The iPad is indeed a useful, entertaining, engaging and disruptive product, but is it really a better reading device than the traditional e-Ink readers currently on the market? We put the iPad’s backlit IPS LCD screen to the test and compared it to its competitors under various lighting conditions. (click here to view testing gallery)
So after all of the fallout, just under three weeks after the iPad’s availability on April 3, I’ve had a decent amount of time to spend with my new device and explore its capabilities. For the most part, the product has delivered very well on its promises as an industry leading and powerful digital convergence device, particularly in the consumption of Web, multimedia and informational content.
The iPad is a non-stop source for consuming updated news feeds, is a phenomenal casual web surfing device, is great for viewing and listening to streamed media, has freed me from my desktop for at least 3 or 4 hours during the work week and has allowed me to relax with technology over the weekend and evenings. In that respect, the device has already justified its purpose.
However, one of the reasons why I purchased the iPad was that I wanted a single device that indeed would be a universal content consumption device and would replace the e-Readers that I have been flirting with on and off over the last several years. I say flirting because I primarily use e-readers for recreational reading when I am on vacation or when I have ample time to spare.
Over the years I have been highly critical of e-Reader devices such as the Kindle. Their internal processing power has been limited and I have found overall performance and responsiveness to be slow, particularly as it comes down to user interface and screen refresh. Most importantly, their cost relative to their limited function, which is to read books has also been traditionally high when compared to multifunction devices. Continue to ZDNet: http://asurl.net/9Yc
