6 ms·
I want a phone that I can read books on, and spend quality time with, rather than reading crappy stuff like Twitter. I fully expect to buy a foldable (not sure
by jblow 8y ago
I want a phone that I can read books on, and spend quality time with, rather than reading crappy stuff like Twitter. I fully expect to buy a foldable (not sure which one) and would easily pay $2500+ for it.
(It's not like I can buy laptops any more, since those are all garbage even when I pay $4000 for a supposedly high-end system, so I certainly have spare device money laying around!)
- goatlover 8y agoKindles are cheap and light, if digital reading is your goal.
- djhworld 8y agoI often read PDF versions of books (especially technical books) or PDFs of academic papers etc I've never been able to view these properly on a kindle. Well, last time I tried anyway, is it better now?
- jshevek 8y agoA foldable phone would be great for PDFs. I often want to flip between pages quickly, which Kindles still can't do.
- YUMad 8y agoSony DPT-RP1.
- Shorel 8y agoKobo Aura One seems to be the right size for your use case.
- photojosh 8y agoYep, I'm currently reading my EPUBs and PDFs on an ancient iPad 3. I researched a newer solution and settled on a Kobo Aura One (or perhaps the Forma which came out only recently) running the open-source KOReader [0], which is apparently much better than the built-in app on the Kobos. But I'm too cheap to upgrade while the iPad still works. [0] http://koreader.rocks http://koreader.rocks
- Marsymars 8y agoI have an Aura One that I love (probably around 2k hours of use on it), but the PDF experience (of anything that can't be converted to epub anyway) is not good.
- jshevek 8y agoKindles are not phones, the parent said "I want a phone that I can read books on, and spend quality time with..." A foldable phone may meet his criteria, a Kindle would not.
- jblow 8y agoRight ... the point is, I can do higher-quality reading without carrying extra devices around.
- rrix2 8y agoHow do you access the kindle when you're not at home?
- jshevek 8y agoBased on the voting pattern at this point, I think several people may have misunderstood his last comment. He is the original person to post in support of a better phone based reading experience, not the Kindle advocate. So he prefers to carry one device, and uses his phone to read.
- rrix2 8y agoYeah, I'll admit I didn't notice that. My apologies.
- lwkl 8y agoAnd it does‘t have any distractions on it. When I‘m reading on my phone I always get distracted by messages or googling something. Most of my books are still physical books. It‘s weird but I often buy books based on their cover.
- leesec 8y agoAll laptops are garbage huh, that's a hot take.
- woolvalley 8y agoThe macbook and it's 3+ year butterfly keyboard debacle or windows 10 laptops with all of their spyware even when high end being his only 2 practical choices is what he is probably referring to.
- dzhiurgis 8y agoApple's phones are now faster than their laptops. I think it makes sense to have a folding computer, especially now that we have screen tech that enables it.
- _coveredInBees 8y ago*For very limited workloads - And those synthetic geekbench scores don't really count
- dzhiurgis 8y agoTry JS Octane benchmarks then. Or how do YOU benchmark devices? The real bottleneck is UI, not CPU's.
- esmi 8y ago*For very limited workloads
- deathanatos 8y agoIt isn't so much about the benchmark one uses. A CPU converts electricity to heat, and does computation as a side-effect. A CPU embedded in a laptop (or moreover, a desktop) is going to be able to convert more electricity into more heat — and more computation — by virtue of being able to better dissipate the heat due to having a larger surface area to do it over. (In addition to having active cooling — vents and fans — which I've yet to see on a phone.) Modern non-phone CPUs can have TDPs of more than 80W. If your phone did 80W, it would burn your hand. So, forgive me if I'm skeptical of any benchmark that says a phone outperforms a laptop. You're arguing that the phone CPU can get significantly better performance, do so with less power, and occupy a form factor smaller than what a laptop requires? Why would I not just manufacture a less space-constrained version of this chip (to make it cheaper) and stick it in a laptop? I Googled the specific benchmark you referenced. I'm not able to find results on it, but one of the top hits was this: https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2017/04/google-deprecates-octane-javascript-benchmark-because-everyone-is-basically-cheating/ https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2017/04/googl...