hmmm...I tried switching an ereader app to reverse color--its gross. hard on the eyes. I don't know how anyone could prefer white lettering on a black background. i think it is hideous.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
iPads screen causing eye strain during prolonged use.
- Thread starter MegaDell
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Ya I hear ya, but less light in your eyes probably better. I want Wargames green with a WOPR voice reading to me.
This is largely a manufactured issues to sell e-ink. LCDs were also sold as the easy on the eyes alternative to CRT and it was oversold even then.
I am a programmer putting in 10+ hour days on CRT/LCD for 15years now without eye strain (and I know lots of other programmers with zero issue as well).
A properly setup LCD won't cause eye strain for most of the population.
If you have eye strain looking at an LCD, lower the brightness or see your eye doc.
Non issue.
agreed. CRT's used as computer monitors, was a definite cause of headaches and eyestrain, due to the flickering. Even set to 85hz, my CRT was irritating.
I prefer to read on my iphone Kindle app that way. I feel like I can read from it alot easier than the black on white. I hope the ipad will allow me to do that.
There was a New York Times article a few weeks ago that addressed this issue. A couple of money quotes:
The whole article is worth reading, along with the comments thread.
The whole article is worth reading, along with the comments thread.
That article makes a good point.
When you are reading on a fixed computer monitor, to get the best position you need to move your body. However on a mobile device or smaller device like an iPad you can adjust the iPad so it is in the best position for you to read.
I think that can make a significant difference.
This is one of the reasons why I think netbooks are not really comparable to iPad like portable tablets. The ability to easily orientate the device to your body instead of being forced to orientate your body to the device will make a significant difference for usability.
When you are reading on a fixed computer monitor, to get the best position you need to move your body. However on a mobile device or smaller device like an iPad you can adjust the iPad so it is in the best position for you to read.
I think that can make a significant difference.
This is one of the reasons why I think netbooks are not really comparable to iPad like portable tablets. The ability to easily orientate the device to your body instead of being forced to orientate your body to the device will make a significant difference for usability.
If anyone is grumbling about possible eye strain without evidence -
maybe they should consider what quality screen and ppi say a MBP or an iMac has.
The iPad ppi afaik will be equivalent if not higher than an MBP or iMac.
It's sensible to get around and move, rest your eyes for a bit whatever you're doing.
maybe they should consider what quality screen and ppi say a MBP or an iMac has.
The iPad ppi afaik will be equivalent if not higher than an MBP or iMac.
It's sensible to get around and move, rest your eyes for a bit whatever you're doing.
I can stay awake all night reading The Guardian's app on my iPhone while laying down. Book's in bed it's a different story. Unless I'm sat up I struggling to get comfortable. Folding the paper, figuring out how to hold it. Continually rolling over from one side or the other till I finish the seventh page and give up.
Why would reading a book cause any more eye strain than surfing the web?
Books don't have refresh rates, nor are their characters made up by tiny pixels, or have back-lighting. any one of those attributes could potential cause eye strain. Remember, eye strain is simply that the eye tires from working so hard at reading (rather focusing).
The very act of a reading a book could also potentially cause eye strain if the print was not clear, or the ambient lighting was not sufficient. In general, monitors do have the greater likelihood of causing eye strain however.
LCDs don't have refresh rates on static content like text. LCDs only refresh when you change the image. So zero refresh issues while reading text.
Being made of pixels is unlikely to cause any issue. I have used monitors with huge dot pitch and even if you see the pixels it doesn't hurt your eyes.
And you could just as easily say having a fully controllable back-light means you can always get the perfect amount of light to read with.
This is a non issue pushed by the e-Ink crowd.
With the explosion of multipurpose tablets, I expect e-Ink will be all but dead within two years.
Could you possible accept that some people prefer reading on eInk without it being a marketing ploy? Isn't it entirely possible that people do get eyestrain when looking at their monitors vs eInk?
Why is it so hard to "admit" that people have different preferences. That doesn't make your preference any different. Do you NEED the validation or to "win" the discussion? Because there's no winner here. People have different preferences.
PS - Your two year "death knell" on eInk is hysterical
There is a difference between a preference and unfounded claims that reading on LCD causes eyestrain. I was mainly shooting down incorrect information about LCD refresh.
Judging by my 15 year experience in the computer industry with people who spend 10+ hours a day staring intently at computer screens, I think it is fair to state that for most people LCDs present no eyestrain issues.
As far as my prediction of e-ink being near dead in 2 years. Bookmark this for 2012 and we shall see how healthy e-ink is then. I may be premature on death knell, but I predict the decline will be fully evident by then.
Unless e-ink can improve contrast ratios, color ability, and refresh rates, I have to agree that e-ink may have a substantially short life-span. I am aware of some newer versions that overcome the current lackluster e-ink displays, but OTOH, various types of LCD technology is not the devil's screen that e-ink enthusiasts would have us believe it is. Does anyone remember how swiftly CD's supplanted vinyl records? Or how fast DVD's caught on? I can easily envision that e-ink displays will become passe. I would concede that they could live on in specialized products needing extraordinary battery life, but I don't expect e-ink to "win the war".
It is hideous. I'm taking a web developing class right now and putting white text on black background is a big no no because it causes eyestrain. There are forums that user white text on a black background and it gives me serious eyestrain after about an hour.
Sorry, my question was misleading when taken out of context. I wasn't talking about physical books, I was responding to another poster who seemed to claim that reading a book on an LCD screen somehow caused more eyestrain than reading regular websites on the same type of screen.
I don't find many people complaining about eInk , in fact I find the opposite. I have the Barnes & Noble Nook and have access to the Kindle and Sony eReader. For many people I know reading eInk is easier than reading paper due to a variety of reasons including the ability to change font and zoom in (not everyone has 20/20 vision).
Also, I've never found people attempting to argue that eInk is the same as paper. Obviously it's not. But, in regards to reading online...eInk vs a backlite screen is a HUGE DIFFERENCE. It's personal choice of course, but I don't find many arguments against eInk and eReaders.
Nonsense
I have a kindle and read 2-3 books every week. I did War & Peace in a week.
No problems!
I assume Apple and Mr. J have taken extended use into account; if not, the iPad will fail as ane-book reader
Nonsense
I have a kindle and read 2-3 books every week. I did War & Peace in a week.
No problems!
I assume Apple and Mr. J have taken extended use into account; if not, the iPad will fail as ane-book reader
the Kindle is not back-lit.
I don't understand this problem at all. I stare at computer screens 13+ hours a day. Never a problem wether it be my iPod touch, dual 23in 2048x1152 samsung displays, mac book pro, mac book. And hopefully my future iPad
In fact I am so used to computer displays, been on them since I was 3, that I feel more comfortable reading on a computer than a book.n
In fact I am so used to computer displays, been on them since I was 3, that I feel more comfortable reading on a computer than a book.n
I think if you're a big reader, you'll like e-ink better.
If you're a casual reader, I'm sure you'll be fine for 30-60 minutes at a time. Particularly when you have good ambient lighting and proper screen settings. And that assumes here you're just buying a device just for reading books. The iPad is a no-brainer when figuring in everything else it does and will do.
Don't forget, reading in low-light causes eye strain too and people do it all the time. At least the iPad is lit.
If you're a casual reader, I'm sure you'll be fine for 30-60 minutes at a time. Particularly when you have good ambient lighting and proper screen settings. And that assumes here you're just buying a device just for reading books. The iPad is a no-brainer when figuring in everything else it does and will do.
Don't forget, reading in low-light causes eye strain too and people do it all the time. At least the iPad is lit.