More on TechnologyTell: Gadget News | Apple News
Are e-book devices too thin?
February 19, 2009 | 3:16 pm
|
By Michael Harris, Assoc. Prof., Information Systems, Indiana U. - Southeast
Moderator’s note: I myself am curious if thinness might mean a bit more bending of the case—and more risk to the E Ink display. – D.R.
How big should an e-book device be? That’s the topic of a discussion at MobileRead, starting on the thread’s page 94.
Thin is in if you go by the current buzz. One of the Kindle 2′s biggest changes is its new sleek form factor. Astak, represented by RobertB on MobileRead, drew thousands of visitors at CES and the company noted: "CES showed thin is what the buying public wants."
It’s clear that thin is sexy, but is it functional?
When you read a novel, you spend hours interacting with the physical medium. That can mean hours spent holding a knife-thin device by grasping a narrow bezel. Several MobileRead commenters have pointed to the Rocket and RCA book readers as devices that are comfortable to hold. Such reader devices have a meatier, curved grip that is easier to grasp.
The dilemma appears to be that the mass-market likes thin, but that some experienced users prefer something easier to hold. One compromise that has been suggested is the creation of a case that provides more surface area for the device. Of course, the tradeoff is that the case would take up more room in your briefcase or luggage.
What do you think? Thin and light for portability? Or, thicker to make it easier to grasp?
|
Previous
SUBSCRIBE TO RSS
Comments:
Thin for those who want it, with form-fitting cases in various styles for those who want a better grip. Everyone gets what they want, the secondary market starts building (wouldn’t you like a Moleskin bookjacket?) and you don’t have to come up with a compromise design that doesn’t satisfy anyone.
I too am concerned about the thinness vs. durability question.
Certainly a thinner object is more likely to flex (all other things equal) but different materials can provide the stiffness that say an eink screen might need to handle the stress so to speak. Thus the Kindle2 has an alloy back plate. Will it prove to be stiff enough? Time will tell.
I’m one of those that rarely use my Kindle sans its stock cover. I find it too tricky to hold without the cover plus I feel that the cover provides additional protection from flexing and gouges when tossed into my bag. When I get my Kindle2 next week I doubt that I will use it sans cover either.
I also keep my iPod Touch in a flip case – so maybe I just like to dress my toys up
I don’t own a Kindle yet, but expect to buy a new one very soon. My reaction to the ultra thin Kindle when I saw it was that it would be fragile. I expect to buy a cover and use it with that most of the time. The only drawback would be a diminishing of the volume of the speaker (which is in the back) for the verbal reading of text (a great feature, I believe).
I like my Kindle 1 without a case – with the case it was too heavy and thick. I am wondering whether the Kindle 2 I ordered will be harder to grasp. If it is, I’ll go with one of the leather covers that are available and fold it back when reading.
I like my reader being thin and light. I have a Sony PRS-700 which is about 10 ounces and fairly thin, tho by no means the thinnest on the market. The flex issue will go away when the new bigger flex screens come into play this year and next. The leather cover that came with the 700 gives me both a quality book feel (like being bound in leather), a nice smell, and a good grip. Covers with built in lights or extra battery capacity could satify those that want a thicker gripping surface or more heft.
I never use my K1 without a case. In fact, I like the extra heft of tri-fold Stylzworld case best of all.
David Berlind, a columnist for Informationweek, describes the accidental destruction of two fragile Kindles:
Kindles are very expensive, and in a comment above HeavyG raises the question of durability. If the first version of the Kindle is fragile then what degree of ruggedness can be expected from the new thinner Kindle 2? Perhaps a container or cover is needed at least for transportation.
For me, is going to be better with a cheaper device than a thin one. the cheaper the better.
Has it occurred to anyone just why e-book devices could have disputed size, weight, thickness, or debated navigation features or preferences of shape? It is because e-book transmissions convey no physical features, none at all. The reader is left to synthesize or prefer something to hang on to.
Paper books convey all their physical features across a magnitude of about 1 to 100 in weight, size, thickness, etc. In fact each paper book transmission is physically different. Although the reader does not need to specify these features, there is ample variety and scope for preference. E-book advocates mention the font size option because it is a rare exception to the insipid conformity of each transmission to the same screen.
And here I thought you could never be too rich or too thin!
I used to own an Ebookwise and it was an unwieldy monster. The hand-grip on it is as thick as a six hundred page book. It’s huge, and uncomfortable to read for more than a few minutes. When I switched to a Sony PRS-500 it was a great relief. One of the things I enjoy most about it is that it’s thinner than the thinnest book I’ll ever read. I could definitely go thinner, it’s great to read one handed, comfortably, for hours. With a book it’s not comfortable to read one handed for longer than a few minutes, but these thin devices make it much easier. For me, the ideal thickness would be as thick as a single sheet of paper.
Glass is simply no good — to be robust it must become too heavy and thick. I cracked my Iliad, while in its cover by simply pushing my bag (which had nothing hard in it), I now have a fine crack in the e-ink strata that drives me insane.
Plastics are the only way to go, robust and light, likely to be durable and useable with the minimum of care, just like my dog-eared books that have been pushed in and out of bags, propped in corners and used as placemats.
The issue of thinness can be corrected by covers, but I cannot safely prop-up a bulky and fragile glass reader, or stack two of three on top of one another as I read (I tend to read a number of things at once, as the mood takes me), plus when researching I would love to have a desk littered by readers.
Thin and glass fronted does not sound a good combination, thin and plastic – now that is another thing.
open to be read and closed to be protected is the legacy solution. Most cell phones adopted this configuration.
Contrarily, Clark, I like the battery bulge of the eBookwise, since it makes for a more comfortable and far more secure grip. I can securely hold it in any position and not even require a thumb. It could weigh less, yes, but on ergonomics it beats e-ink readers handily.