Newbie's reaction to PRS-500 (longish review)

[alexqwerty159]

Hi all,

I've been reading forums here for some time, you've been a great help !

I managed to get hold of a PRS-500 here in the UK. I've been looking forward to a usable reader for years but still, I have mixed feelings about it.
I thought to write a review here, and to summarize some of the issues I've read from other posters that apply to me.

The screen background (even under good lighting) is quite grey (as many have said official photos are a bit deceiving) and the letters much less clear than a paperback. So I've found there is a big trade off.
a) If you increase the font size then the page holds many less words than a book of an equal size and reading is a bit of a chore, you have to turn pages every 5-10 secs and it's like reading a children's book. But pages turn quickly and a 300 page book is less than 0.5mb.
b) Embedded fonts make the book more than 2mb and slow the page turning considerably. From 1 secs without embedded fonts to sometimes more than 4 sec with. You have to remember when you reach the last lines to press the button, that's distracting and unnatural to do when you haven't finished a page. But embedded fonts, even if they are at the same size as the PRS-500 internal fonts, appear much much clearer and bolder (I use libprs-500. Why does that happen ?). By the way the first time the reader encounters a text with embedded fonts, it makes a LONG time to access it, many minutes.

To quantify the above, a character count of 55-70 letters per line (incl. spaces) and a page of 25-30 lines approaches the setting of a normal small book, and is a good balance in my opinion. I've stuck to this but the quality is noticeably lower than a normal paper page.

Apart from that and the usual format conversion glitches talked about in the forums, I'm extremely happy with the reader. I thought the screen would be too small but it's just the right size for reading in home and outside.

Do you think that this technology will catch on after all ? I have my doubts. Most of acquaintances who are avid readers were intrigued at first but not one considered buying one (and many of them are quite wealthy and into gadgets). And I can see their point. Books are indeed better, they are good for display also, they are reasobably lightweight and portable and they are at the same price almost as an e-book.

Also there is very little variety at the Sony ebook store (the same applies to Amazon kindle too). I live in a very rural area, no post office, so how am I supposed to read ? It's quite challenging to find a way to download legally e-books that interest me.

Do any of the above (especially the line character-count/page-turning delay/filesize/embbedded-font trade off) relate to your experience ? What are the settings you find most comfortable ?

[alexqwerty159]

To continue a little on the font/delay trade off, why is it that the libprs-500 embedded fonts look so much better ?

I'm not taking about subjective preferences, a 9 sherif embedded font for example has roughly the same character count as the Sony inbuild one (small size) but it's clearly much bigger, cleaner and bolder. Is it what other users have experiencing ?

Also, is any of the other recommended software capable of embedding similar fonts but with creating small delays in page turning ? The libprs-500 fonts take just too long to turn.

And you who've replaced the inbuilt fonts, would you recommend the process to a complete amateur ?! Is it equivalent to an embedded font with no page delay, or is there another problem cropping up ?

Many thanks in advance !

[dhbailey]

The libprs500 embedded fonts are any fonts you want, so they look better because they are displayed differently from the built-in fonts. I find the built-in fonts to be just fine, but then I also don't find that the contrast on my 500 is an issue.

On the "will this technology catch on" front, there are several issues that we who love the devices need to push to the forefront of any discussion:

1) the ability to have several books with us at once to satisfy changing moods/tastes at any given moment -- when I used to go on vacation I would always take the current book I was ready, a book about music (I'm a professional musician) in case the whim took me to read more on the subject, a book of non-fiction and a second fiction book in case I finished my current book. 4 books, no matter what sort of book take up much more space in a suitcase or a backpack or handbag than a single Reader takes;

2) there is a huge library of wonderful books, both fiction and non-fiction, on all sorts of subjects which are ONLY available electronically. I'm talking about the vast majority of the books from Project Gutenberg as well as other on-line sites such as manybooks.net and silkpagoda.com (the BlackMask DVD). I can't begin to count the books I've already read as well as those in the queue for future reading that just aren't available in printed versions anymore. That doesn't mean they're not worth reading, just that publishers feel they can't make any money from them anymore so they won't bother to print them. I never would have found Anna Katherine Green's fine novels nor the wonderfully fun Reggie Fortune stories by H.C. Bailey (no relation), and buying the complete library of Wilkie Collins in print would not only cost a lot it would demand I build a new wing to my house to store them along with all the Dickens and Walter Scott and many other prolific writers of the past. The reader helps make reading all those unavailable books actually as enjoyable as reading a paper book, and I can flit from book to book to book as the mood strikes.

3) price not being an issue, since most e-books are the same or cheaper than their printed cousins for current releases, the environmental impact of reducing the need for paper could be huge (assuming the ebook readers do catch on);

4) time to release a book can be significantly reduced -- prepare the text, put into electronic format, plaster the electronic channels with advertising (imagine how many sales could be generated if publishers would advertise right here on this forum!) and a book could be in the public's hands in a few weeks, instead of the sometimes up to a year delay currently occuring in the publishing industry.

There is much to be positive about in this medium, and the newer generation (the 505) may well have already solved your complaints about contrast and font clarity.

So don't give up -- it's still in its infancy, but with the Sony500 and 505 and now with the Kindle and the cybook, it has made a huge leap forward from the older versions which were much more like holding a heavy hard-bound book and were harsher on the eyes.

As with any new technology, we who are early-adopters need to be prosletyzers to get more converts so the corporations (who, after all, are in business to make money) can see there is a growing market.

And be sure to contact all your favorite authors AND their publishers and encourage them to bring out Sony versions of their books, and then BUY them to back up your requests. Authors and publishers, just like electronic manufacturers, are in business to make money, so as long as they can see there is money to be made they'll pursue (albeit at a glacially slow pace) new things.

[alexqwerty159]

Hi David,
I agree 100% about the usefulness of e-readers. I'm just sometimes wondering why I have had a hard time to capture the interest of my friends about it (so yes, I'm proselytising, but failing so far !). Personally, despite my criticisms, I'm very happy with the reader.

You're right though, perhaps it's early times yet. I really hope this catches on, not only for personal reasons (i.e. better and cheaper e-readers) but it's a great technology in general. Instant easily-readable knowledge/entertainment without taking up space and little environmental impact !

About the fonts, it's not that any font I prefer is better than the inbuilt, seems that all the libprs500 fonts are miles ahead. (keeping subjective preferences out of it, and character count stable).

I'm quite curious to see if anyone managed to replace the inbuilt fonts and if page turning speed increased.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by alexqwerty159

The screen background (even under good lighting) is quite grey (as many have said official photos are a bit deceiving) and the letters much less clear than a paperback. So I've found there is a big trade off.

The 2nd generation screen of the 505 (and the CyBook Gen3, Kindle, etc) is hugely better than the screen of your 500. The background is lighter, the letters are darker - it's much more "contrasty". When I had a 500, I found that I needed to use a reading light to read in normal artificial light. With my Gen3 I can read in any light that I could read a paper book in.

[kacir]

Originally Posted by alexqwerty159

To continue a little on the font/delay trade off, why is it that the libprs-500 embedded fonts look so much better ?

because of hinting. See below.

My personal preference is to use built-in sans-serif font.
So I create an rtf file of the book I wish to read. In rtf file I set:
- page margins to 0.01
- font to some generic sans-serif (like helvetica or arial), size 16
- intendation for the lines to some value like 0.5cm

Explanation:

- page margins to 0.01 - so I can cram as much text on the page as possible. It really doesn't make sense to have margins on a small display. Margins are leftovers from the time books were typeset for printing. It is much like the first cars were resembling a horse buggy without a horse

- font to some generic sans-serif (like helvetica arial), size 16 so the reader uses its built-in sans-serif font. Again, a serif font is much more readable than sans-serif in a *printed* book. For a low resolution display sans-serif is much, much more readable. Please notice that even *this* text, just like the vast majority of text on a well designed web sites, is sans-serif See wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serif_font
Quote from wikipedia:
While in print serifed fonts are considered more readable, sans-serif is considered more legible on computer screens.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sans-serif
Quote from wikipedia:
Sans-serif fonts have become the de facto standard for body text on-screen, especially online. It has been suggested that this is because the small size of the font causes serif fonts to appear excessively cluttered on the screen.

- intendation for the lines to some value like 0.5cm so you can see where paragraph begins without having to have large space between paragraphs.

in Sony Reader PRS500 the built-in sans-serif font is heavily hinted, so it has a very nice, well defined, high contrast "crisp" outlines. Please see hinting at wikipedia for explanatioon http://en.wikipedia.rg/wiki/Hinting
quote from wikipedia:
One aspect of TrueType hinting is grid-fitting, which modifies the height and width of font characters to line up to the set pixel grid of screen display.

[tgharold]

On the 505, I still turn on about one more light in the room then with a paperback book. So the contrast, while good, still needs a bit of help from ambient light to be comfortable.

[AnemicOak]

Originally Posted by tgharold

On the 505, I still turn on about one more light in the room then with a paperback book. So the contrast, while good, still needs a bit of help from ambient light to be comfortable.

I think it's an individual thing. I find a bedside lamp is all I need when reading before I go to sleep, not much light at all. Same as I did for a dead tree book.

[alexqwerty159]

I'm slowly getting used to reading even with moderate lighting, perhaps it functions well as a sleeping aid like this !

Kacir, that was informative ! I know very little about fonts and I'm a little lost (hinting, interpolations, rasterisations, antialiasing etc). So you're saying that perhaps libprs500
utilises space more effectively (with between-letter/line indentations) so the same line can appear much bolder than any inbuild font ? And the reason all libprs500 fonts appear to me so much better is subjective after all (I instictively pay attention more to the actual letters and less to the space and overall look of the page/reading experience) ?

I've been aiming for a similar setup, sans serif 15-16 size with almost zero margins.

But here's what I don't get:
If I create such an rtf file (with wordpad or open office) and I import it directly to PRS-500 then the reader formats it at first, yes Arial of the correct size show up
but it losses a lot of set up info. (lines are cut mid screen but most importantly margins are not kept, it seems the reader automatically assigns it's own margins which are too big especially the top and bottom one).

If I convert the rtf file with Libprs500 before transfering it, I have to wait more than 5-7 mins for the conversion, I give up before the end, it's too long.

Am I missing something ? Perhaps I need other software (Connect or Bookdesigner) to do what you say ?

Alex

[dhbailey]

One thing you're missing is patience -- remember that once the file is converted you don't have to convert it over and over again. And the 5-7 minute wait is due to the font embedding. I don't imagine that time will get cut down at all, due to the heavy processing required.

The eBook library program has a built-in conversion routine for the RTF files, which relies on your having Word installed.

Have you tried saving as plain-text files, but with an arial font, and then simply moving the text file over to the reader?

[kacir]

Originally Posted by alexqwerty159

Kacir, that was informative ! I know very little about fonts and I'm a little lost (hinting, interpolations, rasterisations, antialiasing etc). So you're saying that perhaps libprs500
utilises space more effectively (with between-letter/line indentations) so the same line can appear much bolder than any inbuild font ?

Imagine a capital i letter.
It appears as a single straight plain line.
The height of the letter I is (I am going to invent some numbers here, just as an example) the height is 20.7 pixels. The width is 2.3 pixels. With hinting the I letter is forced to align with pixel grid, so the height will be rounded to 20.0 pixels and its width will be rounded to 2 pixels. As a result two letters, one 16 and the other 16.5 point height will appear to be the same.
The lines of the hinted font are aligned to the borders of the pixels.
A picture is worth more than a thousand words, so have a look at this
http://www.microsoft.com/typography/...ingVersus.mspx
For a good simple explanation see
http://www.joelonsoftware.com/items/2007/06/12.html

Originally Posted by alexqwerty159

But here's what I don't get:
If I create such an rtf file (with wordpad or open office) and I import it directly to PRS-500 then the reader formats it at first, yes Arial of the correct size show up
but it losses a lot of set up info. (lines are cut mid screen but most importantly margins are not kept, it seems the reader automatically assigns it's own margins which are too big especially the top and bottom one).

I use OpenOffice.org Writer to format books.
Import text - open doc, rtf, txt document or paste text
select all text,
set font to arial - jus type arial to the font name box if you are using Linux and do not have arial installed. It works on my Mint Linux instalation ;-)
set font size to 16
select menu Format, Paragraph
select First line intend 0.5cm
select space after paragraph 0.2cm
select justification to Left
Select menu Format, Page
set all page margins to 0.01cm (you can not use 0cm in rtf)
Save as rtf file.
That is it.

Please experiment until you find layout that you really like.
Then record a macro to format your texts.

I have included an example
I have formatted Fairy Tales, by the Grimm Brothers from Project Gutenberg to demonstrate setting of font type, size and margins.
Otherwise this is not properly formated, just quick (it took me less than 2 minutes) example.

[alexqwerty159]

Ah, that's why the librprs500 fonts are fuller/bolder than Sony's !
I guess they are also less crisp/clear, as on the link above (although they still look fine on the e-reader in my eyes).

Anyway, thanks Kacir for taking the time to explain. I now realise that I didn't keep subjective experiences out of it in my comparison, as I confidently declared above !

Thanks for uploading the file also, it turns out there was no problem after all, I had used exactly the same settings. It was just a big stupid coincidence, the work documents I used had blank lines, they happened to fall regularly at the end of each converted page, so I thought the margins were not converted.

David, no matter the font, any plain text file is interpreted as serif in my reader, not sans serif. You're right though, patience is not one my virtues. Also, I often have to quickly browse books while away from home due to my work, so slow page turns (and 5-10 mins to convert each) would be a nightmare.

[Jeeves]

With my PRS 505 I can assure you, the screen is much MUCH better than even the original hardcover paper book. So the screen is not an issue for me. For some other things... next time
If the situation is THAT bad with the 500, just replace it with 505.

[JSWolf]

So would it be better to replace Dutch Roman with Times New Roman in the 500/505?

[levirothschild]

Hi,
I want to see how pdf files look like natively on the Sony reader.
I live in Norway and then dont sell it here.
Is anyone willing to recieve two pdf files from me and take couple of pictures of how they look on the reader?
Levi.

p,s
Its wrong of me, but I have posted the same question at another thread. Kind of desperate to find someone who can help me.