Kobo >>>>>>>> Kindle

explain why you think this

i like my paperwhite

>>57952125

I fucking hate kindle doesn't identify pages, but percentages and some other non page bullshit. Annoys the shit out of me.

The mere fact that it's not Amazon makes it superior.

>>57952140
>no shitty mobi
>more portable
>custom fonts
kindle is garbage that's not worth the time.

File: Koko the gorilla.jpg (137KB, 625x625px) Image search: [Google]

137KB, 625x625px

>>57952125
Koko >>>>>> Kobo

>>57952125
how do ebooks handle .pdf

>>57952193
>tfw no other species to talk to
humans are fucking gay i want to talk to someone else we're all faggots.

aside from the advantages of battery life and being able to read in direct sunlight, is e-ink a meme? how could a front lit e-ink screen really be easier on the eyes than a back lit lcd screen? sound like bro science to me.

>tfw still on my kindle keyboard in mint condition

>>57952140
they both get their screens from the same taiwan manufacturer so the only difference is in the little things & price.

>>57952183
>mobi
irrelevant.

>more portable
depends on what model.

>custom fonts
you can install custom fonts on a kindle.

>>57952250
>proprietary format is irrelevant
Literally the only thing that matters. I have a kindle and I fucking hate it. KOReader is the only thing that keeps my piece of garbage functional.

>>57952364
just use cailbre, dummy.

>>57952140
>using the amazon swindle

File: inconsolata.jpg (348KB, 800x1422px) Image search: [Google]

348KB, 800x1422px

>>57952125
but kindle + callibre embedded font conversion is pretty comfy too anon

>>57952125
I have both, I prefer my paperwhite.

>>57952210
Just try it for yourself, faggot. You obviously researched enough and if you don't believe it, no one will change your opinion of it.

Kobo is better because they don't fall for the 6" only meme. 6" is fine for text, but for cantonese drawings, 6.8" or 7" is much better.

>>57952682
> t. Koboi manchild

>>57952739
A Two Dollar Gift Card has been sent to your One Click Amazon Address.

>>57952224
With the original leather case from Amazon

>reading

>>57952210
>how could a front lit e-ink screen really be easier on the eyes than a back lit lcd screen?
well
1. you don't need to use the frontlight
2. it is easier on the eyes because the light shines on the screen rather than directly your face

like, try using a tablet versus shining a small light on a paper book

the book won't exactly strain your eyes as bad

it is basically the same difference

File: girl_reading_by_zumadrian-d5xof31.jpg (127KB, 1024x594px) Image search: [Google]

127KB, 1024x594px

>>57952805
There is nothing wrong with reading.

In fact, there is something wrong with NOT reading.

File: jenna-is-not-amused.webm (175KB, 500x281px) Image search: [Google]

175KB, 500x281px

>>57952566
>no line spacing between paragraphs

e-readers are so easy to do right that the differences between the two are rather small when it comes to using them day to day

kobo supports more formats but conversion is easy & automated with calibre
amazon store is cheaper and better than kobo store but who wants to support that drm crap anyway
kobo has some settings more so they're nice if you want to use them
there are more accessories for kindles

none of these really matter much for many users, there is no better, just slightly different

if I was buying a new reader today, I'd go for kobo, probably

but I'm really happy using old kindle dx and kindle keyboard after my kobo glo hd broke down (due to user error, I fell asleep on it and broke the screen with my elbow when turning around)

>>57952923
Don't most modern copyrighted books come with DRM?

>>57952947
well, those stores tend to be even more locked down than just drm'd files

I prefer to buy (if I have to buy) directly from small-ish publishers, they tend to be less bad, sometimes they just watermark the files and tell you not to share

Nook glo light > all

>>57952663
i have an e-reader. it's great for the battery life and the e-ink screen is novel in how it simulates paper but i wouldn't say it's less straining to look at than an lcd.

>>57952816
>2. it is easier on the eyes because the light shines on the screen rather than directly your face
guess where the light goes after it hits the screen.

>>57953148
Why are you even arguing then?

>>57953177
what do you mean?

>>57953195
If you can't even notice any difference in eye strain between a regular e-ink screen and an LCD, it's pretty obvious you're just making shit up or you somehow made reality comform to your feelings.

No amount of facts is going to change your opinion on the subject, so just stop.

>>57953226
>No amount of facts
what facts?

>>57953148
>guess where the light goes after it hits the screen.
yeah, but it is only a reflection from a matte surface

have you ever read a real book? if you shine a lamp on it, the light reflects from it to your eyes, but it is definitely not the same as looking directly at a light (be it LCD or a lamp)

>>57953276
I guess e-ink is a meme to you, because you can't read.

>>57953278
just turn the lcd backlight down until it's as a comparable level of brightness.

>>57953295
explain to me how you think an e-ink screen reflecting the same intensity of light that an lcd is projecting will be less straining on the eyes.

>>57953375
Look directly at a lamp.
Now look at white wall where the lamp is reflecting its light to.

Are you really this retarded?

>>57953400
that's hardly the same. a more accurate comparison would be look at a white wall with a lamp shining on it and then look at diffuse, translucent wall with a lamp behind it. assuming you turn the lamp behind the wall down until both walls are emitting the same intensity of light, how will one be more difficult to look at?

>>57953498
You really are this retarded. Are you underage or whatever shitty country you're from never taught you optics during physics?

The light you see on an e-ink screen is reflected at you. The light you see on an LCD screen is shined directly at you.

>>57953574
>The light you see on an e-ink screen is reflected at you. The light you see on an LCD screen is shined directly at you.
this literally makes no difference. reflected light is still being "shined directly at you".

>>57953652
Please refer to >>57953226

>>57953679
explain to me how you think light reflected off a diffuse surface it less straining to the eyes than light shone through a diffuse surface if the intensity of both lights are the same when they leave the surface. if you can't do this then i'll assume it's you who doesn't understand optics.

>>57952923
what a sensible reply. have bought from nook, kindle, and now kobo.

all have been pretty great for reading.

>>57953498
An e-ink display is easier on the eyes because

(a) it's sharper than a computer monitor, although this isn't true when compared to smartphones

(b) it doesn't burn your eyes out when you look at it in the dark. that is to say you can turn it's backlight down all the way. just compare a kindle paperwhite with backlight set at 6 or 7 to a smartphone. 100% brightness will strain your eyes noticeably more.

>>57953742
>diffuse surface
You keep using that term, but I don't think you know what it means.

It is not reflected off an LCD screen. An LCD screen is basically a lamp. Just because there are pixels on the way doesn't mean that it's suddenly a 'diffuse surface'.

In fact, an e-ink screen is a 'diffuse surface'. An LCD screen is not. But you don't even know what that means, so...

Anyways. Even if you could dim down an LCD to match a backlit e-ink screen (which you can't), the e-ink screen is a 'diffuse surface' while an LCD screen is just a 'light source'.

>>57953814
You're being a moron. The lightsource / reflection surface doesn't matter if it's the same amount of light that reaches your eyes.

Also, there are LED-backlit LCD screens.

>>57953814
an lcd has a diffuser behind the screen and in front of the back light. the light is shone through this diffuse surface.

>Even if you could dim down an LCD to match a backlit e-ink screen (which you can't)
the degree to which you can turn the back light down depends on the device, but with my tablet i can turn the back light down until the page is about the same brightness as the page of my e-reader in normally lit room. i could even make the lcd much dimmer than the e-ink screen by changing the colour of the page from white to grey.

>>57953965
>works for me

>>57953954
You know the LED backlights work exactly the same, right?

>>57953965
The difference is putting a piece of paper in front of a lamp instead of reflecting light on a piece of paper.

Are you really this stupid?

Also, the Shift key is between Ctrl and Caps Lock. If you are on a laptop computer, it should be between Fn and Caps Lock.

>>57953965
> but with my tablet i can turn the back light down until the page is about the same brightness as the page of my e-reader in normally lit room. i could even make the lcd much dimmer than the e-ink screen by changing the colour of the page from white to grey.
yeah but it really isn't realistic to read at such a low level, is it, you lose so much contrast that it stops being comfortable

w/ e ink you can read without the front light being on at all

>>57954034
Wait, so you're comparing a non-backlit e-reader used with room lights on, with a tablet?

>>57954087
No, he's comparing a phone with a front-lit e-ink reader and going 'hurr durr same amount of light reaches your eyes'.

You know, the e-readers that shine a few LEDs indirectly on the screen from behind the bezel. They aren't actually backlit.

>>57954034
>The difference is putting a piece of paper in front of a lamp instead of reflecting light on a piece of paper.
no it would be like the difference between shining a lamp on a piece of paper and stacking multiple sheets of paper in front of the lamp until the brightness matched.

>>57954076
the contrast is about the same because the black level comes down with the white level as you turn the backlight down.

>>57954116
Go to a dark room, pull out your phone and see how much light it casts.

Then do the same with your e-reader.

Then realize you're a fucking idiot.

>>57954130
i was walking about a well lit room. but even in a pitch black room if i turn the backlight right down and change the page colour to grey it's extremely dim. it will be bright enough to read but will have trouble illuminating a wall any further than a few inches away.

>>57954184
In a well lit room you don't need the backlight on an e-reader.

Just do the fucking test you sperg.

>>57954206
all the test will prove is that lcds emit light which isn't something i'm contesting. i'm asking how light reflected off a diffuse surface would be less eye straining than light shone through a diffuse material assuming the light is the same brightness when it reaches your eyes.

>>57954278
Because it's not the same brightness. You can clearly see an LCD emits more light. If that isn't somehow enough to convince you, then you should just continue living in your little bubble where reality bends to your will and facts can't reach you.

>>57953148
>but i wouldn't say it's less straining to look at than an lcd
It's the same as looking at a piece of paper. It is nothing like looking at an LCD where there is actual light coming from it

>>57952194
badly, unless you have a big one to display it in reasonable size

>>57954278
lets put it this way:

the e-reader emits zero light itself
the lcd emits at least some light, generally thins can't be that low if the room is indeed lit

if used in the same "well-lit room" under similar circumstances, using the e-reader should always end up with less light reaching your eyes - and none of the light comes directly from the device, which is often argued to lessen eye fatigue

>>57954310
>You can clearly see an LCD emits more light.
except that's not necessarily true. this is the whole reason why e-readers are better for reading in direct sunlight. most phones/tablets will usually allow you to turn the backlight down until the brightness of the light it emits is about the same as the brightness an e-reader will reflect in a normally lit room.

>>57954359
>if used in the same "well-lit room" under similar circumstances, using the e-reader should always end up with less light reaching your eyes
there's absolutely no reason for this to be true given that you're able to adjust both the backlight of the lcd and the colour of the page. as i said i can make my tablet considerably dimmer than my e-reader in a well lit room by turning the backlight right down and changing the page colour to grey.

>>57954464
Are you actually serious? You think LCDs don't reflect any light at all? They reflect the same amount as an e-ink screen (if they're matte) if not more (if they're glossy, which is usually the case).

You just can't see it, because it emits too much light.

>>57954510
well if they were matte which almost no phones or tablets are it would be a bit different, but with a glossy screen it's only really going to make a difference if you're reflecting a bright light source directly into your eyes.

>You just can't see it, because it emits too much light.
what are you even trying to say? if you're out in the sun the reason you won't be able to see your lcd is because it emits too little light not too much. e-readers are better for reading the sun because they able to reflect more more light than an lcd can emit.

>>57952874
Increased line spacing or indentation. Never both.

>>57954628
I'm saying that in a "well-lit room", an LCD will emit more light than an e-ink reader reflects. It will also reflect a similar amount of light, but that isn't visible because it emits more than it reflects.

But you are such a goddamn retard and you're grasping so hard for every little fucking stupid argument you can logic-leap to amid your broken understanding of both English and physics that you can't even understand that. Or anything.

>>57952157
You can change that

>>57954702
>I'm saying that in a "well-lit room", an LCD will emit more light than an e-ink reader reflects.
here's an extreme example since this concept seem to be so hard for you to understand: if you turn the backlight down and display a pure black image on an lcd the amount of light total, both emitted and reflected, will be less than the amount of light reflected off an e-ink screen displaying a white image.

the amount of light coming from an lcd will depend on the backlight and the state of the pixels. now do you understand how an lcd screen with the back light turned down and the page colour set to grey could appear less bright than an e-ink screen in a well lit room?

i don't know how much more simple i could make it. a retard could understand this.

>>57954854
>both emitted and reflected
Do the dark room test I told you to, then.

You clearly don't understand how any display technology at all works.

>>57954881
at this point i'm just going to assume you're trolling.

>>57954896
>LALALA CAN'T HEAR YOU
Nice argument! Wow! I have no comeback to that.

>>57952125

>buy Sony readers for years
>PRS-505 glorious e-reader with tons of physical buttons, aluminum build quality
>PRS-T2 buttons cut to down to bare minimum, but slimmer than a stack of 35 sheets of printer paper, plastic but solid. easily pocketable
>decide to try kindle since amazon rocks
>Paperwhite 2-huge, massive, heavy as fuck reader. Backlight is a streaky mess that looks like shit. OS is terrible. No fonts, spacing is a fucking mess with stretched words. Creaky cheap plastic that has already cracked.

So I want a new e-reader to replace this Kindle trash. Since Sony is out, what would you recommend?

>>57955111
You can install KOReader on your paperwhite first, should fix all of the software issues.

>>57954854
> now do you understand how an lcd screen with the back light turned down and the page colour set to grey could appear less bright than an e-ink screen in a well lit room?
But is it actually readable like that? I really doubt it.

>>57955242
in a completely dark room room it's perfectly readable. in a well lit room just turning the backlight down is sufficient.

>>57955166

I am less than enthused about the hardware too. But if that can fix the software I'll give it a shot.

Can I still sync between cellphone and e-reader with that software? That was one of the few festures I liked of the software.

>>57955394
Nope, you can't.

>>57954321
>what is Koreader

>>57952193
#dicksout

File: kobo-aura-one-natural-light-800x533-c.jpg (109KB, 800x533px) Image search: [Google]

109KB, 800x533px

>All this arguing about the light
The Kobo Aura has a setting to change the temperature of the light.

>>57952125
Kindle is better.

>>57954805

oh thanks, locations they use locations, but pages? I'll check on that, thanks

Is the new Kobo One screen big enough for manga?

Do any e-readers have an orange backlight mode for night reading yet?

>>57956344
>>57956023

>>57956323
I have an Aura H2O with the 6.8" screen and it's pretty good, even for double pages. With the extra inch, it should be about perfect.

>>57956023

What about the H20?

Bathtub reading is best.

>>57956633
Kobo Aura One is also waterproof. It doen't even need the cover for the microUSB port either.

Neither of them actually work underwater, as the touchscreen doesn't function when wet. You have to dry it off before it recognizes you again. But it's safe if you drop it.

>>57956633
>sent early
T-thanks Captcha.

But no, the Kobo Aura H2O doesn't have that feature.

File: stygiomedusa gigantea.jpg (39KB, 450x307px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 450x307px

So, for those of us with a shit android tablet lying around, what e-reader is best for reading text/pdf without too much eye fatigue? Is that even a thing? What about comics?

>>57956729
>Ereader is waterproof
when the fuck would this feature be used? No one read paper books underwater so why would anyone start now?

>>57956821
I have no fucking idea. As I said, they're not "actually" waterproof, as you can't use them if they're wet, but they survive contact with water.

It's more for durability than usability.

>>57952125
This, but KOReader makes it so much better. Took me half an hour to set up, but reading PDFs on my Aura isn't hellish now.
The SD card slot on Kobo is why I bought it; fuck Kindle's "4GB only" shit. They want you to buy from them, whereas Kobo doesn't give as much of a shit.
>MAM + AR + Apollo + opendirectories + seedbox-laptop running Calibre and Ampache + Kobo, rooted + flashed Amazon Fire, CFWed 3DS and Henkaku Vita
Haven't paid for a piece of media in months.

alright, you all seem like the people that would be able to answer this question for me:

im interested in an ereader, but my biggest problem with the kindle (the only one ive had experience with) is that there is no option to read each page of the ebook as if it were its 1:1 counterpart of the paper book.

what i want is to be able to have the exact same page of the paper book, just on the screen instead. same spacing, line breaks, etc. - and when i turn the page, i get another 1:1 copy of the subsequent page.

i realize there are issues with font size and resolution and screen size... but does such a device/format exist? - when i used a kindle i always felt adrift in text, not really sure of how far id gone in a chapter/page, and not really sure of how far id be going to finish a chapter or page.

the visual blocking and layout of paper pages is really beneficial for this.

>>57952125
they are all the same
they all have the same shitty e ink screen
the end result is also the same, you read a fucking book

if you want a gadget get a tablet

>>57956976
PDF files.

>>57956976
Must be severely debilitating to have autism this bad.

>>57956992

is there a device better suited to viewing PDFs in this scenario? are ebooks commonly distributed (or shared online) in PDF?

>>57957004
(You)

>>57957031
Bigger the better for PDFs, pretty much.

And no. People prefer ebooks in the mobi or epub format because they reflow to fit screen size and formatting.Y

And while PDFs can be accurate to paperback books because formatting and page sizes are preserved, they aren't always.

Besides, multiple releases of the same paper book will be different anyways.

You'll find that very few people care about the things you do in regards to this.

>>57957102
got it, thanks.

its not make or break, and admittedly it was many years ago i had played around with a kindle. i see the up side to having dynamic reflow and being able to adjust font face and size.

maybe the few books i tried were just poorly laid out.

thanks for the info.

>>57956821
>Flip phone is waterproof
when the fug would this feature be used? No one uses flip phones underwater so why would anyone start now?

>>57957222
>his kindle only has 512MB of RAM

Any deals on ereaders?

Might buy one on ebay after Christmas since the typical person would rather have an iPad. Looking for a kobo, but will settle for amazon if its cheap enough.

>>57957873
if you keep an eye on woot they have old model kindles (usually the one with the keyboard) for super cheap. think i got one shipped for like $25.

sometimes they show up in the sellout section, so you have to scroll through stuff to find it. sometimes its on the computers/tech/main sale though too.

So how is the speed and software in the latest models? I have an old Kindle keyboard that is very slow when browsing the library and using the included experimental browser. I also have a Kobo aura HD that has a very nice display but it's also pretty slow when doing anything more demanding than reading like browsing and viewing comics. Any progress in recent years?

File: a.jpg (392KB, 1920x1280px) Image search: [Google]

392KB, 1920x1280px

I'll stick to my oasis

>>57958125
the length-wise asymmetry of this thing bothers me

> brand loyalty

> ever

File: waiting for color ereaders.jpg (366KB, 1600x1200px) Image search: [Google]

366KB, 1600x1200px

Kill me.

Where do yall go for downloading filed for your kindles and whatnots anyhow?

>>57958828
Why do you even want a color e-reader?

>>57958876
Periodicals.

It's 90% of what I read vs novels and such.

>>57958889
Huh. That's a fair point, I guess. A periodical would be pretty fucky to format in the standard e-reader size of 6" though, so you'd need a color e-reader that's larger than average.

>>57958862
libgen is the best way to go pretty much

>>57956281
As i know pages are only in books from amazon store

>>57952125

Kobo is more pirate friendly, reason enough.

>>57953148
So ambient reflective light is the same as staring into the sun?

>>57956778
>shit android tablet lying around
i use aldiko
i'm sure it is among the top if not the best.

>>57956903
>KOReader
>not available for shitty android 7" tablets.
fuck being in a shitty 3rd world country where they don't even sell kobo yet.

File: kobo glo hd.jpg (76KB, 1404x792px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 1404x792px

Why did (((they))) kill Kobo Glo HD?
It's always """out of stock""" now.
Was it just too good for the price?

>>57960716
wasn't it pretty expensive though?

I mean, I'm pretty sure they're currently selling Kobo Auras for 90-100 euros here, which are pretty similar to Kobo Glo HD - which was always about 150-160 (yeahh the Glo HD had a higher resolution screen but does it really matter for books? nah, definitely doesn't matter 60 euros much)

>>57961421
It was like $90 new on ebay.

>>57960716
actually, reading some reviews people complain about stuff. but if you get it for cheap it might be worth it anyway.

>>57960716
I had one but the screen broke

one really funny thing about it: its memory is a microsd card, not attached in there or anything, if you get the back open you can just pick up the card from there

silly they didn't make it officially expandable when it uses microsd either way (no one should need more than 4 GB for regular books but anyway)

File: 1474384544044.jpg (48KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 500x500px

Got this thing years ago, tried recently new ones why did e-ink tech degrade over time?

Can read 10 hours a day for two weeks easily with this one.

>>57957222
how

The only valid reason to not use kindle is because they are actually deleting your files if a book you bought got taken down on amazon. Fuck this orwellian bullshit. If you are only pirating books then I guess it doesn't matter which one you use, both of them support KOreader.

Kobo Aura One is the perfect ereader yet cost $320 AUD, what, the, fuck

>>57952125
if it opens both epub an mobi, then yes
bonus points for rewrapping text in shitty pdfs
(poorfag's trekstor does that)

>>57961939
Does KOreader let you use epub on kindle?

>>57961785
They made it more attractive for normies who just want to look smart by making it thinner, lighter and by removing physical buttons.

>>57962637
https://github.com/koreader/koreader
It does. You need to find your own way of installing that thing, though.

>>57962210
i'm hopping the price will go down by the time a new model is brought out.
as far as e-readers go, a even a 5 year old model is great.

>>57963086
Do you know when a new model is planned to release? I'm really considering paying $300 for it pretty soon, justifying it by it pretty much being unlimited books and will easily last 5 years

I just use my phone. Does an e reader give less eye strain?

>>57963170
>when
no one knows, sorry.
may be they'll try to get a bit of a competition going and a 12 month release cycle.
may be it'll take 3 years for the next new e-reader model.

>easily last 5 years
try a decade with normal care.

File: maxresdefault.jpg (127KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

127KB, 1920x1080px

>>57958928
This is unironically one of my goals. I really want one of these, but they're insanely expensive.

>>57963185
exponentially, if you compare it with a continuous use of your phone for several hours at a time.

Been pretty happy with my Kobo H2O for a year or two now. Comfy as fuck to go sit in the hot tub and read without stressing.

>>57963257
What is this?

It's ... beautiful.

>>57956023
I just leave the light off 99% of the time anyway. Much nicer on the eyes to simply have the room itself be adequately lit, I don't need the page itself to be emitting light.

>>57959897
Both are about equally pirate friendly, honestly. EPUBs are slightly more common than AZW3 (don't download MOBI, it's an outdated format with less features and formatting often doesn't look as nice) but converting between the two takes all of two seconds in Calibre, and is pretty much lossless as far as I can tell.

>>57963314
Eh, it looks nice but imagine lugging that huge piece of shit around. You'd look like a total dork. Only really practical if you leave it in one place and never move it, unless it can fold up or something.

>>57963349
Also occurs to me that you can only really use it laying flat on a desk, and I prefer to angle my e-reader so my eyes are more perpendicular when reading.

Also occasionally like to lay on my back in bed and hold it over me with one hand as I read, seems it would be hard to do that with this thing.

>>57958862
gutenberg.org

>>57959042
Is libgen better than Bibliotik?

>>57963314
it's the Sony Digital Paper. it's amazing.

>>57963376
nothing stopping you from using it like a (big) book

>>57960185
Really? It should work using the Android release here:
https://github.com/koreader/koreader/releases

File: _MG_0006.jpg (1MB, 1958x1305px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1958x1305px

There is only one eReader worth speaking of.

I wanted to buy an ereader but I couldn't find any good one.

It's either expensive or shit. And reading pdf is just shit. Fucking how? This technology has been around for years.

>>57953742
>if the intensity of both lights are the same when they leave the surface.

except they arent

youre correct that a reflection on paper is still straining, think reading a book in the dark with flashlight;

then >>57953965 do the same with a tablet that can dim the screen low enough, in a dark room wearing a black sky mask, its arguably the same strain in pitch dark room;

now in your room, during the afternoon, turn your lcd down, is it as pitch dark as looking to a piece of charcoal inside a potato chips tube ?
not by a huge margin right?

so all other use cases that aren not a pitch dark room wearing a black sky mask, the LCD has to be lit quite above the ambient luminosity to compensate for the already existing difuse light relfecting on its surface.


and thats why the "mental experiment" of imagining a translucent wall with backlight is wrong too, back lit billboard advertising uses opaque characters on TOP of the backlight vynil, thats not analogous to an LCD at all, where theres a glass above the letters and the letters arent pitch dark like a piece of vynil with matte paint in it.


in any case, all the butt mad anons ITT claiming e-ink is autism analogous to audiophiles custom hardware, are probably 18yo with brand new retinas, if they can still sit in front of an LCD for 10hours and feel nothing, i am only too happy for them, fortunatelly for them, when they begin to feel the strain, e-ink will be broadly avaiable, thank us e-ink autists 10 years from now for sponsoring thetechnology mkay

>>57966021
you're forgetting that the amount of light a powered down lcd reflects is much less than the amount a powered down e-ink screen does.