is a significant difference with the 900's screen clarity and contrast?

[dsvick]

Hi LaLa

There are several threads here in which people have mentioned a difference in clarity and glare, I'm not sure I've seen the word "significant" used, but most people have said that it is definitely improved in the 900 over the 600.

Here's a few of them:
https://www.mobileread.com/forums/showthread.php?t=69602
https://www.mobileread.com/forums/showthread.php?t=68199
https://www.mobileread.com/forums/sho...t=66541&page=2

Hope that helps

[mgmueller]

Originally Posted by LaLa4363

Can a previous 600 owner tell me if there is a significant difference with the 900's screen clarity and contrast?

Yes, there is.
Personally, I'd say it's about the same difference from Sony 600 to Sony 900 as from 700 to Sony 600.
It's easily visible. If going for a new reader and solely deciding based on the screen, Sony 900 clearly is preferable to Sony 600. If you already own a Sony 600, I don't think it's necessary to upgrade to Sony 900.
It's not a quantum leap, it's a solid progress.

In addition to the screen quality, I prefer the menu structure as well. For example, you can sort by last read and (due to the larger screen) directly can access the last read and the latest additions. But again: No quantum leap, but a slight improvement.

[Bremen Cole]

/NON 900 owner rant

To me a touch screen brings nothing to the table, except less clarity of the text. Why don't they make a non-touchscreen version? I know the touchscreen is a new must have gimmick, but I wish they would give people a choice.

I love my PRS-300, but is it the last non-touchscreen reader?

/end NON 900 owner rant

[krighton]

Originally Posted by Bremen Cole

/NON 900 owner rant

To me a touch screen brings nothing to the table, except less clarity of the text. Why don't they make a non-touchscreen version? I know the touchscreen is a new must have gimmick, but I wish they would give people a choice.

I love my PRS-300, but is it the last non-touchscreen reader?

/end NON 900 owner rant

well, i'm a future 900 owner...and i wouldn't mind no touchscreen, maybe a 905 to get everything the 900 does with the 505 screen (bigger though)....anyways i always have to have the latest greatest so i'm sure i can adapt to whatever glare the screen has.

[Kolenka]

Touchscreens do allow for a more extensive UI that can break from the '1-10' menu mold (or gets around slow navigation like the nook or similar).

The catch is that you gotta do it right. And it is possible to do it, Sony's priorities of the screen being both finger and stylus friendly have limited their options until very recently (basically after the hardware for the 600/900 got locked down).

[Donnageddon]

Originally Posted by Kolenka

Touchscreens do allow for a more extensive UI that can break from the '1-10' menu mold (or gets around slow navigation like the nook or similar).

The catch is that you gotta do it right. And it is possible to do it, Sony's priorities of the screen being both finger and stylus friendly have limited their options until very recently (basically after the hardware for the 600/900 got locked down).

I certainly agree with your first paragraph, but am very curious a bout your second paragraph. Do you have some intel to support

Sony's priorities of the screen being both finger and stylus friendly have limited their options until very recently (basically after the hardware for the 600/900 got locked down)

This may be true, but I haven't read that referenced before.

[jbloudg20]

Originally Posted by Bremen Cole

/NON 900 owner rant

To me a touch screen brings nothing to the table, except less clarity of the text. Why don't they make a non-touchscreen version? I know the touchscreen is a new must have gimmick, but I wish they would give people a choice.

I love my PRS-300, but is it the last non-touchscreen reader?

/end NON 900 owner rant

What you must understand, is just because you have no use for a touchscreen, doesn't mean it brings nothing to the table. I, for one, will not own a non-touch screen reader. My uses dictate the need for it.

[HarryT]

For me, the key feature of the PRS-600 is the "free-hand" annotation on the screen, which I use to "mark up" my books as I'm proof-reading them. That absolutely requires a touch-screen.

[dsvick]

Originally Posted by Bremen Cole

/NON 900 owner rant

To me a touch screen brings nothing to the table, except less clarity of the text. Why don't they make a non-touchscreen version? I know the touchscreen is a new must have gimmick, but I wish they would give people a choice.

I love my PRS-300, but is it the last non-touchscreen reader?

/end NON 900 owner rant

I'm looking forward to the touch screen more from a convenience factor than anything else. Admittedly I have not owned any eReader previously so the only basis for comparison is several cell phones. I find being able to navigate by touch much easier and faster than having to press the buttons to get around. This should, in my opinion, make thing like dictionary look ups easier, annotations (with or without the stylus), and other things easier and faster.

[advocate2]

The touch screen advantage for me is the dictionary use. Modern novels don't stretch one's vocabulary much, but novels from the 1800's do sometimes. In this the dictionary is helpful. I would love to get to a point where I could get a Spanish=English dictionary so that I could read books in Spanish once in a while.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by advocate2

The touch screen advantage for me is the dictionary use. Modern novels don't stretch one's vocabulary much, but novels from the 1800's do sometimes. In this the dictionary is helpful. I would love to get to a point where I could get a Spanish=English dictionary so that I could read books in Spanish once in a while.

You can have dictionary lookup without a touch screen, though - numerous devices do (eg CyBook Gen3, Pocketbook 360, Kindle). The touch screen is certainly a much more "direct" interface for dictionary lookup, though.

[Kolenka]

Originally Posted by Donnageddon

I certainly agree with your first paragraph, but am very curious a bout your second paragraph. Do you have some intel to support

This may be true, but I haven't read that referenced before.

It's an educated guess based on one assumption and the data at hand: Sony isn't completely incompetent.

The 300/600/900 line was put into development quite awhile ago, and they had to lock down the hardware design a ways back to get it out in time for the holidays. I'd wager that the 600 and 900 were locked down at about the same time, and the extra software work and agreements for the 3G connectivity is what held up the 900 and prevented them from ramping up production and launching sooner.

So this means that for touch technology, Sony is going for something that can be used in the 6-7" range.

Wacom tech has already been vetted as usable on EPDs by iRex, so why not use it? It cannot respond to finger touch, something that the Sony UI is built around (you can do pretty much anything without the stylus). And I'd wager Sony is probably right here, a UI that is friendly to the user who doesn't want to get out a fiddly bit of plastic to navigate is one that is friendly to both types of people.

Capacitive tech has been shown to be finger friendly, so why not that? Well, a couple of reasons: It is like the finger version of the Wacom tech. It doesn't respond to most stylus designs meaning that some operations on an e-reader that are easier with a stylus (highlighting, scribbling) aren't guaranteed to work well. Look at the iPhone and the lengths it goes to, in order to offer certain functionality that would have been absurdly easy with a stylus. Some of that trickery isn't possible on EPD screens that can ship in devices right now. Now, there are stylus designs appearing that seem to work, but it's a bit up in the air how well they work, and how bulky they need to be, and I don't believe Sony had the time to fully investigate this before the hardware design was locked down. We're just now seeing capacitive screens show up in demos at CES, which I think is a good hint that backs this idea up.

That just leaves resistive, that Sony uses. It responds to touch from both a stylus and a finger, so it side-steps the issues of touch interactions on an EPD display, and doesn't require that you must use the fiddly piece of plastic. It let's you reduce the number of buttons on the device to a bare minimum of standard options that you don't want to clutter up the screen with. It just has a drawback: it affects screen clarity in low-light situations.