Can't understand why the Kindle wasn't designed with some kind of back-lit screen option. Yes, I know the copy is supposed to be more like ink quality lettering, which it is, making it a far better outdoor reader than the iPad. But the thing is, where do you do most of your reading? If you're like me, it's in bed, around bedtime when the lights are low. In a darkish room, the iPad is much better, you don't need any lighting. That said, the back-lit screen can be hard on the eyes and I'm even wondering if this is why I've been walking around with a blood-shot eye for two days. Of course, doesn't help that I wake up often during the night and always try to fall back asleep by reading (on my iPad). Spares my wife waking her up with lamp light.
The only other reason, and it is very important, that People may prefer the Kindle is because there is a far better selection of books on it. You can't even compare it to iBook's selection. Take recent Booker winner Howard Jacobson,(whom I only recently discovered thanks to The Rent Collector author, Glen Rotchin. On iBooks none of his books are available, while three or four, (still not enough) can be downloaded off of Amazon / Kindle.
Final note: iBooks has a better selection of free classics, so if you get it in your head to read a James Joyce classic like Dubliners or Portrait of a Young Artist..., you are better off with the iPad. Considering however that the Kindle is only $139 now, it's worth it to have even if you have the iPad. It's still great value...
No comments:
Post a Comment