After reading more on the Apple vs everyone else debates, I realized that I probably need to define my usage of “flash” when griping about eBook readers.
I read very fast. It’s just a talent. I can’t paint my own toenails without making a huge mess and I have no athletic ability. I don’t suck at math, but I can’t do complex stuff in my head the way my mom and sister can. I’m just blessed in the language arts category.
By very fast, I mean around 120 to 150 pages an hour. That means I turn a page every 20 or 30 seconds with real books. With digital books, the pages aren’t as big, so I turn a page about every 10 seconds.
In all the eBook readers I’ve seen, when you turn a page the screen inverts the black and white text then turns completely black, then fades back in to the words on the next page. It takes a little under a second to change screens. Hence, my term “flash.” It has nothing to do with the program from Adobe.
As quickly as I read, I see a lot of page changes in a very short amount of time which to me is “flashing.” When I have a migraine, I can’t even read a magazine with glossy pages. Even then, sometimes the glossy pages trigger a migraine so I’m not going to submit my brain to a “flash” every several seconds.
Until the technology gets better, I’d rather scroll down than change pages. Even the reader on my cell phone (Samsung Moment) is better than the full sized eBook readers I’ve seen because it’s a constant, hi-def screen.
With the file sizes of eBooks being so incredibly small, there is room to improve the screen quality in the device itself. The largest eBook file I have is 111,ooo KB with most averaging around 10,ooo to 15,ooo KB in a PDF format. PDFs look great on the average computer screen, so why can’t the readers do the same?
A nice screen with a few buttons to turn pages and load books with a single USB port would be something I would drop a few hundred dollars on. Until then, I’m not going to risk a migraine to have a slimmer way of reading a book.