3 ms·
>better contrast As a former kindle dx owner, I don't see that this changes anything. The real problem is the glacial refresh rate, which means the iPad is sti
by Herring 16y ago
>better contrast
As a former kindle dx owner, I don't see that this changes anything. The real problem is the glacial refresh rate, which means the iPad is still a much better reader.
- WorkerBee 16y agoThe kindle uses ePaper, which as you say has the disadvantage of a slow refresh rate, but the advantage that it is better visible in strong light. Do you find that this trade-off is in the iPad's favour? i.e. that you never read in strong light, but all the books that you read require animation?
- c1sc0 16y agoFor me the major downside of the iPad for reading is not the lack of strong light tolerance, but the annoying glare on the screen. For me, the ipad is in the 'good-enough' league of eBooks.
- Herring 16y agoEasily in the ipad's favor, yes. You encounter problems with the refresh rate when trying to read somewhat more complex books, eg anything that requires flipping back/forth, or large scanned books. Then the kindle browser is horrible, & I've been downloading educational videos from iTunes, etc. Id go as far as to say the kindle is only good for novels. But yeah, the iPad glare is pretty bad, I have to read indoors.
- c1sc0 16y agoI was surprised to find out how adequate the iPad is as a book reader, especially when using Amazon's Kindle app. I ended up buying more books from Amazon than from Apple because of the better choice available on Amazon's store.