This is very odd. If you look at the article below you will see that the Kobo Touch wins Tim Carmody’s Editor’s Pick as the best ereader. (Congrats to Kobo, by the way! A great company!)
Now let’s look that the other ereaders Carmody chose to compare:
Sony PRS-T1 – a touch-enabled ereader that has no ads
Barnes & Noble Simple Touch: a touch-enabled ereader that has no ads
Kindle: low end, non-touch, ad enabled version.
What’s going on here? Carmody is taking a completely different category non-touch Kindle and comparing it to three higher-end touch ereaders. In addition, one of the “Cons” he lists of the low end Kindle is that it has ads. This same version of the Kindle is available without ads, but he chose not to mention this and then decides to use the ad version and list it as a con.
Finally, he says that the Kindle has the “worst in-test screen, dim and blurry, with horrible artifacts”. Doesn’t he know that all these ereaders use the same Pearl screen? Possibly he got a defective unit, but he didn’t check for that.
I don’t know what’s going on here, but I think that anyone who is going to buy an ereader had better steer clear of Carmody’s recommendations. There are plenty of unbiased reviews out there on the net.
Shame on you, Wired.