# How soon before a TouchScreen Kindle?



## DailyLunatic (Aug 4, 2009)

How soon before a Touch Screen Kindle?

I don't ask this question lightly, or just to get the latest buzz.  I'm holding off purchasing an e-reader until I can get one with the sized screen I feel I need (K2= screen too small, DX= footprint too large).

Sometime between Q4 2009 through Q1 of 2010 there will be yet another Kindle competitor coming out with an e-reader with a better screen size and little, if any increase in footprint to the K2.  Sony already has one, but is not affiliated with a major bookseller. iRex has just announced their new yet to be released reader has B&N as a partner.

I’d like to be able to say I’m holding off till Amazon comes out with Kindle “X”, but I'm not sure I can hold off the committee in my head for long.  Any thoughts?

Sterling
92.5% Pure


----------



## Forster (Mar 9, 2009)

Never I hope.


----------



## intinst (Dec 23, 2008)

Why would you want to read through all those fingerprints? I am sure it would drive me crazy. ( DW says crazier)


----------



## Joan Marie (Sep 3, 2009)

I would never buy a touchscreen anything myself bc having a pristine view of the words is the biggest factor for me. So no fingers and no stylus, please. Clarity is definitely impaired. Maybe for a phone that's fine but not where focused reading is the goal. JMHO.


----------



## Kind (Jan 28, 2009)

Yeah I don't know about a touch screen e-reader. It might happen, but not sure if Amazon will be the one to pull the trigger.


----------



## Ann in Arlington (Oct 27, 2008)

DailyLunatic said:


> How soon before a Touch Screen Kindle?


Amazon is traditionally -- even notoriously -- tight lipped about what it's got in the pipeline. And even with all the hoopla surrounding the B&N agreement and Sony's new devices, there are still not even any wild rumors about a new Kindle, let alone anything credible. So, the answer is. . .we don't know.

You could ask at Amazon, but they won't tell you anything.


----------



## LisaW. (Jun 1, 2009)

Has anyone ever used a touchscreen e-reader? Do you get fingerprints on the screen? Do you need a screen protector/cover so that you don't get smudges directly on the screen?

My sister reads books on her iPhone. While she says it's great, it's kind of a pain if she's eating and reading at the same time, because she has to use her greasy fingers to turn the page.


----------



## Rasputina (May 6, 2009)

We have one now, it's called kindle for iphone app LOL. I love mine. 

Yes fingerprints get on, it's a total non issue, it wipes off easily and I don't even see the fingerprints when I'm using it unless I tilt the screen in an unnatural way so I can see them in bright light. I don't use any type of screen protector.


----------



## Mike D. aka jmiked (Oct 28, 2008)

Rasputina said:


> We have one now, it's called kindle for iphone app LOL. I love mine.
> 
> Yes fingerprints get on, it's a total non issue, it wipes off easily and I don't even see the fingerprints when I'm using it unless I tilt the screen in an unnatural way so I can see them in bright light. I don't use any type of screen protector.


Agreed. The people here who go off on a rant about touchscreens come off as being a bit intolerant and unreasonable because apparently they don't want one available at all. Having had no problems with fingerprints on touchscreens, I'd prefer having a touch keypad than the awful keys on the Kindle.

Having said that, I have doubts about how well touchscreens would work with the eInk screen in regards typing. The refresh rate might be working against it.

Mike


----------



## Scheherazade (Apr 11, 2009)

I am horribly anal about even a spec of dust on my Kindle screen, I would go absolutely crazy if they made it touch screen so I really hope they don't.  And if they do I would like the option to still use buttons which would make the advantage of not as much real estate taken by the bevel moot.  Not to mention touch screens add that extra layer, no matter how thin, over the top of the screen and would probably affect clarity and I have yet to own a touch screen that didn't "fail" in some way.  My current phone has a discolored patch due to its touch screen, my old Garmin is showing a layer of pockmarks where the touch screen is, the old Nintendo DSs show a clear grid where their touch screen is even when they're new.

I just don't think because a technology is available that it has to be thrown into every application on the market.  Ereaders are one place where I just don't think we need touch screens.  The whole point is to mimic a book and every bit of anything that comes between my eyes and the text are going to work against those ends, whether it's a thin film for a touch screen, a centimeter of space for side lighting, a smudge or a spec of dust... I just don't want it there and I definitely don't want more components to worry about failing.


----------



## Rasputina (May 6, 2009)

jmiked said:


> Agreed. The people here who go off on a rant about touchscreens come off as being a bit intolerant and unreasonable because apparently they don't want one available at all. Having had no problems with fingerprints on touchscreens, I'd prefer having a touch keypad than the awful keys on the Kindle.
> 
> Having said that, I have doubts about how well touchscreens would work with the eInk screen in regards typing. The refresh rate might be working against it.
> 
> Mike


/agreed

I'd bet the vast majority that complain about touchscreen supposed fingerprints clouding their view have never actually seen it in use or tried to read on one. It really is a total non issue. And I MUCH rather have a touchscreen key pad than those stupid keys we have on the K now. Part of the reason I can't stand blackberry either.

But I seriously doubt amazon will come out with one, they are in love with the greyscale e-ink. I personally much prefer color.


----------



## MarthaT (Mar 3, 2009)

hopefully in K3, that'd be a neat idea


----------



## Joan Marie (Sep 3, 2009)

I don't have a touchscreen anything (and won't by choice) but I have tried them out in every store I go into and check out friends' various touchscreen hardware. They are a hot mess for fingerprints and other obstructions. (I also don't grasp how touching a screen is "easier" than touching a button but whatever.) That being said, the latest on the Amazon boards is that the next Kindle coming soon is a touchscreen minus the keyboard. No word on the side buttons.


----------



## Bren S. (May 10, 2009)

I own several touch screen gadgets. Love my ipod touchs for instance.

That said I would not want a touch screen on my Kindle as I use it to read on, and for me personally that would make fingerprints an issue for me.


----------



## Scheherazade (Apr 11, 2009)

Nobody here has accused the side of wanting touch screens to be going off on rants or being intolerant or unreasonable.  Nor has anyone said anyone wanting a touch screen has obviously not done their research or tried other ways and therefore have no idea what they're talking about.  It would be nice if you guys paid us the same respect.  We have an opinion that is just as legitimate as yours.  Because we post a differing view it does not make what we say any less worthy of the text on the screen or the thoughts in our minds.  I'd appreciate it if you all didn't just dismiss us as a gang of backwater hill folk that obviously have no idea what they're talking about simply because we don't agree.


----------



## Garand (Jul 14, 2009)

I have lots of touchscreen devices and wouldn't mind one on the Kindle. I too wonder if the eInk technology can support touchscreens.

Almost everyone who examines the K wants to touch the screen to see what happens. I've learned to explain in advance it is not a touchscreen.

Since I have never been particularly careful about getting fingerprints on the screen, I periodically clean my K2 with a bit of Windex (anybody see _My Big Fat Greek Wedding _ ) sprayed on a soft cloth. I have noticed the screen is fairly resistant to most common fingerprints, but does tend to show a mar from peanut butter.

Dave


----------



## Bren S. (May 10, 2009)

Scheherazade said:


> Nobody here has accused the side of wanting touch screens to be going off on rants or being intolerant or unreasonable. Nor has anyone said anyone wanting a touch screen has obviously not done their research or tried other ways and therefore have no idea what they're talking about. It would be nice if you guys paid us the same respect. We have an opinion that is just as legitimate as yours. Because we post a differing view it does not make what we say any less worthy of the text on the screen or the thoughts in our minds. I'd appreciate it if you all didn't just dismiss us as a gang of backwater hill folk that obviously have no idea what they're talking about simply because we don't agree.


Agreed.


----------



## Bren S. (May 10, 2009)

Garand said:


> I have lots of touchscreen devices and wouldn't mind one on the Kindle. I too wonder if the eInk technology can support touchscreens.
> 
> Almost everyone who examines the K wants to touch the screen to see what happens. I've learned to explain in advance it is not a touchscreen.
> 
> ...


lol @ peanut butter


----------



## libros_lego (Mar 24, 2009)

I wonder if those who want a touchscreen kindle have read on/seen a touchscreen reader, like the Sony 700? And that's why they like it


----------



## suicidepact (May 17, 2009)

Only as soon as they make a smudge-proof, grease-proof screen I hope. Otherwise, why bother, IMHO.


----------



## suicidepact (May 17, 2009)

DailyLunatic said:


> How soon before a Touch Screen Kindle?
> 
> I don't ask this question lightly, or just to get the latest buzz. I'm holding off purchasing an e-reader until I can get one with the sized screen I feel I need (K2= screen too small, DX= footprint too large).
> 
> ...


"there will be yet another Kindle competitor coming out with an e-reader with a better screen size and little, if any increase in footprint to the K2"
Care to elaborate, as I have no idea what model or manufacturer you could be referencing. Is this a guess, or is it based on facts?

And in response to jmiked's post, I have a Blackberry Storm and an iPod Touch, both of which are touch screen. They both have great screens that are composed of material that do an exemplary job of not scratching when in a pocket with keys, etc. However, they still have a nasty habit of picking up every bit of fluff in my pocket or oil or contaminant that might be on my fingers. Couple this with a large touch screen of a K2 or DX size and you're dealing with a big P.I.T.A.
It's not that I don't want one available at all, it's that I want one that I don't have to vigorously clean and potentially break every time I want to read it.


----------



## Rasputina (May 6, 2009)

Scheherazade said:


> Nobody here has accused the side of wanting touch screens to be going off on rants or being intolerant or unreasonable. Nor has anyone said anyone wanting a touch screen has obviously not done their research or tried other ways and therefore have no idea what they're talking about. It would be nice if you guys paid us the same respect. We have an opinion that is just as legitimate as yours. Because we post a differing view it does not make what we say any less worthy of the text on the screen or the thoughts in our minds. I'd appreciate it if you all didn't just dismiss us as a gang of backwater hill folk that obviously have no idea what they're talking about simply because we don't agree.


works both ways, I saw a few "nevers" in this thread. Your nevers are just as guilty of assuming your way is the right way and our opinions aren't worthy. There is a difference between NEVER wanting one to be made as has been posted and " well it's not for me ".


----------



## Garand (Jul 14, 2009)

Some of us are being a little "touchy" about the whole screen thing.


----------



## Addie (Jun 10, 2009)

I think it would be great if Amazon came out with one touch screen version but still kept up with the non-touch screen version. The more versions they can come up with, the happier people will be and it will increase those interested in the e-reader market. And that would mean more e-books in the end!

If a touch screen Kindle came out today, I would be very hesitant to buy one due to the poor word/page contrast, glare and mirror effect that seems to occur with other e-reader touch screens. Hopefully the problem can be fixed.

For me, I would be happy with an e-reader that would let you type using a touch screen keyboard or stylus but still have the physical page-turn buttons (but where you could also use the touch screen to turn pages if you wanted ... maybe an option button in settings so you wouldn't accidentally turn the page if you preferred the physical buttons). I like just having my thumb on the page-turn button while I read, so I don't have to think about it at all when I get to the end of the page. I think it helps make an uninterrupted reading experience.


----------



## Wunderkind (Jan 14, 2009)

AddieLove said:


> For me, I would be happy with an e-reader that would let you type using a touch screen keyboard or stylus but still have the physical page-turn buttons (but where you could also use the touch screen to turn pages if you wanted ... maybe an option button in settings so you wouldn't accidentally turn the page if you preferred the physical buttons). I like just having my thumb on the page-turn button while I read, so I don't have to think about it at all when I get to the end of the page. I think it helps make an uninterrupted reading experience.


I agree...that would be the best of both worlds in my opinion.


----------



## Rasputina (May 6, 2009)

I have much less word to page contrast issues reading on my iphone than on my K. On the iphone I can choose by background and font color, unlike the e-ink which is just greyscale. I read with black background and white text. The contrast is quite good actually.


----------



## libros_lego (Mar 24, 2009)

So touchscreen people would want a touchscreen kindle like the sony prs 700 or a touchscreen kindle like a giant iphone


----------



## Forster (Mar 9, 2009)

Rasputina said:


> works both ways, I saw a few "nevers" in this thread. Your nevers are just as guilty of assuming your way is the right way and our opinions aren't worthy. There is a difference between NEVER wanting one to be made as has been posted and " well it's not for me ".


I think too much is being read into some of the nevers. Simple take them as a "well it's not for me."


----------



## Meemo (Oct 27, 2008)

I'd be disappointed if they came out with Kindle 3 (or 4 or whatever) that had a lot of nifty new feature but was only a touchscreen.  I'm just not interested.  I like my iPhone, and I don't mind reading on it for short periods.  But the fingerprints DO bother me (just like they bother me on my Kindle) and I don't mind the keyboard on my Kindle the way some people seem to.  If they did like Sony did, and came out with both a touchscreen Kindle AND an upgraded Kx without the touchscreen, that would be great.  Sony's touchscreen reader hasn't been a resounding success, as far as I can tell, it apparently had some pretty serious glare issues.  

Having said that - I'm still perfectly happy with my K1.  Not sure what a new version of Kindle would have that would make upgrading worthwhile to me.  I'm pretty happy with ol' Pearl - and see myself reading on her as long as she'll wake up & open a book for me.


----------



## DailyLunatic (Aug 4, 2009)

Ignoring the <ahem> friendly support, I just want to clarify that I don't want the TouchScreen for the TouchScreen, per se. I want the TouchScreen cause it gets rid of the $%^# keypad. I'd be perfectly happy to have something like a screen keyboard selectable from the 5-way, but don't see that as likely to happen.

If a TouchScreen gets me something big enough to read, and still small enough to carry, then so be it.

Over the weekend I did finally have a chance to hold an e-reader in my hot little hands for the first time. It was the Sony with the screen the same size as the K2 (not the Sony Touch). Read for approx 1/2 hour to get a good feel of things.

Don't like it. Screen is too small.

...but I want a Kindle... I want it because of the support, the accessories, and style... I'm willing to wait, just want to make sure that I'm waiting for a reason.

Sterling
92.5% Pure


----------



## idolguy (Dec 31, 2008)

Scheherazade said:


> I am horribly anal about even a spec of dust on my Kindle screen, I would go absolutely crazy if they made it touch screen so I really hope they don't. And if they do I would like the option to still use buttons which would make the advantage of not as much real estate taken by the bevel moot. Not to mention touch screens add that extra layer, no matter how thin, over the top of the screen and would probably affect clarity and I have yet to own a touch screen that didn't "fail" in some way. My current phone has a discolored patch due to its touch screen, my old Garmin is showing a layer of pockmarks where the touch screen is, the old Nintendo DSs show a clear grid where their touch screen is even when they're new.
> 
> I just don't think because a technology is available that it has to be thrown into every application on the market. Ereaders are one place where I just don't think we need touch screens. The whole point is to mimic a book and every bit of anything that comes between my eyes and the text are going to work against those ends, whether it's a thin film for a touch screen, a centimeter of space for side lighting, a smudge or a spec of dust... I just don't want it there and I definitely don't want more components to worry about failing.


Excellent points. Touch screen on my phone--I love it. On my Kindle--Never. It would get in the way of the reading experience.


----------



## DailyLunatic (Aug 4, 2009)

suicidepact said:


> "there will be yet another Kindle competitor coming out with an e-reader with a better screen size and little, if any increase in footprint to the K2"
> Care to elaborate, as I have no idea what model or manufacturer you could be referencing. Is this a guess, or is it based on facts?


http://blogkindle.com/2009/08/theres-a-new-irex-reader-coming/
http://blogkindle.com/2009/08/irex-reader-will-also-use-barnes-nobles-platform/
http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,2845,2351876,00.asp

Sterling
92.5% Pure


----------



## DailyLunatic (Aug 4, 2009)

AddieLove said:


> For me, I would be happy with an e-reader that would let you type using a touch screen keyboard or stylus but still have the physical page-turn buttons (but where you could also use the touch screen to turn pages if you wanted ... maybe an option button in settings so you wouldn't accidentally turn the page if you preferred the physical buttons). I like just having my thumb on the page-turn button while I read, so I don't have to think about it at all when I get to the end of the page. I think it helps make an uninterrupted reading experience.


Sounds perfect. An excellent compromise.

Sterling
92.5% Pure


----------



## Selcien (Oct 31, 2008)

I wouldn't mind a touch screen at all, as long as it was implemented in a way that did not negatively affect readability, and that the "next page", and "previous page" buttons are kept intact.



Joan Marie said:


> I also don't grasp how touching a screen is "easier" than touching a button but whatever.


I personally like to look up words that I don't know, in order to do so I must navigate the page using the five way controller. That's not a problem at all when there are very few words that I want to look up while reading a book, but the more words there are, the more obvious that the navigation is extremely clunky. Footnotes also require the use of the five way controller and if you read a book with a lot of footnotes it will end up being quite a nuisance. A touch screen would allow words to be looked up, footnotes to be clicked on, without wasting all of the time it takes in putting the cursor where you want it with the five way controller, and would make for an overall smoother experience.


----------



## Scheherazade (Apr 11, 2009)

Rasputina said:


> works both ways, I saw a few "nevers" in this thread. Your nevers are just as guilty of assuming your way is the right way and our opinions aren't worthy. There is a difference between NEVER wanting one to be made as has been posted and " well it's not for me ".


Saying you never want to see something is a long way away from insulting people. This is a debate about touch screens, or has turned into one, not a debate over people's intelligence or right to have a point of view.


----------



## Addie (Jun 10, 2009)

Rasputina said:


> I have much less word to page contrast issues reading on my iphone than on my K. On the iphone I can choose by background and font color, unlike the e-ink which is just greyscale. I read with black background and white text. The contrast is quite good actually.


I have the Kindle app for the iPod Touch, and I like it for short-term (I also use the black background and white text) but not long-term use. I'm not even talking about how small the screen is. The screen is far too reflective, and there are times when I read on the Touch where I see myself and it distracts me for a second. Plus, it's like reading on a computer screen, and that hurts my eyes after a while. I prefer the e-ink, and when you compare the Kindle's screen to the Sony's touch screen, you can definitely see the difference.

I'm sure it's just going to be one of those things that takes time to develop.


----------



## Mike D. aka jmiked (Oct 28, 2008)

Scheherazade said:


> I'd appreciate it if you all didn't just dismiss us as a gang of backwater hill folk that obviously have no idea what they're talking about simply because we don't agree.


Works both ways.  

I have no opinion that I hold so strongly that I won't change it on submission of credible evidence.

And nobody said anything about backwater hill folk. Anybody is free to disagree based on rational discourse and evidence.


----------



## Scheherazade (Apr 11, 2009)

Again, I fail to see where anyone insulted anyone over wanting a touch screen.  I was hoping you had both posted those things not realizing you had gone a bit far in what you said but I can see I was mistaken.  Forget I mentioned it.


----------



## NogDog (May 1, 2009)

My question is, is everyone who has used a touch-screen and liked it ever used one that was not self-illuminated? I ask because I wonder if fingerprints/smudges would be more of an issue with an e-ink screen like the Kindle's, since the light source would have to travel through the print from the outside first, which can cause both initial reflections off of the print plus shadows on the display surface, and then the reflected light off of the actual text would be filtered a second time through the print. So theoretically any finger-print/smudge might be twice as annoying as it would be on a self-illuminated display.

Again, I'm just asking and theorizing, since I've never used an e-ink-type touch screen (if there is such a thing).

From a marketing viewpoint, I'm sure that if Amazon or whoever else can come up with touch screen e-book reader that works well, does not smudge too easily, and is durable enough that they won't be getting too many demands for returns or class action suits, then they'll come out with it when they can achieve an appropriate price point with it.


----------



## Mike D. aka jmiked (Oct 28, 2008)

NogDog said:


> My question is, is everyone who has used a touch-screen and liked it ever used one that was not self-illuminated? I ask because I wonder if fingerprints/smudges would be more of an issue with an e-ink screen like the Kindle's, since the light source would have to travel through the print from the outside first, which can cause both initial reflections off of the print plus shadows on the display surface, and then the reflected light off of the actual text would be filtered a second time through the print. So theoretically any finger-print/smudge might be twice as annoying as it would be on a self-illuminated display.


Quite true. I have not seen an eInk touch screen. I may change my stance after I have. It could be awful.

I'll wager that if we had an eInk touch screen we could get two people looking at it at the same time and one would say "See it works just fine," and the other would say "That the most horrible thing I've seen." Neither opinion represents the actual device.


----------



## ak rain (Nov 15, 2008)

[/quote]


AddieLove said:


> For me, I would be happy with an e-reader that would let you type using a touch screen keyboard or stylus but still have the physical page-turn buttons (but where you could also use the touch screen to turn pages if you wanted ... maybe an option button in settings so you wouldn't accidentally turn the page if you preferred the physical buttons). I like just having my thumb on the page-turn button while I read, so I don't have to think about it at all when I get to the end of the page. I think it helps make an uninterrupted reading experience.


this I also think would be perfect more screen to same size. I don't live in WN and I only take notes to mark genre and other things. so less space devoted to something I don't use.
sylvia


----------



## BookishMom (Oct 30, 2008)

Garand said:


> I have lots of touchscreen devices and wouldn't mind one on the Kindle. I too wonder if the eInk technology can support touchscreens.


Dave, although previously it was thought that eInk couldn't support it, Sony has proven otherwise in their new Sony Touch 600 Reader. Here are some links to see how it works on them:

Sony's new 600 reader and the touch feature (review and video)
http://www.mobiletechreview.com/gadgets/Sony-Reader-Touch-Edition-PRS-600.htm

PDF Zoom Feature
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oKpl4wiG-Bs


----------



## Cat (Nov 10, 2008)

Now, now, people, the disagreeing on this thread has been going on since _last night_. I almost said something then, but since it's still going on, please be forewarned that the mods may close a thread where there is a disagreement going on. In fact, I've been wondering why they haven't already, or at least come in and posted a warning. They don't like that someone(s) may _possibly_ take offense, I guess. Now behave, put on your smiley faces, and continue with NO discussion that _might, maybe, possibly_ cause someone to take offense.


----------



## KBoards Admin (Nov 27, 2007)

Cat said:


> Now, now, people, the disagreeing on this thread has been going on since _last night_. I almost said something then, but since it's still going on, please be forewarned that the mods may close a thread where there is a disagreement going on. In fact, I've been wondering why they haven't already, or at least come in and posted a warning. They don't like that someone(s) may _possibly_ take offense, I guess. Now behave, put on your smiley faces, and continue with NO discussion that _might, maybe, possibly_ cause someone to take offense.


Cat: please re-consider the post you just made. Your continued posts that mock the way our volunteers try to moderate this forum are out of line.


----------



## NogDog (May 1, 2009)

Cat said:


> Now, now, people, the disagreeing on this thread has been going on since _last night_. I almost said something then, but since it's still going on, please be forewarned that the mods may close a thread where there is a disagreement going on. In fact, I've been wondering why they haven't already, or at least come in and posted a warning. They don't like that someone(s) may _possibly_ take offense, I guess. Now behave, put on your smiley faces, and continue with NO discussion that _might, maybe, possibly_ cause someone to take offense.


Hmmm....to the best of my knowledge, there are no rules here about disagreeing with other members, as long as it is done in a civil manner. If we all agreed on everything, this would be a boring and mostly useless place, IMO. As long as we can avoid "That's stupid...," or, "You obviously have no idea what you're talking about...," and other opinions about _members_ instead of issues, we'll be fine.


----------



## Rasputina (May 6, 2009)

NogDog said:


> My question is, is everyone who has used a touch-screen and liked it ever used one that was not self-illuminated? I ask because I wonder if fingerprints/smudges would be more of an issue with an e-ink screen like the Kindle's, since the light source would have to travel through the print from the outside first, which can cause both initial reflections off of the print plus shadows on the display surface, and then the reflected light off of the actual text would be filtered a second time through the print. So theoretically any finger-print/smudge might be twice as annoying as it would be on a self-illuminated display.
> 
> Again, I'm just asking and theorizing, since I've never used an e-ink-type touch screen (if there is such a thing).
> 
> From a marketing viewpoint, I'm sure that if Amazon or whoever else can come up with touch screen e-book reader that works well, does not smudge too easily, and is durable enough that they won't be getting too many demands for returns or class action suits, then they'll come out with it when they can achieve an appropriate price point with it.


I haven't seen a touch screen that isn't self-illuminated so far. Not in person. Since I can't even see fingerprints on my iphone except when it's turned off and therefor not illuminated I'd venture that you are correct and that non illuminated makes fingerprints stand out. At least that is my experience.


----------



## Rasputina (May 6, 2009)

jmiked said:


> Quite true. I have not seen an eInk touch screen. I may change my stance after I have. It could be awful.
> 
> I'll wager that if we had an eInk touch screen we could get two people looking at it at the same time and one would say "See it works just fine," and the other would say "That the most horrible thing I've seen." Neither opinion represents the actual device.


they need to work out the crappy contrast of e-ink before I'll be interested


----------



## Scheherazade (Apr 11, 2009)

Cat said:


> Now, now, people, the disagreeing on this thread has been going on since _last night_. I almost said something then, but since it's still going on, please be forewarned that the mods may close a thread where there is a disagreement going on. In fact, I've been wondering why they haven't already, or at least come in and posted a warning. They don't like that someone(s) may _possibly_ take offense, I guess. Now behave, put on your smiley faces, and continue with NO discussion that _might, maybe, possibly_ cause someone to take offense.


Eh, I love a good debate. I just don't think it should be taken to a personal level. Debate the topic at hand, not people's intelligence or intentions or make presumptions about what they do or don't know or have or haven't experienced. That was my only point. I -definitely- see the reason people would want touch screens... I even see a real need for them. I just don't think the technology is there yet. Nogdog kinda hit the nail on the head. Most touch screen devices are bearable because they're backlit. If they can make a smudgeless touch screen that doesn't blur text or cause glare I'll be all over it. I still prefer physical keys for typing... but the Kindle keys are horrid enough that I would agree whole-heartedly that touch keys on the screen would be miles and away better. I just don't see how it's possible yet.

(Edit: Somehow I totally read past the sarcasm... I still think I needed to say some of those things though so I'll leave it.)


----------



## Tippy (Dec 8, 2008)

Touchscreen Kindles -- well I can see why people would like it.  I don't know whether it would work with Kindle technology or not, but it would be cool.  Except for the fingerprints.  That would drive me crazy -- kinda like a dirty compact mirror.  I wonder if there is a Law & Order or CSI story here. . .


----------



## DailyLunatic (Aug 4, 2009)

Cat said:


> Now, now, people, the disagreeing on this thread has been going on since _last night_.


I started the thread today at my lunch break. Possibly you have this thread confused with another?

Sterling
92.5% Pure


----------



## DailyLunatic (Aug 4, 2009)

Joan Marie said:


> I also don't grasp how touching a screen is "easier" than touching a button but whatever.) That being said, the latest on the Amazon boards is that the next Kindle coming soon is a touchscreen minus the keyboard. No word on the side buttons.


Very good news indeed. Do you have a link to more information?

As for 'Easier' - Well, I can only speak for myself. The point of the TouchScreen, for me, would be not so much 'Ease of Use' as it is 'improved screen size' by scrapping a little used feature, (keyboard). BTW - I would still want the side buttons. 

Sterling
92.5% Pure


----------



## Cat (Nov 10, 2008)

Harvey said:


> Cat: please re-consider the post you just made. Your continued posts that mock the way our volunteers try to moderate this forum are out of line.


_This_ is the only post I would agree that you could label mocking. The other posts, though you may not have liked the tone in some of them, were legitimate concerns/complaints/questions. I'd appreciate it if you wouldn't classify all those posts as continuing to mock, please. I don't think it's your usual personality to generalize so casually, so I'm sure it wasn't your intent to belittle my other posts even if you didn't like them. I meant for this to sound nicer, but I guess I'm still prickly. Sorry 

NogDog...I didn't think there were rules like that either. The post here was more a message to the mods than anything else. I'd made a thread complaining about another thread's closure over something similar.

Didn't get the result or answer I wanted, but there was an attempt made to try to answer me, at least, so I give the mods (big) credit for that. Anyway...time to move on from this issue I'm told.

Peace, everyone.


----------



## Cat (Nov 10, 2008)

DailyLunatic said:


> I started the thread today at my lunch break. Possibly you have this thread confused with another?
> 
> Sterling
> 92.5% Pure


Oops. No, you're right, I was just wrong. Musta been earlier today I thought that ...it just feels like last night. *sigh* Long day. Long week, already.


----------



## Garand (Jul 14, 2009)

BookishMom said:


> Dave, although previously it was thought that eInk couldn't support it, Sony has proven otherwise in their new Sony Touch 600 Reader. Here are some links to see how it works on them:
> 
> Sony's new 600 reader and the touch feature (review and video)
> http://www.mobiletechreview.com/gadgets/Sony-Reader-Touch-Edition-PRS-600.htm
> ...


Thanks BookishMom.
I finally got an eBook when Amazon dropped their prices. While I'm normally a very _comparative_ shopper, this time I just grabbed the Kindle2 and didn't do a bunch of homework. Looking at the Sony 600, I think I should have waited just a bit. It looks great.

I may have to consider the upgrade one day.

Dave


----------



## Anju  (Nov 8, 2008)

Not to change the topic - but it was not all that long ago everyone was crying for folders!  Now you want touch screens?  What happened to color?  All these wants should be keeping all the e-reader developers busy for a long time - good for the economy, good for job security, good for the competition, good for us (lower prices).  In the meantime, I'll keep my K1 and see if I can find a good book.


----------



## Bren S. (May 10, 2009)

Garand said:


> Some of us are being a little "touchy" about the whole screen thing.


lol it sure seems that way.


----------



## Forster (Mar 9, 2009)

Anju No. 469 said:


> Not to change the topic - but it was not all that long ago everyone was crying for folders! Now you want touch screens? What happened to color? All these wants should be keeping all the e-reader developers busy for a long time - good for the economy, good for job security, good for the competition, good for us (lower prices). In the meantime, I'll keep my K1 and see if I can find a good book.


I think folders would be useless, I hope the kindle never has folders either. 

/runsaway


----------



## Bren S. (May 10, 2009)

Forster said:


> I think folders would be useless, I hope the kindle never has folders either.
> 
> /runsaway


uh oh lol


----------



## Garand (Jul 14, 2009)

Nasty, greasy touchscreens...yuck!
Folders...how wooode!

I just want a Kindle with a built-in pump dispenser for hand sanitizer and an pump sprayer for Lysol, in case I ever decide to go out in public.

Dave


----------



## Bren S. (May 10, 2009)

Garand said:


> Nasty, greasy touchscreens...yuck!
> Folders...how wooode!
> 
> I just want a Kindle with a built-in pump dispenser for hand sanitizer, and an pump sprayer for Lysol for those times when I actually go out in public.


lol


----------



## geko29 (Dec 23, 2008)

BookishMom said:


> Dave, although previously it was thought that eInk couldn't support it, Sony has proven otherwise in their new Sony Touch 600 Reader. Here are some links to see how it works on them:


I think the (now discontinued) Sony 700 was a touchscreen as well. It was not well-received because of it's poor contrast and lack of clarity. Whether that was due to the sidelighting, the touchscreen, or both, remains to be seen, though the initial reports on the 600 seem to imply that ANY additional layers above the e-ink make the screen less readable.


----------



## MarthaT (Mar 3, 2009)

Garand said:


> Nasty, greasy touchscreens...yuck!
> Folders...how wooode!
> 
> I just want a Kindle with a built-in pump dispenser for hand sanitizer and an pump sprayer for Lysol, in case I ever decide to go out in public.
> ...


Now that'd be nice


----------



## Mike D. aka jmiked (Oct 28, 2008)

I'll admit to being much less of a pro-touchscreen advocate than I am a pro-better-method-of-text-entry advocate. I'm disappointed that the K2 keyboard is substantially less easy for me to use than the K1 keyboard was. I consider it an example of style victory over usability.

I'm also not committed to a pure touch screen. The capacitance screen on my iPod Touch is superb, and if it reduces the clarity of the display, I'd be amazed.

As far as folders: if I can have the Kindle display only a particular subset of books, I don't care if they do it with folders, labels, tags, or black magic. I want it.  

I think people get fixated on a process and forget the goal sometimes. I'm as guilty as others, but I do stop and reconsider what's going on from time to time. If I remember.  

Mike


----------



## LindaW (Jan 14, 2009)

With all this talk about touch-screens, buttons, page turning, etc., I just have to ask this question....have any of you found yourself so engrossed in your book that you find your hand moving to the upper most right hand corner of your Kindle to "turn the page"?

I've had my Kindle for a bit over a year, and from time to time I still find myself trying to turn a paper page.


----------



## Scheherazade (Apr 11, 2009)

I'm more guilty at trying to push the next page button on a paper book than trying to flip my Kindle like a page ><

And I agree with the keyboard statements wholeheartedly.  The K1 keyboard had much better tactile feedback, the DX keyboard has slightly improved buttons but they are horribly arranged, spaced and shaped... not to mention the device is very top heavy if you do attempt to type with it.  I would have rather seen a cell phone sized and styled keyboard in the bottom center of the device but I can see why they didn't do that from a design perspective because it'd leave it looking unbalanced and full of wasted space.  A pull out keyboard could be another solution but would probably make the Kindle thicker.


----------



## BookishMom (Oct 30, 2008)

geko29 said:


> I think the (now discontinued) Sony 700 was a touchscreen as well. It was not well-received because of it's poor contrast and lack of clarity. Whether that was due to the sidelighting, the touchscreen, or both, remains to be seen, though the initial reports on the 600 seem to imply that ANY additional layers above the e-ink make the screen less readable.


I think it was a combination of both, according to remarks I've read. Quite a few reviews say that the 600 is better than the 700, but not as good as their 505 (as far as readability goes). Some compare the 600's readability with the Kindle 2 without the font hack. Also, from the reviews I've read, none of them say the touchscreen/fingerprints are an issue at all. ::shrugging shoulders:::I thought that would be a big issue, but apparently it isn't, and since I don't mess with touchscreen devices much, I'll have to see for myself.)

The contrast actually seems pretty good (to me) from the video reviews and photos I've seen, but the glare/reflectivity is an issue that I'd have see for myself before buying. The extra features (folders, double-click word for dictionary, better navigation, locking out the display, library book access, etc) may outweigh having to tilt the screen a certain way to get rid of the glare (which is the work-around those who've bought it are suggesting). I read under fluorescent lights a lot and don't know how (or if) that would affect the glare. I'm going to look at the 600 myself as soon as I can (another week or two) and then decide whether to purchase. I'm interested in it as an addition to my Reader collection, not as a replacement for my Kindles. I prefer buying from Amazon because I use my reward points, but I could use another ebook reader for my children - we're all voracious readers and they fight over their K1... a good problem to have!  Having a different reader that reads a wider variety of formats and library ebooks is a good idea - for my family.  )


----------



## BookishMom (Oct 30, 2008)

Scheherazade said:


> I'm more guilty at trying to push the next page button on a paper book than trying to flip my Kindle like a page ><


I do that more and more now, as well as try to do a dictionary look-up for words I'd like to look up.


----------



## Annalog (Dec 28, 2008)

LindaW said:


> With all this talk about touch-screens, buttons, page turning, etc., I just have to ask this question....have any of you found yourself so engrossed in your book that you find your hand moving to the upper most right hand corner of your Kindle to "turn the page"?





BookishMom said:


> Scheherazade said:
> 
> 
> > I'm more guilty at trying to push the next page button on a paper book than trying to flip my Kindle like a page ><
> ...


I do all three. I try to turn physically turn the page on my Kindle and since my Kindle is in a home-made cover, I end up looking at the back of my Kindle.  I have frequently, but usually not more than once a reading session, tried to use the dictionary look-up and button page turn on paper books.

EDIT: I have read books on my Palm PDA using touchscreen but, of course, that has backlighting. I also used a non-glare screen protector so finger prints and scratches on the screen were not a problem.

I may be in the minority but I use the keyboard on my K2 frequently. The ability to easily make notes is important to me.


----------



## Ann in Arlington (Oct 27, 2008)

Annalog said:


> I may be in the minority but I use the keyboard on my K2 frequently. The ability to easily make notes is important to me.


I don't use it all that often but I don't think I'd want it to be on screen when I do have/want to use it. I used to have a cell phone with a slide out keyboard; then I got a new one that has an onscreen keyboard. Having now used both, I think I like the separate keyboard better. And I don't use the keyboard on the phone that often either!

I'm undecided on the touchscreen debate. I really kind of don't like them, but there are some things for which that is the perfect input device. Thinking of an e-book device, I think I'd prefer a button/key press for page turns. I certainly wouldn't want to lose contrast or have a glare problem in order to have a touchscreen.

I guess I'll have to wander out to the Sony store at Tysons and see what they have just to be able to speak knowledgeably.


----------



## suicidepact (May 17, 2009)

I use my keyboard quite a bit and would prefer a qwerty rather than a touch a touch screen.


----------



## Tippy (Dec 8, 2008)

The touch screens are really popular.  But I am afraid my age is showing.  The fingerprints would drive me crazy.  A stylus is inconvenient.  I think I would still prefer the keyboard.  Personally I am hoping that K3 is not a touch screen.


----------



## Annie (May 28, 2009)

Touchscreen would be way too sensitive, I think. Or they take several clicks to work (I tested out the Sony touchscreen eReader). I use people's touchscreen gadgets all the time, and there's no comparison. For phones and iThings, it may be okay, but for an eReader, I really can't see myself using a touchscreen Kindle. If that ever happens, I guess they'll have to cross me off of their list for the ordering of the new Kindle.


----------



## Mike D. aka jmiked (Oct 28, 2008)

There are at least two different technologies being used for touch screens. One requires pressure to operate (it's a mechanical switch). This type frequently requires the use of a stylus, or at least a relatively firm press of the finger.  The other is a capacitance switch, which requires only proximity of a fingertip (it won't work at all if a stylus is used). The iPhone/iPod Touch use this type, and you barely have to touch the screen to use. This might contribute to the lack of print and smear problems I've had with this type.

Mike


----------



## Rasputina (May 6, 2009)

suicidepact said:


> I use my keyboard quite a bit and would prefer a qwerty rather than a touch a touch screen.


The touchscreen keyboard I use on my iphone is a qwerty. All qwerty means in the order of the letters.


----------



## Rasputina (May 6, 2009)

jmiked said:


> There are at least two different technologies being used for touch screens. One requires pressure to operate (it's a mechanical switch). This type frequently requires the use of a stylus, or at least a relatively firm press of the finger. The other is a capacitance switch, which requires only proximity of a fingertip (it won't work at all if a stylus is used). The iPhone/iPod Touch use this type, and you barely have to touch the screen to use. This might contribute to the lack of print and smear problems I've had with this type.
> 
> Mike


That is possible. Did you know that there are stylus made for the iphone? http://www.amazon.com/Stylus-Apple-iPhone-Touch-Silver/dp/B001BVTMZ6/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=wireless&qid=1252125958&sr=8-2


----------



## suicidepact (May 17, 2009)

Rasputina said:


> The touchscreen keyboard I use on my iphone is a qwerty. All qwerty means in the order of the letters.


I obviously meant a keyboard rather than a touchscreen.


----------



## mlewis78 (Apr 19, 2009)

jmiked said:


> Agreed. The people here who go off on a rant about touchscreens come off as being a bit intolerant and unreasonable because apparently they don't want one available at all. Having had no problems with fingerprints on touchscreens, I'd prefer having a touch keypad than the awful keys on the Kindle.
> 
> Having said that, I have doubts about how well touchscreens would work with the eInk screen in regards typing. The refresh rate might be working against it.
> 
> Mike


Had to laugh when I read "intolerant". Sounds as if you think the people who don't want a touch screen are intolerant of the screens. Oh, how pc. I never connected intolerance with objects. And if you mean intolerant of opinions of those who want a touchscreen? Give me a break.


----------



## Mike D. aka jmiked (Oct 28, 2008)

mlewis78 said:


> Had to laugh when I read "intolerant". Sounds as if you think the people who don't want a touch screen are intolerant of the screens. Oh, how pc. I never connected intolerance with objects. And if you mean intolerant of opinions of those who want a touchscreen? Give me a break.


Maybe it was worded a bit strongly, but I don't think it warrants the tone of your reply.


----------



## Mike D. aka jmiked (Oct 28, 2008)

Rasputina said:


> That is possible. Did you know that there are stylus made for the iphone? http://www.amazon.com/Stylus-Apple-iPhone-Touch-Silver/dp/B001BVTMZ6/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=wireless&qid=1252125958&sr=8-2


No, I didn't know that, thanks for the link. I'll have to investigate and see how they do that. The reviews suggest that it's not entirely successful, that it can be done is encouraging. I may get one or two.

Mike


----------



## Rasputina (May 6, 2009)

I've been wanting to try one out but I just haven't gotten around to ordering one. If you get one, please let me know how you like it.


----------



## Toby (Nov 25, 2008)

I was an early adopter of the Sony PRS 500 version. Great contrast, but I had to use pressure to click on the buttons. I have arthritis in my hands/wrist. Sometimes, my wrists would hurt if I was just scanning thru a book. I then purchased the K1 Contrast was not quite as dark for the smaller fonts. The buttons were so effortless to click. A real pleasure, except when I had the accidental page turns when I balanced my K1 on my handbag in the shopping carriage, moving around. I then purchased the K2. Contrast not as good as the K1. Buttons just as hard to push/ click on as the Sony. Finally, I got the iPod Touch when there was a special deal. Contrast is good, although it is not eink. Love the ease of swiping thru the pages. The the rest of you, don't like smudges/scatches, but not very noticable when the iPod Touch is on as when it is off & you have that gray screen. I love it for reading in short spurts, just as the TTS on my K2. I've finally getting myself to leave my K2 at home for short trips or when I know that I won't be reading it, because i have the iPod Touch with me. Sort of a case of separation anxiety. LOL! 
    Now, last night I went to the Sony Link. Not a bad idea having both touch & buttons on the Sony. Today, I was thinking of what everyone said. I remember seeing a laptop shown at shopnbc on TV. You can go to shopnbc.com. I don't remember the name of the laptop off hand, but the laptop had the mouse area be the touch screen, not the monitor screen. So, instead of smudging the screen, you just touch the mouse area & the page turns. Why couldn't Amazon make a Kindle with a separate, special area to touch??


----------



## mlewis78 (Apr 19, 2009)

I can imagine people with touch screen kindles carrying them with a polishing cloth for the fingerprints on the screen.  I wipe down my flute with one before I put it in the case after playing.


----------

