On 3 September 2010 16:21, Simon Reed <simon.spectre.l...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Can't comment on AMOLED as I haven't used one before but I would think as > the device is still a light generating source as opposed to a eInk which > requires another source to read the same strain would occur. However I know > people who have no issue with reading from a standard lcd for hours on end > which would drive me insane. > > LCD backlit isn't so good in daylight. AMOLED is better - but transflective devices are better again. > For anyone looking I would say beg, borrow or steal one of each variety > before buying and go with what suits (note I am not endorsing stealing :) ). > How energy efficient are the new AMOLED devices anyway? > > > Better than backlit. I'm thinking it's a question like 'how many pages from an inkjet cartridge' - in that it depends how much of the screen is on. Unlike backlighting, which requires the backlight to all be on. > On Fri, Sep 3, 2010 at 2:12 PM, mike smith <meski...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On 3 September 2010 15:05, Simon Reed <simon.spectre.l...@gmail.com>wrote: >> >>> +1 agree with Ken >>> >>> Also compared to a backlit device such as an iPad or tablet I find the >>> eye strain considerably less especially when reading for long periods. >>> Battery life on Kindle is also comparable to the Sony's month, but as Ken >>> mentioned it is more to do with page turns. >>> >> >> What about compared to AMOLED devices? I find them better to read on >> than backlit, but haven't tried an electric ink device. >> >> -- >> Meski >> >> "Going to Starbucks for coffee is like going to prison for sex. Sure, >> you'll get it, but it's going to be rough" - Adam Hills >> > > -- Meski "Going to Starbucks for coffee is like going to prison for sex. Sure, you'll get it, but it's going to be rough" - Adam Hills
