Color New to the JetBook world..intrested in buying JetBook Color

[PF4Mobile]

I need e-ink to protect my eyes.
For productivity I looked at the Asus line as well.
I missed a good deal just before holidays, here in Canada BestBuy sold Asus eee121 (slate) with 600$ factory refurbished....
That will allow me to use the same PDF reader on desktop and tablet and get rid of all the complication to transfer the content from e-reader to desktop. I needed time to go to the store and test my PDF reader there. The functionality was OK (Windows is not very good for tablets, not yet) but the screen was glaring and even if I adjusted the contrast and brightness it was still uncomfortable

However the tablets give me the same eye strain as desktops and I do not want to spend any more money for that.

[Kris777]

Originally Posted by PF4Mobile

he says that but can we see it :-) ? Seeing is believing.

This page has information in English:
http://www.jetbookk12.com/jetbookcolor/

I already made the preorder for jetBook Color and will submit my review as soon as get it from Ectaco.

[fsvum]

Another one writes about the confusion concerning the resolution. As far as I understood, the reader has a 800x600 ppi and with subpixel-dithering it makes out of it 1600x1200 dpi.
9.68" x >200 dpi ~= sqrt(1600^2 + 1200^2)

still don't get it , so the bottom line , for comics and scanned pdfs , should i get it or go for Pocketbook Pro 912/903?

[Backi]

Originally Posted by fsvum

still don't get it , so the bottom line , for comics and scanned pdfs , should i get it or go for Pocketbook Pro 912/903?

We will definitely see how that looks after the shipping on 15th.
I found two 1200x1600 images, which look like internal screenshots (maybe they are simply photoshopped) and they give a hint, how it would look like on the device in terms of resolution:

http://ectaco-global.blogspot.com/20...irst-look.html

[PF4Mobile]

They are too vivid for eInk in my opinion.
However there seem to be some doubts regarding the PDF browsing speed
It can be noticed in their videos as well. Let's see what those who bought the device have to say about it. Some independently made videos would be helpful.

[Backi]

Originally Posted by PF4Mobile

They are too vivid for eInk in my opinion.

I think, the reason is, that it is not the eInk, that displays these images. That is how they look like before displaying them on the Triton (as I said: internal screenshots (grabbing from frame buffer)).
On the Triton display they'll look muted. I think, the graphics chip is supposed to put out such vivid graphics to compensate the muted display.

[DaleDe]

Originally Posted by Backi

I think, the reason is, that it is not the eInk, that displays these images. That is how they look like before displaying them on the Triton (as I said: internal screenshots (grabbing from frame buffer)).
On the Triton display they'll look muted. I think, the graphics chip is supposed to put out such vivid graphics to compensate the muted display.

And they are only 300x400 images in Jpeg. There are too may artifacts in a jpeg image to see much of anything with these samples.

[Backi]

Originally Posted by DaleDe

And they are only 300x400 images in Jpeg. There are too may artifacts in a jpeg image to see much of anything with these samples.

Why 300x400?

[soilwork]

Originally Posted by Backi

Why 300x400?

I think he is talking about the resolution of the thumbnails. Once you click the thumbnails, you get 1600 * 1200 pictures. But I have to agree with others that they are too vivid to be actual screenshots.

The following link also has screenshots and they look more realistic.
http://www.jetbookk12.com/jetbookcolor/?refid=29532
The colors are more muted and the resolution is only 550 * 733. I guess it may be the effective pixels that can be used out of the supposed resolution of 600 * 800 just as PRS-505 has effective 754 × 584 pixels out of 800 * 600 pixels.

[Backi]

Ectaco's device is a rebranded Hanvon. So as long as one can read the little chinese characters on it, I'm not concerned about the resolution





(http://www.engadget.com/2011/01/09/h...der-to-ces-we/)

I'm reading an interesting thing: "It’s based on the Hanvon C920, which utilizes a 1600 x 1200 Triton color E Ink display that’s capable of interpreting two-finger touch gestures."
Zooming could be more comfortable.

[PF4Mobile]

Why are you assuming that displaying the characters means that they are readable? You might see exactly what the camera say...that is not much

[soilwork]

Originally Posted by Backi

Ectaco's device is a rebranded Hanvon. So as long as one can read the little chinese characters on it, I'm not concerned about the resolution

I agree that the photo looks quite promising and I am anxiously waiting for users' hands-on review.

But to point out one thing, only Ectaco claim that JC has 1600 * 1200 resolution but not Hanvon. Hanvon do not claim C920 (which JC is based on) has 1600*1200 resolution. Hanvon advertise the 1600 * 1200 (with 200dpi) resolution for their greyscale version (E920), though. You can compare the information on two devices here.

http://www.hanvon.com/en/products/eb...ucts-C920.html
http://www.hanvon.com/en/products/eb...ucts-E920.html

If Hanvon C920 (which JC is based on) can actually display 1600 * 1200 resolution, I guess Hanvon would have advertised it as well, so I am a bit skeptical about Ectaco's claim.

[Backi]

Originally Posted by soilwork

I agree that the photo looks quite promising and I am anxiously waiting for users' hands-on review.

But to point out one thing, only Ectaco claim that JC has 1600 * 1200 resolution but not Hanvon. Hanvon do not claim C920 (which JC is based on) has 1600*1200 resolution. Hanvon advertise the 1600 * 1200 (with 200dpi) resolution for their greyscale version (E920), though. You can compare the information on two devices here.

http://www.hanvon.com/en/products/eb...ucts-C920.html
http://www.hanvon.com/en/products/eb...ucts-E920.html

If Hanvon C920 (which JC is based on) can actually display 1600 * 1200 resolution, I guess Hanvon would have advertised it as well, so I am a bit skeptical about Ectaco's claim.

Someone on the russian board also noticed, that one can't find the resolution on the product page. I watched this video recently and at 1:48 the asian representative says 1600x1200 (the other both misunderstood her ):



Well, let us wait a week.

Originally Posted by PF4Mobile

Why are you assuming that displaying the characters means that they are readable? You might see exactly what the camera say...that is not much

Then it would be very difficult to sell the device on chinese market. Wait, that's why they are exporting all their rebranded stocks to the west!

[PF4Mobile]

Originally Posted by Backi

Someone on the russian board also noticed, that one can't find the resolution on the product page. I watched this video recently and at 1:48 the asian representative says 1600x1200 (the other both misunderstood her ):

....
Well, let us wait a week.


Then it would be very difficult to sell the device on chinese market. Wait, that's why they are exporting all their rebranded stocks to the west!

I guess it depends on the resolution of the page that is displayed...
the page is the picture could can be read column by colum I guess but not if full size

[soilwork]

Originally Posted by Backi

Someone on the russian board also noticed, that one can't find the resolution on the product page. I watched this video recently and at 1:48 the asian representative says 1600x1200 (the other both misunderstood her ):

I think we all know that JC (or C920) has the screen with
* 1600 * 1200 subpixels, which can be used to display
* 800 * 600 color pixels
So it should be able to display color images in 800 * 600.

So, there are two mixed issues here.
1. Whether Jetbook Color (JC) can display 1600 * 1200 BW images or documents.
2. Whether emphasizing 1600 * 1200 resolution is ethically right.

1.
About the first question, we have to wait about a week. It is possible that this machince can display BW images or documents much better than 800 * 600 using subpixels, hopefully closer to 1600 * 1200. If it can display better than 1200 x 825 (current 9.7 e-ink screen), I will order one right away.

2.
Second issue is whether it is ethically sound to claim 1600 * 1200 resolution. As you found from Engadget, they claim that

"It's based on the Hanvon C920, which utilizes a 1600 x 1200 Triton color E Ink display"

One problem is that people automatically think JC will be able to display 1600 * 1200 color images when they read 'resolution 1600 * 1200 color e-ink screen'. Since eink Triton actually uses 1600 * 1200 subpixels so 'resolution 1600 * 1200' is not a lie technically but still gives misleading information to consumers.

If JC can display BW images/documents closer to 1600 * 1200, then claiming 1600 * 1200 resolution can be somewhat justified. If it is not, then, I think it is a shady promotion strategy.

Well, let's see how the product turns out to be and I really hope JC turn out to be a really good one.