Talk:Comparison of e-readers

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from Talk:Comparison of e-book readers)
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Electronics (Rated List-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is part of WikiProject Electronics, an attempt to provide a standard approach to writing articles about electronics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. Leave messages at the project talk page
 List  This article has been rated as List-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Computing (Rated List-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 List  This article has been rated as List-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.


Missing power consumption[edit]

Important factor for outdoors use. Kindle 2 in standby lasts 2 weeks with wireless off, 1h use per day. [source: Amazon, own experience]. Michalp (talk) 14:54, 19 March 2011 (UTC)


I have a feeling we're missing a few. i.e. the Cybook and the eSlick are I think both rebrands of Netronix hardware but different software, though I'm having trouble finding a source. DaveWF (talk) 23:19, 1 May 2009(UTC)


It would be nice for someone to start a E-book device comparison page. With the Kindle coming out, this will become a popular topic over the next few weeks...

Sounds a good idea. You might like to consider starting it off yourself. — Matt Crypto 19:02, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
There is a good comparison matrix here: Jcurious (talk) 03:13, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

The File Format comparison table needs serious reformatting. The most commonly available formats should be in the left-most columns and the seldom-seen or obsolete formats off to the right. Another approach would be to put all of the Text Formats together, and the Graphic Formats together (e.g., txt, epub, pdf, and then png, jpeg, tiff). Else, they should be in alpha order. Also, someone has added a second 'html' column off to the right when one already existed (argues for alpha order)Tloc (talk) 23:36, 7 July 2011 (UTC)


I added the fact tag to the claim that e-readers are expensive compared to PDAs and laptops because it's potentially misleading at the moment. While I would agree that most e-book readers are expensive compared to laptops and PDAs, this is only relatively because of what you're getting. For example the $400 for the Kindle or even $500 for the Sony E-reader isn't really that expensive compared to a laptop, there aren't that many at the price (new). The issue is of course that with a laptop you get a device with a bigger colour screen, a better processor, lots of hard disk space and which can do a lot more. With PDAs, $400 is I think on the fairly high end although PDAs tend to be smaller (but again as with laptops have colour screens and usually better processors etc) Nil Einne (talk) 10:49, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Why aren't there price ranges listed, maybe w/ required dates of submission? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gniob (talkcontribs) 02:52, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

I've removed the prices from the tables. Apart from WP:NOPRICES, it was an unreferenced and useless mix of dollars, euros, pounds, zlotys and won. Something well-sourced in the article about general price trends, especially versus smartphones and tablet, would be useful though. Captain Conundrum (talk) 13:04, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

Reader programs for PC[edit] seems to be perhaps the only PC reader that doesn't include burdensome DRM (such as preventing copy/paste) the way Adobe Digital Editions and Mobipocket do.[1] --Ty580 (talk) 04:46, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Existence of this article[edit]

There is an issue if this article should exist or not. On the pro side is myself, on the con side User:Thumperward.

I believe Wikipedia should have a comprehensive and complete list all of dedicated e-book readers. It is not an open-ended or unusually long list, there are only about perhaps one or two dozen. This list would include discontinued models for historical purposes to show how the technology has advanced and changed. The article is currently a stub but it could be expanded to include much more information about each device in a grid matrix. For example. I don't believe I am the only one who feels this was as another anon user expressed a similar sentiment above.[2]

On the con side, from what I can gather, the position is that Wikipedia should only list notable models (ie. those with their own internal Wikipedia article) and not have a "list of" article at all, but only list them in a more general parent article. In effect, this "list of" article would be re-directed e-book and the list pared down (as it currently exists in that article).

Hopefully this states the general positions. Can Wikipedia have a comprehensive and complete list of all e-book readers, or only a partial list based on some criteria of notability (ie. Wikipedia article for the device).

Thanks for your input. Fothergill Volkensniff IV (talk) 14:45, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

At present, such a list is easy to make and provides an exhaustive overview of a niche market. However, if e-book readers will become popular, the number of models will surely explode, and then it will be both unfeasible and meaningless to try and keep an up-to-date list, in the same way that few people would take interest in a list of all cellular telephones or all PDAs.
I would propose to have no more than several examples of state-of-the-art readers on the e-book reader page to give an idea of typical capabilities, possibly in a matrix format, and have a short list of the notable readers (the Kindle; first e-paper-based reader, etc.). MaxVT (talk) 18:31, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
Like all such lists, in a class of things where many of the readers are notable, it is usual to limit the list to that, and the reason is WP:BOT#DIRECTORY. A list of all ebook readers may be useful, but it is not our job to do thisany more than w list all of any other sort of products. A list of t he ones with articles is useful, as a guide to the reader--it helps to give a little more information than can be conveyed in an category--which is just the name. I A comparison article is possible, but then, it would be fair for this to include all that do have an article. There is no real reason to vary Wikipedia policy for this particular instance. The existing policy has proven very successful here and elsewhere in keeping out spam, while keeping in notable information. DGG (talk) 23:44, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

The list is finite and small. There is no spam since it is a complete list, and many of the models are no longer being sold, it's a history of the industry. Concerns about what might happen in the future: if in the future things do in fact explode and there are 100s of models and it is difficult to keep track of them all like PDA's or cell-phones, than obviously only "notable" models should be listed. Until then, listing the industry history is very simple - there just are not that many - we've done it and should be happy to have it here as a base to work from for future historians (wikipedians) to write a history of the most important models (important != most well known). Give this article some time to see how the industry develops, because no one really knows where things are headed, and what in the past will be important. (talk) 05:31, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

if they ever were notable, write articles on them. If not, try an article on history of e book readers, if you have adequate sources. DGG (talk) 08:45, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

readius bit[edit]

why does readius and the manufacturer link both link to the phillips page? —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 21:44, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

The redirects of Readius and Polymer Vision to the Philips page doesn't make sense. Also, the redirects were established by a user who later had his account suspended on grounds of abusive edits. I have requested the deletion of the redirecting links. (talk) 09:45, 26 October 2008 (UTC)


In intro paragraph, can we just say that use of the term "for this article" is restricted to a certain meaning? Seems way more readable and economical. Ronocdh (talk) 00:58, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

elonex and borders[edit]

elonex are releasing a new reader under a deal with borders in the UK. this has many ghits, from notable reliable sources. someone may wish to add the elonex device. it's probably a rebadged machine, but I don't know enough about the devices to tell which one it is. (talk) 17:21, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

software and hardware[edit]

A web search will show many software projects that call themselves, and are called by other people, "ebook reader software". See, for example, Microsoft Reader (which even uses a freakish proprietary format with DRM). So I've removed the comment about "term restricted to hardware not software". (talk) 20:23, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Rumored devices or prototypes[edit]

I think this section is just about apple and it should be expanded or completely erased. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 23:13, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Removed. (talk) 22:49, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

comprehensive list[edit]

Electronic Book Reader Landscape, Sept 10 2009

Where's Pocketbook IQ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gniob (talkcontribs) 02:57, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

What about the new Asus Eee Reader?[edit]

What about the upcoming Asus Eee Reader? Into which article space should info about this product go?

Asus' top of the line Eee Reader would be a dual screen, full-color device with both screens connected by a hinge to emulate the look and feel of a traditional book. Asus showed off a concept version of this device earlier this year.
it will reportedly be able to simultaneously read text on one screen and view a Web page on the other. Dual Web/reading access could be a handy feature for students who want to have an online reading guide open while they study, and every day readers could enhance their understanding of a book by referring to online sources relating to their text.
One of the screens may also have the capability to convert into a touch-based keypad, turning the device into some sort of netbook for easy Web access. Other features include Wi-Fi, speakers, Webcam, and microphone....

Also, we should look for info on what type of screen it will have: Color LCD? (Hope not!) Or color digital paper, like the Kindle? (much better for reading books!) RK (talk) 16:20, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

Column ordering[edit]

The column ordering needs to be revised, with key information like memory limits and card reader off the screen to the right. Perhaps the model column could be repeated at the end for easier reference. Vicarage (talk) 22:15, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

I keep having to scroll up/down to read the column headings. Could we add rows in the middle of the table to fix this? One about every 1.75-2 screens' width? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gniob (talkcontribs) 02:55, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

Ultra wide table[edit]

Is it possible to split the main table ?-- (talk) 18:49, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

it would also be nice if the table could be tidyed up a bit it appears that the last 3-4 columbs have no heading? —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 15:29, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

The last 3 columns don't print, not even using landscape mode (A4 paper). —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 08:50, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

Perhaps the heading rows on the tables could be repeated after a certain number of rows? The full table doesn't display on my screen and I keep having to scroll up or down to remember which column is what. Alexi lupin (talk) 05:06, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

color vs black and white[edit]

We should have a column for Color or B&W since new readers are coming out in color. Green Cardamom (talk) 03:30, 31 January 2010 (UTC)


Come on guys, who did that? That table is pretty useless. I am looking at it on a 24inch widescreen, and it doesn't show completely.

Also, who cares about ".mp3 remembers last mp3 file played " in an ebook reader? Kids/manufacturers, if you want to show off with features, then at least have a look at the table afterwards! It is screwed up on the right. Or even better, just don't do it at all.

Anybody wants to cleanup the mess? Can anyone prove all the numbers/facts? How about links to product pages?

Damn, this page used to be useful, but that was a long time ago (talk) 02:03, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Condor Technology Associates[edit]

I can not help but notice that the two products from the above mentioned company that are due "soon" have everything set to "Y" (eGriver IDEO,eGriver Touch) but that one product that actually exists (EGriver) does not appear in the list at all. I would suggest the reference to these devices be removed unless concrete proof can be given for the mentioned specifications. Also the details for the EGriver device should be added. —Preceding unsigned comment added by GramlerGrindstone (talkcontribs) 21:45, 5 March 2010 (UTC)


What does the column "Size" give? Normally I'd expect something like height x width. However, it gives only a single length. What does it give? The height? The width? The diagonal? Do all readers share the same height:width ratio? Because only then it makes sense to give the size by a single number. -- (talk) 20:54, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Remove "numbers sold"?[edit]

The column "numbers sold" not only is almost empty, but the few non-empty entries are all either "NA" or release date information which would logically belong to the column "Intro Date". Moreover, I'd not consider that relevant information, and it would outdate very quickly anyway. Therefore I'd propose to remove that column, especially given that the table is overly wide anyways. -- (talk) 21:05, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

add OpenBook E-Book Reader from Delstar?[edit]

I haven't seen a physical copy, just the pictures in the advertisement. Does anyone have reviews on this product? The specs are on the web page. LexIcon (talk) 20:03, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

Article Updates[edit]

I have been working a bit on the article, and based upon my own thoughts and talkpage comments i made the following changes:

  • I split the main table in two for readabilities sake - There is now a secondary table that lists the file formats.
  • The main table is now a square table and not a jagged table anymore - if you add column, ADD IT TO ALL THE ITEMS LISTED! Not doing so will create an ugly jagged column, and at worst screw up the entire table.
  • The formats table now uses colored {{yes}} {{no}} {{partial}} and {{?}} templates to display information - but it contains a whole lot of question marks.
  • I commented the "Comparison Table for not-yet-available devices" out. There is valid information in the table, but it should be integrated once the devices become available. Small problem: The table format is not suited to be directly pasted in the main table.
  • I removed the gallery on top of the article. I think the screen type could better be listed in the table if required, but i feel that images of the devices are better placed on individual product pages, rather then in a comparison page.
  • I removed the "numbers sold" and the "mp3 remembers last mp3 file played". The former contained no information whatsoever, and the latter is trivial information at best. I added a new column on screen resolution though - 5' and 6' devices seem to have a set size, but the larger devices vary quite a bit - and more large devices are set for launch.

I think the article looks fine now, safe for the barebone references and the amount of question marks and non filled fields in the tables - but those will flesh out overtime i presume. If something is wrong, or your dead against a change i made, drop me a note. Besides, i will be monitoring this talk page a bit, so if there are more suggestions for improvement... :) Excirial (Contact me,Contribs) 11:41, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

Fad Features Galore![edit]

(but no talk on need to know aspects like how the screen fairs upon eye strain, or use in the sun or inside in dark the reason it seems to exist in the first place, no comparisons there) all fad talk, fad, fad, fad lol! —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 15:15, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

How about FictionBook (FB2) format?[edit]

This XML based open e-book format is essential on cyrillic markets. So, all the Ukrainan devices (PocketBooks, lBooks) have support for it by default. --jno (talk) 08:58, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Feel free to add it, seems valid enough. Just remember to add the field to every entry of the table, or we will end up with the ugly jagged layout again. Excirial (Contact me,Contribs) 15:38, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

Ebook reader with Organizer features[edit]

I heared rumors about a new Ebook reader with organizer features such as adress book, todo list, callendar, etc. Does anyone know some more about that? I'd totally buy that thing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 15:29, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

default typeface[edit]

What fonts do the readers use? —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 02:42, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Limited Web Browser capabilities in Kindle 3 Wi-Fi 3G[edit]

That limitation should be further explained. As long as I know browser access doesn't differ at all with the Kindle 3 Wi-Fi. Both have software and hardware restricted compatibility with some Internet content. On regard of the 3G connection, Internet access it is indeed restricted, but no more than other devices without 3G access that have been considered as with full browser capabilities. Heathmoor (talk) 03:18, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

.XPS format: time to add it!?[edit]

With the release of Ray Kurzweil's Blio software initially for PC's, with iPad iPhone Andriod etc coming, and then hopefully "real" eReaders later, isn't it time to add the .XPS format to the list? The Blio reader only supports .ePub and preferencially XPS for advanced content. Im using it myself and if I stick with it then I am going to need a reader that'll read .XPS... —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 03:22, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

Before we add .XPS should we sort the extensions into alphabetical order...[edit]

Sounds like the _only_ non-discimatory way of doing it?

I will come back and do both: that is if no one else gets around to doing it first!
 Done - File formats are now sorted alphabetically. Excirial (Contact me,Contribs) 11:27, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

BOOQ Android ebook reader[edit]

There is a new affordable Android ebook reader : -- (talk) 13:25, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

Meaning of "Library Compatible"[edit]

"Library compatible" means what exactly? the column headers need to be wikilinks, or else the features aren't notable (in the sense of being well known to a general audience) enough to be standalone headings. Same with file formats. A file format that doesn't have a WP article is too obscure to care about. SchmuckyTheCat (talk)

Library compatible likely means that the e-book reader is compatible with E-books rented from a library ( Files expire and cannot be opened after a certain amount of time). I don't entirely agree with the wikilinks part. Not every feature in every product is worth being written into a seperate article, even though it may be relevant for a comparison table. it is also possible that a feature is mentioned in the middle of an article detailing another subject (For example, the PDF page may spend 1 or 2 lines on specific subject XYZ for e-readers). The file formats may be a good call, though i advise caution. Its easier to google and create an article if notable, then to re-add a removed column later on. Excirial (Contact me,Contribs) 20:59, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
I agree with SchmuckyTheCat, I had to read the comment above to get any meaning out of "Library Compatible" and I'm still not 100% sure what it means... there should be at least some description of the columns in the article. --Dmfallak (talk) 18:38, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
I came here to find out what "library compatible" means and still haven't figured it out. Maybe we don't need to wikilink every column title, but that term absolutely should be defined. (It's the only thing holding up my decision to get Dad a Kindle for Christmas.) --JaGatalk 05:44, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
FYI - I went to a random e-book offering library and selected a book. The book was in format "Adobe PDF eBook" which was described as playing on "eBook-compatible computers & devices", which took me to this link, which indeed says Kindle does not support. So it looks like the column is correct (and I'm no longer in the market for a Kindle.) --JaGatalk 05:52, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
Saw a review on Amazon for Libre Ebook Reader Pro (black) that said: "I own a Kindle; love my Kindle--but professionally I also need an e-reader that allows me to get content from my local library, i.e. EPub format." So maybe that's all it means: supports EPUB format. thundt (talk) 05:41, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
Yes, I think "library compatible" needs more description. I think this means "Supports DRM EPUB files". Also, there are very simple freeware tools for stripping EPUB DRM and converting EPUB files to MOBI, which is Kindle supported. So, this should also be briefly explained, I think, because otherwise it is inaccurate to flatly say library books are not supported on the Kindle. I think folks read library books on Kindle all the time. Also, fyi, elsewhere on Wikipedia, for example Windows_Media_DRM, DRM removal tools are discussed explicitly, so doesn't appear to be a policy restriction regarding this. Pjwst6 (talk) 13:52, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
Since we obviously need to have some definition even to investigate whether the information is accurate, I've added one and fact-tagged it to stimulate some action here. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 10:16, 3 September 2011 (UTC)
I've done a bunch of research on this topic recently, and one very concrete instance of "library compatible" is "compatible with the OverDrive service that many libraries use to facilitate their e-lending". That service supports two different DRM schemes for e-books, the Kindle one (added recently) and the "Adobe Digital Editions" one. So in some sense it's correct to say that "if it can either consume Kindle content or content protected by a sufficiently featureful implementation of Adobe's DRM, then it's library compatible", but that's IMHO both an oversimplification and confusingly complex (in different ways). For one example of a problem with putting things in those terms, not every title that's lendable supports every DRM scheme, so the set of books my own local library can lend to Kindle owners is not identical to the set it can lend to Nook owners. For another example, devices that can use Adobe's DRM get a lot more than "library compatible" out of it -- the free monthly ebook from the University of Chicago Press is DRMed with this scheme, and multiple book sellers use that scheme. Might it make more sense to make a column for each supported DRM scheme? Or a "DRM" column with each device listing the schemes it supports? We could have a separate table of which services provide content with each DRM scheme, if that's desirable. Dfjdejulio (talk) 20:49, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
Further clarification: it doesn't mean "supports ePub files that use either the Kindle or Adobe DRM schemes", as many of the lent ebooks are in PDF format. You've got two semi-orthogonal components: your device must support both the DRM scheme and the document format for a given individual book. My own local library's ebooks, provided via OverDrive, are in some cases available as very Kindle-specific documents, in some cases available as Adobe-DRM-protected ePub files, and in some cases available as Adobe-DRM-protected PDF files. I am not sure how to cite this sufficiently well for wikipedia purposes, as the links I used to convince myself of this will only work for people with a library card number at my local library. I think I could describe how any given people could prove this to themselves, but I cannot provide a simple citation URL. Dfjdejulio (talk) 20:53, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

Additions needed: Color Nook and Hanvon Color (E-Ink) Readers...[edit]

Additions needed: Color Nook and Hanvon Color (E-Ink) Readers... (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 10:50, 8 November 2010 (UTC). The first is released and represents probably the best value Android Tablet available (after hacking), the second is on its way... (talk) 10:54, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Sharper Image Literati. Nantucketnoon (talk) 09:11, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for your suggestion. When you believe an article needs improvement, please feel free to make those changes. Wikipedia is a wiki, so anyone can edit almost any article by simply following the edit this page link at the top. The Wikipedia community encourages you to be bold in updating pages. Don't worry too much about making honest mistakes—they're likely to be found and corrected quickly. If you're not sure how editing works, check out how to edit a page, or use the sandbox to try out your editing skills. New contributors are always welcome. You don't even need to log in (although there are many reasons why you might want to). Excirial (Contact me,Contribs) 20:51, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
I am going to try to add the nook colour when i have time --Guerillero | My Talk 18:54, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

Top Table Cleanup[edit]

I did a first-pass cleanup of the top table. I tried to remove junk to make this table easier to read, make entries be more uniform, so they will sort better. I also tried to narrow the heading row and other things to narrow the columns, so more can be read on some people's screens. It is harder for editors to maintain this table if we sort it by product release date, thus is why I started moving a few manufactures to the top. I removed the middle title row until we get this table sorted by manufacturer name. • SbmeirowTalk • 23:23, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

To Do - Fill In The Unknowns[edit]

Everyone needs to spend a little bit of time filling in the unknown fields. Some of these devices need to be deleted from the table if their unknown fields don't get fixed. • SbmeirowTalk • 23:28, 2 January 2011 (UTC)


I'm not sure that the lead picture is the best, since it most prominently shows the iPad, which is not an e-book reader (by our own definition). It's also misleading to call this "evolution", implying the iPad is the best - aside from the POV, this is again a dubious claim since it isn't an e-ink based reader.

This picture could easily be cropped of course, but the other readers aren't shown so clearly (which itself is another problem - it looks like the non-iPad readers aren't as clear in their display, when that's just due to being out of focus). Can we find a better picture showing a range of actual e-readers? Mdwh (talk) 15:05, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Software Readers[edit]

This article should include a comparison of e-book reader software or a link to the corresponding article.-- (talk) 02:03, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

ePaper vs LCD[edit]

I noticed that the column heading is "devices with electronic paper" which is not correct with the inclusion of Nook Color and perhaps others. Sbeattie (talk) 14:21, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Please please -please- someone add what type of screen is used, what version (see below) and whether it supports colour or not. I would revise a bit if I had the time (I might contribute in the future). (talk) 18:37, 9 February 2011 (UTC) - Anonymous

Need eInk (or Whatever) Version[edit]

I've been compiling my own collection of info in preparation to buying one of these things... and just stumbled upon this one. It's missing one of the important pieces of info, namely, just exactly what type of "eInk" or other display technology is being used. For example, the Kindle 3 (and some/all Sonys) use eInk "Pearl" whereas the current Nook and Kindle 2 use eInk "Vizplex", the previous version. (Pearl is claimed to have 50% better contrast.) Clearly this is useful to know! thundt (talk) 05:34, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Great idea! Furthermore I would like to suggest to mention tablets (LCD instead of eink) in a different table. People who wants an ereader deliberately choose for eink because it simply reads much more comfortable than a LCD-screen, that's why those people accept the limitations (no color (yet!), no animations, relatively low resolution etc.). Tablets are a great piece of technology but they aren't ebookreaders. (talk) 03:23, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

Apple iPad & other iDevices[edit]

With the inclusion of iBooks and the kindle app as well as numerous other reader apps for various file formats, perhaps the iPad could be included in this article as a device that can function as an e-book reader and have its stats placed in the table for comparison with the others. Nekochan1973 (talk) 07:55, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

There is also an Overdrive app for iPads that are library compatible, the table could be updated to reflect this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 17:33, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Battery life column[edit]

There are an increasing number of ebook readers being sold with LED or LCD screens - obviously colour is a major selling point. Currently the comparison table doesn't quantify the advantages of eInk, which is presumably the longer battery life and readability in bright conditions.

But some of the LCD readers (e.g. Ectaco jetbook) claim 90 hours reading which is more than many eInk readers. (They do this with 4*AAA batteries which weigh almost as much as the claimed 5.8oz! 90 hours is probably misleading as they claim the advantage of jetbook lite is 23 hours reading instead of 20.) Since the battery reading time life is pretty important to usability should we not attempt to quantify it? Chris55 (talk) 13:14, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Android or Linux?[edit]

Isn't the operating system portion slightly illogical, since Android is separated from other Linux distributions? I've understood that also Android is based on Linux kernel so it can be considered just another Linux distribution. Maybe we should put "Linux (Android)" instead of just "Android" as the operating system for the Android devices. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 18:14, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

I note this revision [3], but could some column please provide info on how readily the software can be modified/replaced (rooting, etc.)? HLHJ (talk) 16:02, 6 August 2015 (UTC)


I think that the "dictionary" section is misleading. I purchased the Pocketbook Pro 902 and it is listed as having a dictionary. I thought that I would be able to look up the definition of words, but all it allows is the rough translation of a word from one language to another. Perhaps this should be a separate column. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheMightyOrb (talkcontribs) 02:49, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Keys to chart headings[edit]

This article is sorely in need of descriptions for non-obvious table headings. I've created one (a stub) for the "by maker or design" section and started with the one I'm most concerned about, "library compatible". I've also fact-tagged it because I doubt there's even a universal definition for the term, so more research (and definitely reliable sourcing) is needed. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 10:20, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

Addition of sales figures[edit]

Considering the number of imconpatible formats, I'd suggest a column for units sold. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 11:55, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

Removing the non-electronic paper displays section from the article.[edit]

I just removed the non-electronic paper displays from the article itself, mostly par WP:BRD in order to trigger a discussion on this if people disagree. I removed the section itself par the following rationale:

  • An e-book reader is a device that has an electronic ink screen.
  • An e-book reader primary function is to allow reading e-books.

A large amount of devices, most notably tablets, are capable of functioning as e-book readers, even though this is not their primary purpose. If we were to list every device capable of displaying documents, we would have a large amount of overlap with other articles such as Comparison of tablet PCs. To prevent this, i propose we only list devices which main purpose is displaying e-books. Excirial (Contact me,Contribs) 22:06, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

This section need to be re-instated as not all e-book readers use electronic ink.
Also you have removed some valid ebook readers such as the Barnes and Noble Nook color.

As the person who introduced this section, let me explain: there is no intrinsic connection between e-ink and e-book reader. Plenty of tablets are good for reading ebooks and recent Nook readers show there's no clear dividing line. The market will decide whether this idea of an ebook reader is permanent or just a passing phase. In the meanwhile, people want to make comparisons for whatever purpose they have in mind. What's missing currently is a meaningful comparison of battery life. If someone could figure that out I'd be grateful. Chris55 (talk) 18:03, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

Iriver Story HD[edit]

There are two versions of the Iriver Story HD currently available: there's a Basic model not mentioned in this list which doesn't support Wi-Fi (part code EB07-BASIC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bpdlr (talkcontribs) 16:52, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

New column: Registration required[edit]

I'd be interested in a new column, "Registration Required". I almost bought a Nook Simple Touch this weekend, but the deciding factor against it was that (I was told) I would have to register a name, email address, and credit card, and that I could not read my own files without it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 01:35, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

Jinke E-Readers[edit]

I don't want to mess up the chart, but Jinke V3 has these formats: PDF, EPUB, TXT, HTML, DOC, RTF, MP3, WOL, CHM, RAR/ZIP,BMP, JPG, TIF, PNG, GIF, PPT, PDB, FB2, DjVu, LIT, MOBI, PRC. And Jinke V5 has these formats: PDF, EPUB, TXT, HTML, DOC, RTF, MP3, WOL, CHM, RAR/ZIP,BMP, JPG, TIF, PNG, GIF, PPT, PDB, FB2, DjVu, LIT, MOBI, PRC. (These are the same for both) (talk) 05:14, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

Nook Simple Touch GlowLight introduces built-in light source[edit]

A new column indicating if the reader can be used in the dark without additional light source would be nice — Minusf (talk) 17:01, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

HTML duplication[edit]

I have just noticed that there are two columns for .html in the file format support table. I just wanted to mention it! :) -- (talk) 08:36, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Now there is only one. And no DRM there. What's up with you, people? For a whole year no one managed to fix this. Are you afraid of tables or what? (talk) 08:44, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

Commercially available devices[edit]

Heading says listed are only commercially available devices -- thus more models need to be removed, like e.g. old Kindles? --Brevity (talk) 14:16, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

Removal of "integrated dictionary" column[edit]

The tables have been, in multiple places in this talk page, accused of providing "fad" information about a device, and not the ones that consumers seek out. As well, as a result of having so very many columns, the tables have become rather sprawling. For the sake of easy comprehensibility by the reader (without which they will likely avoid the table altogether) - I think it is necessary some columns be eliminated.

I understand "integrated dictionary" is sometimes desired by people seeking to provide a reader for young children to learn from, but my impression is that by and large in the market for e-readers, it is a low-priority feature. For now I am removing this column.

I realize this is a controversial choice. This is the reason I am posting it on the talk page. If you feel this is an essential feature (and thus vital information for a significant portion of readers) please justify why before reinstating it, as I have done before removing it. Thanks. --Monk of the highest order(t) 22:38, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

"Partial (non-DRM only)"[edit]

What the hell does that mean? How is non-DRM support of .txt "partial"? Is that about exporting into that format? --AVRS (talk) 23:47, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Agreed, I'm going to remove it. There's no such thing as DRM in a .txt file anyway. Jdc1197 (talk) 12:40, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

Why not to add CPU/RAM info[edit]

I think this comparison is missing information about processor and RAM — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 17:09, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

USB / other port number[edit]

In the USB column, instead of "Yes", could we have "2"? More data, no more space. I'd also like to know about other ports, so a "Ports" column with "2 USB, micro SDHC(up to 2Gb)" would be perfect. (talk) 14:45, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

Supported file format table is not clear[edit]

I would suggest organising the columns into the following supercolumns.. Text ,Audio ,Video ,Proprietary formats

Also having the cells coloured red and green would be good.

In its present state this table does not clearly show a difference between the more open readers such as those made by pocketbook and the more restrictive ones such as those made by amazon for example. As open and proprietary format columns are mixed together willy nilly.

What are "USB peripherals"?[edit]

Can anybody tell me what is meant with the column "USB peripherals"? I doubt that there is any e-book reader with a USB host functionality. --LordOider (talk) 23:01, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

Removed arg and lbr fomats[edit]

I couldn't find any meaningful information regarding these e-book formats so I removed them from the table. I used the web and this article as reference: I also made the table more pretty. — Preceding unsigned comment added by VzjrZ (talkcontribs) 00:12, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

Inclusion request Navy E - reader[edit]

When somebody gets the chance, please include Navy eReader Device in the chart. --WikiTryHardDieHard (talk) 00:55, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

It is not available to the general public, just US Navy sailors so I am not sure it belongs here. Frmorrison (talk) 16:06, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

E-book readers that run on PC's[edit]

It isn't clear to me why e-book readers that run on laptops aren't included here. There don't seem to be a great many, but some of them are used by a very large number of people around the world. A week ago I downloaded calibre (small-"c"), a free app, and have been delighted at its professional design. It supports e-books and related formats, also e-book editing, cross-linking, automatic table-of-content creation, and so on. It also claims to provide a number of ancillary apps and free storage in the Cloud (neither of which I've tried yet). Yet it's not even mentioned in this listing of e-book readers.

Any comments or explanations? Cheers, kentfx 07:33, 8 June 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kentfx (talkcontribs)