Consumer Reports ranks NOOK SimpleTouch #1 EBR
Consumer Reports has a reputation for being an unbiased testing company, and I think people are influenced by what they say.
In August 1, 2012 issue, they rank EBRs (E-Book Readers).
You can get that issue for your Kindle Fire, Kindle for iPad, or Kindle for iPhone here:
You can buy the individual issue for $3.99…or get a subscription for $2 a month. That comes (like all Kindle store magazines) with a 14-day free trial. You could read this issue, and then go to
http://www.amazon.com/manageyourkindle
and then go to
Subscription Settings
and click or tap
Actions…
and choose
Cancel my subscription.
As to what they said…
The NOOK Simple Touch with Glowlight is #1, with a score of 83.
I’ m reasonably sure that Amazon has one of these in the wings, waiting for the right time to announce it…but they need to be careful about waiting too long.
The #2? Also a NOOK (the Simple Touch without the Glowlight).
Interestingly, the Kindle Keyboard outranks the Kindle Touch.
Neither the Touch nor the Keyboard get a “Best Buy” rating…the only Kindle that gets that is the Mindle.
They tested 22 models…but only 14 would they recommend.
I’ll let you read the rest of that…don’t want to take too much away from the list.
By the way, they also list tablets…and in the 7-8 inch, Wi-Fi only category, they have six to recommend…and the Kindle Fire is number 5 (but is a Best Buy). The NOOK tablet is…#6.
If you want to see some local news bantering about this, you can watch this video:
What do you think? Surprised that the NOOK Simple Touch beats the Kindle Touch? Does Consumer Reports still matter? Is Amazon making a mistake by not getting a front lit reflective screen Kindle out sooner? Is it ethical to get a 14-day free trial if you are sure you aren’t going to subscribe to something? Feel free to let me and my readers know by commenting on this post.
This post by Bufo Calvin originally appeared in the I Love My Kindle blog.
July 13, 2012 at 4:04 am |
You asked, “Is it ethical to get a 14-day free trial if you are sure you aren’t going to subscribe to something?” I don’t think so. So maybe you don’t intend to continue the subscription after the free trial. The purpose of the free trial is to try to get you to stay with it, so it’s possible that once the issue downloads and you look through it you slap yourself upside the head, say, “WOW! Look what I’ve been missing out on!” and continue to subscribe. There have been several publications that I subscribed to with the full intention of continuing the subscription only to find myself unhappy with the way it looked or worked on the Kindle and I ended up unsubscribing before the 14 days were up. There have been others that I tried thinking I wouldn’t like them only to discover that I liked them a lot.
July 13, 2012 at 12:43 pm |
Thanks for writing, Lady!
This one is a fascinating question for me. Is there an implied intent that you get a free trial because you might purchase it?
Certainly, the publisher hopes you’ll buy a subscription, and you might decide to get it even if that isn’t your original intention.
I’d relate it to free samples at Costcoo. How many people take that free sample, even though they have no intention of buying the product? Is that unethical? I don’t think so…Costco knows that is part of the experience, and supports it (the people doing the labor of the free samples appear to typically be Costco employees).
Free samples (14-day trials) are similarly part of the Kindle store experience.
Is it different from getting a sample of an e-book? I’ve done that with books where I didn’t think I was going to buy the book, but I wanted to know more about it.
In the case of Consumer Reports, I’m writing about the magazine. That’s potentially a considerable value for Consumer Reports. That’s going to be true for anybody who gets a free trial. If a magazine costs, say, $100 a year, many people might not subscribe. People who get a free sample, though, might talk/write about it to people who do decide to get it.
If the publisher only wants you to get the free trial if you think you will buy it, that seems…to make it something other than a free trial, to me.
On the other hand, it is a “trial”, suggesting that you get it free because you are trying it. Trying can certainly imply testing, which suggests you think you may be influenced by the results.
Here’s the other weird piece of this. Somebody could get the free trial, pay for one month, than cancel…and have gotten a single issue for about half the price of buying a single issue.
What’s the logic for the publisher? Presumably, many people forget to cancel, and pay when they didn’t really want it. Is that, itself, ethical?
It’s all complicated…
July 13, 2012 at 4:33 am |
I do think Amazon is waiting too long to release a lighted Kindle, if they have one…but that opinion might be colored by the fact that I really really want one. I’m also not surprised that keyboard beat touch; I hugely prefer turning pages with a slight thumb pressure to moving my finger into the reading field of vision. Thanks.
July 13, 2012 at 1:01 pm |
Thanks for writing, Melissa!
There are two things that make me think strongly that Amazon has a frontlit Kindle pretty much ready to go.
One is that their contract with the Department of State appears to require it:
http://ilmk.wordpress.com/2012/06/12/the-us-state-department-chooses-kindles/
The other one is that I wrote about one reportedly being seen…before the NOOK Simple Touch with Glowlight was released:
http://ilmk.wordpress.com/2012/04/07/techcrunch-next-generation-of-e-ink-kindle-to-sport-new-front-lit-screen/
As to the Touch versus the Keyboard…
Amazon refers to the Touch as the “top of the line”, and it does have features the Keyboard doesn’t (notably, the X-ray feature and multiple language interfaces). Looking at the table in more detail, the Touch was rated lower on “Responsiveness” and “Page turns”. I agree with you on the slight flex being better than the swipe or tap. My guess is that the rankings could have switched easily by including a category for “multi-language support” or “research value”.
The question then becomes, which parameters are the most important?
July 15, 2012 at 3:41 am
I’m a pure pleasure reader, and a heavy use one at that. So for me, the most important — almost only important– features are those around ease of use. If I were a student, or reading research, or something other than a daily pleasure reader, some of those other features might matter…but they don’t. I enjoy your blog, thanks.
July 15, 2012 at 12:24 pm
Thanks for writing, Melissa!
Yes, I agree…the Consumer Reports analysis is too narrow to communicate the real issues that determine how much someone will enjoy one model over another.
July 13, 2012 at 4:42 am |
This is confusing on a number of fronts. The link you posted takes one to an Amazon page that will get you a subscription for the KF and some PC apps. Not sure whether this is an app on the KF or a specially formatted web page.
I have had a web-based subscription to CR since before the KF was announced — it includes a “mobile” version that appears to be different than what your link references, yet this “mobile” version works fine on my KF AND my smartphone (the Amazon link you posted is only for KF) — it’s confusing — not sure what the source of the confusion is CR or Amazon.
Then I went to CR to read the detailed review of the KT SO which their summary table gives a rating of 68 and recommends it, but not a best buy. Now if you go into the detailed review they say:
“This version of Amazon’s first touch-screen reader is a
CR Best Buy,
and is among the least expensive touch-screen models on the market. It does, however, carry rotating ads and offers on the screensaver and along the bottom of the library screen. (A sibling that omits the commercial content is available for $140.) Its jumbo largest font size is a boon for the sight-impaired.”
They then go on to review individual features with comments like ” best we’ve seen”; “best of all devices tested”, and they have not one negative thing to say about the device — all the Cons paragraphs are blank. They do say that the KT is “locked” in landscape mode (if it’s locked at all — it’s in portrait — and I thought they removed that limitation a while back?).
Makes me wonder about their vaunted “objectivity”
At best this EBR review is a sloppy piece of work.
July 13, 2012 at 1:07 pm |
Thanks for writing, Edward!
In terms of my link, it’s to a subscription page in the Kindle store. I wanted people to have the ability to read the article…and I don’t think Consumer Reports makes the article available online to non-subscribers. Since you can get a 14-day free trial and/or buy the individual issue, it’s a way for people with a compatible device to read it.
As to the neutrality…you can be neutral and sloppy, using your assessment.
If any imprecision in the article isn’t due to prejudice towards one brand or another, that’s still neutral.
The Touch is not locked on portrait any more, so that’s inaccurate. If the article was available on the web and had a comment section, I could let people know that, but I don’t think I have a good way to do it. They probably have a “letters to the editor” thing…I’ll have to look.
July 13, 2012 at 3:49 pm
The main inconsistency I was pointing out was not the screen rotation, but that on the overview EBR page the KTSO is NOT listed as a Best Buy, but in the detailed review it is.
My other point was that by subscribing directly with CR you get a subscription that works both on your KF AND your smartphone — I believe the Amazon page is for kindle-only subscriptions.
Upon reflection I think the various inconsistencies I’ve and others have pointed out is mostly due to the timing of when the devices were detail reviewed. I think the summary comparison reflects their current opinion, while the detailed reviews reflect their opinion when the detailed review was done.
I suspect the KT review was done right after it came out last year — it has fallen in their estimation since as competitors have announced better products
July 13, 2012 at 11:55 am |
I’m shocked that they rated the Kindle Fire #5. I haven’t read the article, but I would have expected it to be #2 (behind the Samsung Tab 2).
I am waiting for Amazon to announce a second gen Kindle Touch (lighted or not, doesn’t matter to me). I want them to take their time and make sure it is a quality product. But I do hope they can announce it this month.
It sounds to be like Consumer Reports is biased against Amazon. I have read other web sites praising the Nook over the kindle as well. I don’t believe it. But I am not going to buy a Nook Touch just to find out for myself. I do have a Nook Color, and compared to my Kindle Fire, the Fire wins for touch responsiveness and many other things.
July 13, 2012 at 1:30 pm |
Thanks for writing, Anne!
Reviewers like the frontlit feature, bottom line. They see it as a bridge between the backlit device’s ability to read in the dark and the reflective screen’s ability to read in bright sunlight. They also like the life of the battery charge life, compared to a backlit screen.
Assuming Amazon releases one or more models with the feature soon, I think it will become a standard. That doesn’t mean every model will have it (the Mindle doesn’t have sound, for example), but I think people will come to expect it.
July 13, 2012 at 1:26 pm |
To me the infrastucture is more important than the device. Before I got my Kindle, B&N was touting that you could buy books and get free books from their website without owning a Nook, so I donwloaded their e-reader on my PC, and tried to find some readable free books, and the search at the time was just impossible to really find anything, shortly after, Amazon introduced the Kindle Keyboard at a much lower price than previous Kindles, so I didn’t need to do any research on the Kindle vs Nook dilemma, and thus a new Bufo fan was minted! LOL Now that I am a few years collecting Kindle books, and Fire Apps, I don’t think I would switch even if B&N gave me a free goldplated Nook! (I’d melt it down for scrap.)
July 13, 2012 at 2:17 pm |
Thanks for writing, Zebras!
I do think infrastructure is very important, and I also place a high priority on Customer Service. The latter is what really made a solid divide for me between Amazon and Barnes & Noble (online).
I would, though, happily accept a NOOK. I think it’s a good device, and there are smart people who use them. Switching is a different story, but I’d be interested in owning both.
I do think I’d tend to buy my content from Amazon, because of the service and who else owns Kindles in my circle.
One of the simplest and clearest differences: Amazon allows the “return” of a Kindle store book within seven days of purchase for a refund, B&N does not allow the return of an e-book at any time. Consumer Reports was reviewing the hardware, but I think that’s important for consumers to know.
July 13, 2012 at 4:00 pm
Another “little” customer service thing Amazon does is that every time I hit “buy” on an e-book in their store, it flashes up a message (if I’ve already bought the e-book) before finalizing the deal — most other e-book sellers don’t. I buy so many books that I often forget what I’ve already bought — Amazon goes the extra mile here IMO.
July 13, 2012 at 2:46 pm |
The return policy is huge. Its a level of trust Amazon gives us knowing it could easily be abused. Its comforting to know if I get clicking away, I can correct a mistake, which I usually figure out when I get the order e-mail.All but one of my returns was nearly immediate. I have to say I ordered one travel book while we were in Bermuda, whose contents added absolutely nothing that we did not already know to our experience, so I also returned that one.
July 13, 2012 at 3:21 pm |
Thanks for writing, Zebras!
Yes, that’s huge! I think “trust” is a good word. Now, I’m pragmatic enough to know that the difference in “trust” doesn’t imply a fundamental difference in, oh, I’ll say “morality”. It can be a business decision to trust people more, but that is one Amazon has made and B&N has not.
July 13, 2012 at 3:21 pm |
It’s interesting to me that the rankings would seem to be based solely on the “price” of the eReader without any user experience included in the “value” proposition.
To me, the value of the item is related to the overall experience. Using the Consumer Reports method, there would never be a justification for a Mac of any sort when you can get a PC with the same processor/RAM/HD specs for 1/3 the price. But the Mac isn’t any more expensive if you look at the cost of ownership (since Macs hold their value and you can sell your old one when buying a new one, resulting in about the same cost as a “new” PC). Further, the downtime of a PC due to viruses, malware, software conflicts and lack of “it just works” is considerable.
The Kindle experience is a huge part of the equation. It is tightly ties with Amazon.com and that is a good thing. The availability of books on Kindle is higher than B&N Nooks. While I’m sure the actual reading experience when you’re in the book isn’t significantly different, the overall experience has to be included somehow.
Now, regarding the “subscribe” to read the magazine free and then unsubscribe comment… As long as this is something you can’t do repeatedly, I don’t have much of a problem with it. It would be easy enough to just stop by the magazine rack in the grocery store, read the whole article and put it back on the rack. The “perusability” of books/periodicals in Amazon is one major deficiency compared to a regular bookstore.
July 13, 2012 at 7:12 pm |
Thanks for writing, jasonecox!
I’m with you on the evaluation method. They seem to have gone for the “low-lying fruit” of analyzing the stats, rather than the experience. Of course, it might be harder to measure experiential elements in a neutral manner. Since repair stats aren’t released by the companies, you’d have to do it by surveys.
I think Consumer Reports prefers to do the testing themselves. Unless they are going to give their testers each of the 22 different models, and have them actually purchase books and experience the use of each model for, oh, at least a month, I think it’s hard to replicate the consumer experience.
The ongoing relationship of an EBR may not lend itself well to CR’s methods.
You point about “browsability” is a great one! That also matches up with the free samples on the e-books. You can only get a free trial on each magazine one time, so it can’t be abused by subscribing and canceling every month.
July 13, 2012 at 5:37 pm |
Bufo, you’ve really stirred up a hornet’s nest. Outrage is a mild description. I am a fan of CR but am really disillusioned about this article. Almost none of the best things about Amazon and the readers is considered.
However, I am considering continuing the subscription because of the other valuable articles I found. The mag adapts very well to the ereader format. Big print, great pics.
Thumbs down on the Kindle reviews.
Rosemary
July 13, 2012 at 7:18 pm |
Thanks for writing, Rosemary!
Well, I suppose the question is that if you are outraged about this story, because you feel it doesn’t present a complete and useful picture, how then can you trust the other articles?
July 13, 2012 at 9:33 pm |
It has been years since I paid any attention to CR. Nobody is ‘unbiased’, and there’s a big difference between reviewing vacuum cleaners and reviewing ereaders. I find readily available professional and user reviews much more informative and useful.
That said, I think many of Kindle Touch’s ‘soft’ features escape notice and appreciation. I wan’t blown away by mine at first. It took time, and especially the 5.1 update (did CR review KT with 5.1?) to get there. When I pull out my Nook STR to read something on it, it seems bland, crippled and stripped down by comparison. Maybe there’s some zen-like virtue to that, but to cite one example: having used wikipedia lookup (summary displays without launching a browser) I would never want to read without it, any more than I would want a reading device without a built in dictionary (yes I don’t read much on my Fire).
As another example, consider (the lack of) file management on the Nook: you cannot delete anything from the Library view. You must hook up a USB cable to load and delete side-loaded content. Even to archive B&N content, you have to open the item to be able to see the option to do this. And samples are added to your Library and show as such on every registered device. To get rid of them, you have to use a computer browser and go to your account page. Annoying. By contrast, you can pretty much do away with KT’s USB cable, and use a combination of personal documents service, dropbox, etc. You don’t have to sift through dozens of book samples that get lodged in your library. Delete/archive directly from the Home listing. But reviewers aren’t likely to discover this sort of thing.
July 14, 2012 at 4:05 am |
For us, the serious competition for our Kindle keyboard is our iPad and iPhones running the Kindle app, not any other current or future device from either Barnes and Noble or Amazon, and also not iBooks, which we haven’t even opened in over a year. We only buy both Ebooks and MP3s from Amazon.
July 14, 2012 at 12:54 pm |
Thanks for writing, Man!
That’s a place where I think Jeff Bezos has been very smart. He made the point that Amazon was keeping the EBR (E-Book Reader) and e-book markets separate. There was a lot of talk early in the Kindle’s evolution, when it cost over $300 dollars, that Amazon should do a “give away the razor and charge for the blades” model. People thought Amazon should give away Kindles, or make them very low-priced, but tie it into an obligation to buy a certain number of e-books.
Bezos said that he didn’t want to tie those two markets into a dependency. People can, and do, buy Kindle books without owning physical Kindles. I don’t think the reverse happens as much (that people own Kindles, but don’t buy or at least download Kindle store books), although it hypothetically could.
If iPads do great and iBooks doesn’t, that works very well for Amazon…since people buy Kindle store books to use on iPads.
If your hardware loyalty is to Apple, and your content loyalty is to Amazon, that’s okay with Amazon.