What's the best ereader for a poor man like me?

A smartphone.

What are the benefits of e-ink display?

Better readability and far less energy consumption.

How exactly is it more readable and how exactly does it consume less energy?
I'm staring rn at my laptop, and I'm just simply reading your reply. I don't know how it can get more readable than that.
Does the ereader read the text for you so your energy is less consumed?
I'm begining to think Kindle is a leftist trend.

a library card you trash

What is this post.

It's a red pill.

I think he overdosed.

...

trips confirm
get with the times, gramps
ereaders are a meme. Just use a tablet, you dorks

HOLY SHET

Since this thread is here again, what is the Best Kobo ereader? Back when I was shopping, I was really interested in it, but ended up getting a Kindle Paperwhite (which I love). But I'm in need of a second reader, and thought this might be the opportunity to finally get one.

The one downside with the Paperwhite was that occasionally I would want to read a manga or a doujin and even with Kindle Comic converter, it's kind of uncomfortable to read. Also I wouldn't mind having a slightly larger ereader to flip through my David Hamilton books (tablet would probably be better for that, though).

I have a library card, but I'd like to read the ebooks I have

>paperwhite is worth the extra

What advantages does it have? I see it has higher resolution but how much of a benefit is it?

Backlight, that's it.

In fact, it's frontlit. That's exactly the opposite, and because it's not backlit, it's easy on the eyes.

Nigga, I'll give you my unused Kindle for free simply because you're a fellow user and no one else will but it for more than twenty dollars cause it's last year's model.

Also has a higher resolution screen, so it can easily render fonts like Bookerly or Baskerville and they'll look great even at smaller sizes. Paperwhite also supports kfx ebooks, which have new improved typesettings for things like ligatures, decent kerning and proper justification via good hyphenation.

I got a Kobo Glo and that shit is pretty good for me.

More readable is probably not how I would put it as that may a subjective observement in my opinion.
> Does the ereader read the text for you so your energy is less consumed?
He didnt mean energy consumption of you, but of your reader...

The main legitimate difference between e-ink and standard displays is the lack of the harsh backlight which WILL affect your sleep and strain your eyes if used frequently. Having no backlight allows for a reading experience that won't give you headaches and wont keep you up late.

>You can get the Kindle without the backlight for around 60-70 bucks.

You forgot the fifteen dollars they charge to take the shitty ads off the lock screen

This.
This is important.

"The Virgin eReader"
>Amazon reserves the right to delete books from your library without your permission
>doesn't support epub
>doesn't let you change your wallpaper or fonts
>floods your device with ads to remind you that you are Amazon's bitch forever

"The Kobo PleasurePad"
>supports epub
>lets you put anything you want on there and keep it there forever
>no ads
>can change the font or the wallpaper to whatever you want

KOBO AURA ONE
O
B
O

A
U
R
A

O
N
E

How can I change the wallpaper on my kobo glo?

>Amazon reserves the right to delete books from your library without your permission
What? News to me. I've had my Kindle for over two years and have not experienced or heard of this.

Come on user, this is retarded.

It consumes less energy because the kindle runs only one process, that is, to show you the pages. If it's a classic kindle with no backlighting the battery lasts for weeks. It is also designed to resemble a book as closely as possible and I know for a fact that reading a book is far less tiring for the eyes. The kindle is as close a second to the book as you can get.

Do kobo not ship their ereaders? My shitty country is only filled with kindles and pocketbooks

Who on earth gives a shit about wallpapers?

Also, converting epub to mobi is done in less than a minute.

There once was a single incident where 1984 got deleted due to copyright issues. Everyone was refunded.

All of that is not meant to say the Kindle is better. Never had a Kobo.

Just turn on "eye-friendly" on your phone.
Tada! Now you have cheap e-reader

No, you haven't, as folks explaining the technology and frontlit screens have already pointed out.

Damn there are so many different Kobo devices.

Hey so question, I was considering getting a Kobo Aura One since it's a little bigger than my Paperwhite and I thought it might be good for
PDFs. But I've heard that Kobo actually sucks for PDF. Can anyone confirm?

It's the PDFs that suck

Your smartphone

That much is true. But sometimes a PDF might be all I have. Or the book has particular formatting or art that make a PDF the preferred or sole format to view it in.

The e-ink devices are not good for PDFs. There are $50 tablets available from Amazon and from B&N that are preferred for PDFs, the downside being they offer more distractions like easy internet browsing, and they're overkill for ePub docs

So I guess I'm doomed to buying Kindle for text-only books and a tablet for the other stuff. Lame.

>it's okay if a company fucks you over as long as I know how to get around it, so give all your shekels to Amazon!!

capitalist slut

That's what makes for the best reading experience. Unfortunately trying to convert between PDF and ePub gives nearly unreadable results. Speaking of which, I recommend against giving Amazon any business and converting any Kindle files to ePub as needed

Went and looked at Kindle Fires. I already have a 5.5" screen phone, so it hardly makes a difference. I ended up finding out about K2pdfopt, and that'll at least make PDFs readable on an e-reader. I'm gonna go ahead and hold out for a Kobo Aura One.

Actually the only bad thing is I have a few Amazon purchased ebooks that I probably won't be able to carry over to the Kobo so I'm considering getting the latest-generation Paperwhite.
I also just found a Kobo Glo on Craigslist for $50.

I got a Kobo Aura H20 a few years ago. It's great in terms of legibility and the battery seems to last forever, so I have no complaints.

Just jailbreak it or turn on your airplane mode. Also who gives a fuck about a lockscreen? Do you stare at your kindle when not reading?

Or you could just buy a Kindle Keyboard (3rd generation)
>less than $20 if you shop around
>never connect to wifi or 3G internet (There are 3G/Wifi and Wifi only versions, wifi only will be cheaper and it's what you want anyway)
>only load books on old fashioned way (plug in USB and drag&drop)
>Amazon will never be able to delete books
>will never see a single ad
>use calibre to convert epub to mobi
>caring about wallpaper (there are probably ways to hack it so you can change wallpapers if you are autistic enough, the default wallpapers are comfy enough desu)
>incredible battery life (4-8 weeks)

As if other companies wouldn't, you halfwit!

Also, its not "fuckiing over". The kindle is affordable, performs great and Amazon hast offrts good support.

The ad bullshit people are complaining about is also by choice.

Seriously, need opinions. Have been looking towards the Kobo Aura One to replace my gen 2 Paperwhite, which I'm giving to a family member, but I have an opportunity to snatch a cheap used Kobo Glo HD instead. Is the 7.8 screen worth it?

Kindles are an attempt to turn reading books into a shitty proprietary experience. They're cancer and can be easily replaced by an android tablet for less money. Go visit a library or check out some flea markets.

okay, here's what you do. go to ebay frequently and look up "blacklisted kindles". typically all this means is that amazon no longer works on the kindle, and is essentially claimed stolen, but since they're like 50 bucks, cops don't do shit.
next, you turn on airplane mode immediately upon receipt, as you don't need dat shit. then, you get calibre, convert your books to .mobi, and upload. then, you don't read because you're a pleb.

anyway, blacklisted kindles are a way to get more expensive kindles for less, i got a nice one with a keyboard for some 18 bucks. just gotta be patient and make sure the thing isn't just broken, but blacklisted.

but why even go for the more expensive kindles? They offer no additional benefits to the 3rd generation Kindle keyboards.

well, even the less expensive ones are extremely cheap when blacklisted, it's a bonus if they're the better kindles, honestly.
but in reality, it's just the nice cheap ones you're after.
since the whole point of this thread was to get a poor guy a cheap ebook reader, that's what i've found to be the cheapest way to get a kindle. hell, i think even now you can get an older style for 20-25 bucks even non-blacklisted, but if you can, blacklisted ones can be just as cheap or cheaper.

Wait, I don't get it: are these "blacklisted" Kindles actually stolen? Are they second hand, refurbished? New, but faulty and sold a such without warranty?

Nevermind, after some research I've discussed that all the recommendations for Kobo on /lit have been nothing but shilling, and proprietary software be damned, my best bet is still the latest iteration of the Paperwhite. Good day.

>it's a bonus if they're the better kindles, honestly
But this is what I'm asking. What makes a Kindle newer than 3rd gen better? Touchscreen? Faster?

They are stolen

basically stolen, typically, and amazon has abandoned them for whatever reason, whether theft or just, well, theft. i dunno. apparently it's not illegal to distribute them on ebay though. i dunno how i discovered it, but i have two of em, and they work great for me. i have yet to have any kind of failure with them, and they serve my purposes and the general purposes of anyone just wanting to read some gutenberg or pirated ebooks. if they actually want to buy books straight from amazon, they'd have to purchase proper kindles, used or otherwise.

i don't see any appreciable difference for the price. as far as i'm concerned, all but the paperwhite are essentially the same and should be treated as such.

Give it back Tyrone

well, yeah, but why not enjoy something that someone got robbed of? it's not like there's any moral impetus for you to such an extent that you're off buying ebay kindles to call amazon and have the things returned. i see it as a utility thing, if my enjoyment is equal to or greater than the suffering that the other person experiences, then clearly i'm morally superior.

Except there is no way to measure the victims suffering, so you're just justifying obviously wicked behaviour by making up weird mathematical comparisons of abstract things.

Aldiko for your phone

Lithium for patricians.

>there is no way to measure a victim's suffering
you sure about that? say i give you a papercut, and then i break your leg, would you say there was a definite difference between the levels of sufferings you experience? if not, i'm not going to have a conversation with you because you're a silly person.
of course you can measure suffering, it may be arbitrary, but what measurement doesn't have some foundation of arbitrariness? i can assure you that my enjoyment of a kindle is greater than the suffering experienced by the person who experienced its theft. i can evidence this very easily, by time. i have enjoyed my kindle for far longer than the length of time the robbery took place and the recognition of said robbery. even the length of time required to cope with the theft is less than the time i have spent reading and enjoying the kindle. all around, the value of my pleasure is great enough to overlook the small suffering required.
As I said earlier, you aren't off buying ebay items that you are fairly sure are stolen, and returning them to their rightful owners, are you? I think that somewhat invalidates your implied moral superiority, as you make no move to right a known wrong. I at least create a positive situation by overwhelming the suffering with valuable pleasure. Pleasure, I might add that in other forms may require even greater suffering.

I will also add that I induce no suffering by my act, and merely transmute the item into joy for at least one party, myself. By adding no suffering, my act is in no way wicked. I profit indirectly from a past suffering unrelated to my insular purchase.

My fucking post says "the victim" not "a victim". I was referring to the case you made. And in that specific case, you can't.

I am pretty damn sure that you could have measured my suffering as I read that smartassy bullshit of yours, though

>asshurt response that in no way refutes what i have said
it is clear where your suffering rests, my friend.

Mi Pad 2

youtube.com/watch?v=lKVB7VQP8OI

I do not refute what you said because you are obviously right about that you can, in fact, measure physical suffering, monkeyhead.

And I did not refute that shite about your time enjoying stolen goods weighs out the victims suffering, because I thought it would be unnecessary to point out that this is utter horseshit, for reasons like you can not know what emotional value the device itself as well as files on it might have had in the eyes of the former owner.

And to bring this unbelievably infantile discussion to an end, no I am not buying stolen Kindles and returning them to their owners. That doesnt mean, however, that it is suddenly okay to purchase stolen goods

i can specifically measure the maximum length of time the kindle was held by its initial owner, giving him the benefit of joy equivalent to mine, then the obviously brief suffering of losing a 40 dollar product, i would add, say, one month tops of slight suffering, i do not include the general suffering of the theft itself, as there may be other items dislodged from their person, so i simply add an offset of a day of extreme fear, which will be offset by my own delight upon receipt of the product. i take into account the joy of the previous user as well to grant you the greatest possible position to make my purchase unethical. Their enjoyment say, from the initial release date of the product to the date of my receipt, assuming the product was stolen and resold that day, is shorter than the time of my ownership by nearly three times. I use the product daily, and experience pure enjoyment for nearly 75% of my interaction with the product. so, in all, my pleasure vastly outweighs not only the pleasure of the person from whom it was stolen, but their suffering, as well as in the greatest possible handicaps in favor of the previous owner.

Calibre makes easy work of converting Kindle files to ePub. If the files have DRM, there is a Calibre plugin called deDRM that will take care of that too.

>I would add, say...
>I take into account
>I

First of all, I do not give a shit about what you would. My point is, you can not scientifically measure this.

Second, why the heck is it so important to you to win this argument? Nagging conscience because you support thieves?

i will go on to say that because you do not purchase and return stolen items to their rightful owners, you hold no moral dominion over me for enjoying stolen property that in no way adds to the initial suffering caused by the theft itself.
unless you genuinely believe there is someone weeping uncontrollably for several years over a lost kindle, then you're not being reasonable with your assumption that my joy is not outweighing their suffering.
In no way is the purchase of stolen goods as an insulated act of direct purchase from an unrelated party an unethical or negative act. It is perhaps in poor taste to you, but because you associate the theft itself with my purchase. I am merely acting upon an opportunity to give myself maximum pleasure, insulated entirely from the suffering in the first place, I don't even have to outweigh it, honestly.
I have dismantled your faux position of moral superiority, which you used unfairly to suggest that I was somehow incorrect in increasing my pleasure through no act that creates suffering of its own accord.

To profit indirectly from suffering is in no way immoral, nor is it unethical.

>support thieves
well, if you want to take that tact, how do you know that the product is being sold by the thief? if you wish to hold the position that you can know the thief himself is selling the product, then you should withhold the position that i cannot know the level of suffering of the victim of the theft.

>To profit indirectly from suffering is in no way immoral, nor is it unethical.

If you do so knowingly, it is. By knowingly purchasing stolen goods, you encourage stealing of goods. Therefore, you are a rapacious son of a bitch.

And I can very much tell you that you are an evil bastard even though I do not return all stolen goods in the world because that would be impossible and I do not encourage stealing.

Are you thick?! Even if it isn't the thief who sells it on ebay, he's making profit from it. But I guess according to your logic it would be kay if he sold it to a middleman first, because then in gets magically "passive" and "indirect"

now you're getting it. the indirect middleman is enough to wash my hands of any ethical problems. i have not gone to a thief asking for stolen property, and i am not operating under the assumption that the person i am purchasing from is the thief themselves, or even a middleman doing such a thing. from my perspective it is a potentially stolen item that is purchased by me, and is in no way connected to the initial act of theft, the item in this case was already purchased by the middleman or several filters of middlemen, and in that instance, the suffering itself gets further and further from my hands, until the magnitude of the suffering is so dilute that it is non-existent for practical purposes.
I do not encourage theft by purchasing stolen goods from the middleman, the middleman purchasing stolen goods encourages theft. I am encouraging the purchasing of stolen goods, at best, which itself may be immoral, the purchase of stolen goods directly, however, the reward for the theft has already been sanctified by other hands, by the time i get to the middle man, the act has already taken place, and in no way am I furthering any future acts of theft.
I am completely absolved, as I am not in any direct way guilty of a crime against anyone, and I merely profit from a now inert and untainted object.

>the indirect middleman is enough to wash my hands of any ethical problems

Nah. He's enough to wash your warped understanding of morality. I don't even know while I keep arguing with you. We won't convince each other. I think you're a prick, you think I'm a white knight.

Fact is, if no one would purchase stolen goods, no one would be selling them. Thus, less stealings. There is no discussion in that.

I will, however take back that "evil bastard" because now I genuinely believe that you think you are not being unethical. You're still a rapacious son of a bitch, though

If anything, I could easily argue that theft is a moral and ethical act simply due to the pleasure derived across a group of members. Their pleasure outweighs the suffering of the one stolen from, as each individual adds to the pleasure resulting from the theft, down to the final owner of said product, me.
Ultimately, the theft of this product from a utilitarian position, was a positive event.

There is no greed involved, as the price itself was a matter of convenience. Why, if I choose to purchase an item, would I choose not to purchase that same item for a lesser price? From my perspective, it is in no way a bad choice. I would buy the more expensive product anyway, since I want the product, but I am taking an opportunity that comes as a matter of course.
I do not agree that thefts would lessen if there were no one to purchase them. People would simply steal other things that are of more direct value, that do not require sale.

Unironically thinking that you'd be great fun in a debating club. You almost got me out in the streets, commiting arson, gangraping women and stealing Kindles off the masses because it would be such great fun for everyone who'd join me.

and so you don't stay upset about this, let's not make this personal. I understand your position completely, and from a certain perspective, I agree with you. I'm really just curious how this might play out as an argument ethically.
I bought the thing because it was cheap, I didn't realize it was blacklisted until after the purchase, and I figured I would keep it after research showed that Amazon typically doesn't bother with people wishing to return them. (according to forums)
In terms of this thread, I'm merely suggesting to a poor person with very little options financially a way to enjoy something that may be muddy ethically, but really isn't that serious of an issue. I genuinely don't want people to be stolen from, and I have since then purchased legal kindle products without any gripes.
Anyway, don't take this too personally, I might be in some sense the bad guy for not returning it as my duty as a citizen, I'll agree i'm saddling some guilt for that in and of itself.

ah, if only, i'm just in a strange mood tonight, wanted a more peaceful argument than the normal shitfest over the best author or whatever.
Check out the utility monster, an interesting thought experiment.

I am not taking this personally and am genuinely enjoying the debate. I might have to go slow on those expletives, though, now that you've proven yourself to be not a complete asshole. That's kinda sad.

I hear you, too. You're intention might be good: let's point OP to a way of getting a cheap e-reader.

However, I think that the, what, ten bucks? that he might save are not worth it, especially since he could have an unstolen device from different brand for an even lower price.

I still think that talk about returning stolen goods is silly. If I had purchased the thing and found out after, I wouldn't've ripped out my arsehole to return it. I would not have been happy, either. But I would keep my eyes open to not make the same error again.

Gotta love a good old internet fight to keep a thread from 404'ing.

All good points. The purpose of this thread is to make some destitute illiterate wastrel happy, so i'm open to more e-reader suggestions to be sure. though, i doubt there's much that performs as well as a simple kindle for a much lower price. even the non-blacklisted ones go for some 20 bucks or so, so it'd be hard to find something as solid and cheap as that.

really it was definitely a fallacy, but only to counter your moral fallacy, i suppose. the idea that your position was morally superior because you were actively morally superior in the argument, which put my entire argument at a disadvantage in the pursuit of truth, rather than, well, winning the argument for a dickwaving contest.
I do also consider, in this instance, I bought the product, and I discover it was stolen, I am not going to be reimbursed, but I feel that it is the right thing to do to return it, I suffer as a victim of being sold stolen goods, and the pleasure of having a stolen item returned (especially if insured, for example, and already replaced regardless) would hardly outweigh my now empty wallet. It would be as though there was a second theft, and would double the suffering.
Also, I wonder if suffering and pleasure are the true units of measurement that should be considered. Is a hedonist more valuable than an ascetic monk? are at least their lifestyles of differing values?

>falling for amazon botnet
Get a kobo holy shit

What if I was someone who had nothing in life except to read books. The only way for me to read them was by using a kindle and loading pirated books onto it. What if I made only enough that I could save $10 a year. What if after 10 years I finally purchase it and have the most supreme form of joy I've ever experienced in my life. What if that night some cunt steals the kindle to sell to your sorry ass on ebay.

well, first off, it's not $100.
second, i would argue that i am experiencing even more joy than you, or of an equal amount, and now that i own it, and will own it longer than you have, my pleasure outweighs the pleasure you experienced.

it's interesting to outweigh both pleasure and suffering with pleasure alone, as though you can put them at odds in that way.

I'm convinced Kobo is a meme. Everything I've read sounds great and I was almost convinced, but look at this shit:
youtu.be/jj3di89M9Hs
It's a fucking Kobo Aura One, it's the newest model, and yet it still can't get highlighting just right. It looks like it performs clunky, like it's a cheap knockoff piece of hardware or something.

Do you mean your pleasure outweighs my suffering? How do you quantify this? What if the theft drove me over the edge and I started hating myself to the point of suicide?