Important to know!! On Gizmodo (link below) Kyle Wagner writes about the light spot that he has created on his Nook GlowLight ereader by scratching the screen.
As you can see in his photo of the scene of the crime, by dropping a TV remote onto his Nook from (he says) about 6 inches, he has created a small dent in the light spreading sheet on top of the actual e-Ink screen. And this dent catches the light from the LEDs arranged along the top of his ereader screen, and produces a truly irritating light spot, which he says, and I would agree with him here, completely spoils his reading experience with this ereader.
The way the ereader’s reading light is installed on the Nook is by placing a transparent sheet on top of the actual e-Ink screen, and the light from the LEDs is spread down over the entire screen through this sheet. A very standard way of spreading light from a single source over a surface.
However, it is now obvious that this sheet is highly susceptible to being damaged, which has to be one of the daftest things ever. To use such a sensitive and fragile material on a device that by its very nature is going to be banged about, dropped into bags, exposed to the risk of small children hitting it with toys and all the other risks that are the daily life of any ereader is the height of stupidity in my view.
I understand that in order to function, this light spreading sheet has to be mounted on top of the e-Ink screen, but surely they must have noticed this fragility during the development of the technology one would have thought.
One of the many selling points of this particular otherwise excellent ereader is not only the built in light, but also the fact that they have managed to make it noticeably lighter than the standard Nook ereader. But it seems to me that have achieved this last at the cost of producing a sensibly and usable device.
To have brought to market a gadget that can be rendered more or less unsuitable to purpose by any small accidental contact with any sharp objects seems stupid to me. At the least they should have placed some sort of tougher layer or film on top of the light spreading screen.
As Kyle points out, he can still use his Nook, but not with the light, which makes the extra cost of the thing pretty pointless.
I don’t know if placing some sort of screen protecting film on top of the existing screen would help prevent this sort of damage, but at the least I would try that if I was the proud owner of a Nook GlowLight ereader. And if that didn’t work, I would be knocking on Barnes and Noble’s door demanding my money back very fast indeed!
Link to the Gizmodo post: http://gizmodo.com/5907053/you-really-dont-want-to-drop-the-new-nook-simple-touch
Share with us:
What do you think of this? Is this a reasonable way for a large company to perform?
May 3rd, 2012 at 8:19 pm
I guess, Tony, you and I disagree about this topic. You wrote: “However, it is now obvious that this sheet is highly susceptible to being damaged, which has to be one of the daftest things ever. To use such a sensitive and fragile material on a device that by its very nature is going to be banged about, dropped into bags, exposed to the risk of small children hitting it with toys and all the other risks that are the daily life of any ereader is the height of stupidity in my view.”
What I consider the “height of stupidity” is the dropping of the remote on an unprotected screen. If the Nook is to be held responsible for the author’s carelessness, then we might as well demand that these devices be made bulletproof, waterproof, childproof, and careless proof or not sold. Whatever happened to the idea of being careful with one’s possessions?
My Sony 505 is 4.5 years old, is used every day, and still is in the pristine condition that I received it in. Why? Because we are careful not to leave the screen exposed when we are not using the device and we do not use the 505 as a coaster for our tea cup. I would add that my Sony 950, which is 1.5 years old and also gets used daily, is also in pristine condition. I don’t ask my dog to fetch it for me.
Accidents happen; I understand that, which is why I buy the extended warranties for these known-to-be-delicate devices. But you wouldn’t take a permanent marker and write telephone numbers on your computer screen and then complain that the screen is defective because you can’t see behind the marker. Why complain when YOU are careless enough to drop an object on a delicate screen. Shouldn’t the complaint be: Why didn’t you have a protective cover?
May 4th, 2012 at 9:13 am
@ Rich,
You are, as ever, correct in your comments about my post, and your remarks about the guy whose ereader got scratched.
I seem to have fallen victim to the prevailing atmosphere of blaming others for one’s own mistakes, the dreaded Health and Safety syndrome. Scalding yourself by spilling hot coffee on your lap in Starbucks and then suing them for the pain and emotional damage you suffered and similar things.
However, I do feel that to produce a device that is apparently very easy to damage in this way does seem to me to be a pity, since ereaders do generally have a rough life one way or another. And to assume that people will buy covers to protect their gadgets instead of making it reasonably tough in the first place seems to me to be a bad idea.
If for some technical reason it is impossible to make the light spreading screen tough enough to cope with the normal risks in the life of an ereader, then perhaps a warning with the gadget might be a good idea perhaps? Or sell it with a cover, as some ereader makers do might help.
May 10th, 2012 at 10:56 pm
“I don’t know if placing some sort of screen protecting film on top of the existing screen would help prevent this sort of damage, but at the least I would try that if I was the proud owner of a Nook GlowLight ereader. And if that didn’t work, I would be knocking on Barnes and Noble’s door demanding my money back very fast indeed!”
B&N explains that adding an additional screen protector may damage the screen of this nook.
This is in the manual for the NSTG:
Note: To insure the hishest qualilty of reading imaginable, NOOK Simple Touch™ with GlowLight™ has an anti-glare, screen protector already installed. The use of any additional screen protectors may damage the device and will void the warranty.
Hope this helps anyone who is planning to add an additional screen protector.
May 21st, 2012 at 10:05 pm
While I agree it doesn’t need to made to withstand abuse such as dropping, I really am disappointed in the screen. I only use mine to read at home and have never had any accident with it but it got the smallest little scratch. You can’t even find it with the glowlight off (maybe 1 mm in length). But with the light on it reflects and lights up a large circle around it. It is thankfully at the bottom of the screen and will not affect my reading but I am very sure that with it being so sensitive I will get more scratches that will render the glowlight useless. I hope I am wrong as it is by far the best ereader out there and I prefer B&N over the competitors.
June 9th, 2012 at 2:18 am
I don’t think it is a scratch. I’ve fooled around with a few of the devices and I’ve even tried scratching them. I think it’s a crack caused by a blow or excessive pressure. If you put your thumb on the screen and push really hard, you’ll hear a crackling sound and see light streaming through the cracks.
June 28th, 2012 at 3:00 am
The screen on the new nook with glowlight is definitely fragile. I noticed a crack on my screen this morning which looks much like the pic above when the glowlight is on. I did NOT drop a remote, or do anything else that would obviously damage the nook. This crack occured with normal usage, and I have been conscious of being careful with this nook since this was a replacement for a defective nook that the display totally went out on. Both of these issues occured within days (less than two weeks) of purchase.
It seems that the new nook with glowlight is not made to the same standards as the first simple touch nook. I had that nook device for a year before I had any issues, and it stood up to daily use (and I didn’t treate that one as gingerly as the one I have now). I am really disappointed in the quality of this new nook.
July 20th, 2012 at 4:56 pm
Bought a nook with glowlight this Saturday, and even though I treated it carefully, the screen got a little crack (there does not seem to be a scratch). It is not noticeable with the glowlight off, but it looks like the picture above with glowlights on.
If anyone would come up with a method to fix this, this would be greatly appreciated.
August 9th, 2012 at 6:25 am
[...] Link to my post on the Nook Glowlight: http://www.ebookanoid.com/?p=8509 [...]
August 13th, 2012 at 6:48 am
Agree with the above. I am hyper careful with all my devices and my new glow has the tiniest speck of a scratch which is completely unnoticeable without the light. With the light on it screams “look at me!!” it seems to be a little less obvious if I tilt the top of the nook down a bit. I may consider contacting BN to see what their response may be.
August 14th, 2012 at 1:47 am
I am on my 4th Simple Touch with Glow Light. I keep my reader in a case when not in use. Sub-par product!
August 14th, 2012 at 5:48 am
@ LAS,
I am sorry to hear that you are having so much trouble with your ereaders. what was wrong with the other three?