Act of Valor (A Review)

Courtesy of Grace Hill Media, Kathy and I saw a free advance screening of Act of Valor, an upcoming motion picture featuring active Navy SEALs.

Before the movie began, a representative from Grace Hill Media told us that everyone we saw in uniform in the film was an actual active soldier. That's probably a bit of an exaggeration; however, it is well-known that the eight principal Navy SEALs in the movie are the real deal. They're not just Navy SEALs, but active Navy SEALs. Since they are active, their real names are not used in the credits for the movie.

I don't know if it will be featured with the full release of the film, but in our advance screening, there was a brief introduction to the film from directors Mike McCoy and Scott Waugh of the Bandito Brothers production company. In preparation for the movie they spent six months with active Navy SEALs and came to the conclusion that actors could not convincingly portray what they observed. Having decided to use real SEALs in the characters' roles, they were given unprecedented access not only to the soldiers, but also to military equipment and locations. 

The movie's story revolves around a SEALs team's efforts to recover a kidnapped CIA agent and thwart a terrorist plot against the United States. Non-combat dialogue between the eight principal soldiers is the movie's primary weak point as these men are not professional actors. These scenes are somewhat reminiscent of the level of acting in recent films from Sherwood Pictures (not in any way affiliated with Act of Valor). 

However, the real advantage of using actual soldiers for the film comes in the combat sequences and provides a level of realism that I doubt any actors (of any caliber) could have offered. Kathy and I both found it absolutely fascinating to watch these professional soldiers in very realistic situations. Their skills for stealth, professionalism, and ability to make quick decisions were absolutely engrossing. 

Back in May of last year, if you saw footage of the White House staff watching Navy SEALs ambush Osama Bin Laden's compound in Pakistan via the soldiers' helmet cams, you have a glimpse into the reaction of our audience last night. The combat scenes were incredibly intense, and at one point I looked around the theater to see hundreds of wide-eyed movie goers with their hands in front of their faces, just like the President's cabinet earlier this year. 

I won't give away the ending of the movie, but I will say that it was a bit predictable at a certain level. Considering the title of the movie in the singular and considering that there is in the plot a formulaic adaptation of the old cop movie "I just have this last case to solve before I can finally retire!" shtick, the final scenes are not overly surprising. Nevertheless, even if predictable, they were still quite moving. Even though the story itself was fictitious, the reality never left me that these were real soldiers and the events in the film depicted the kinds of actual situations that our soldiers--and their families--find themselves in every day.

No doubt this movie will inspire a new generation of young men to aspire to becoming SEALs themselves, although the reality remains that achieving such status has even less likelihood than the average teenager's goal of becoming a professional athlete. The SEALs are clearly the elite of the elite in our nation's defense. In spite of the fact that this world can be a very dangerous place to live at times, I went to bed last night feeling much safer after seeing this film.

Act of Valor, rated R for strong violence including some torture and for language, will be released nationwide on February 24, 2012.

Review: B&N Nook Simple Touch

I won't drag out any suspense to the end: I like the new touchscreen Nook from Barnes & Noble. It's not a perfect device, and there are some aspects that B&N needs to address, but it has great potential and already does a few things better than its competitors. This new Nook incarnation has been positioned by Barnes & Noble to squarely take on the dominance of the Amazon Kindle, which currently controls about 65% of the eBook market, with the Nook coming in second at 25%.

I never owned the first generation Nook, so this review will not spend much time comparing the two beyond a few anecdotal notes told to me by those who had the earlier eReader. However, I will compare the new Nook to Amazon's Kindle, which is where the most significant comparisons rest anyway. Would I recommend the Nook over the Amazon Kindle? Maybe, maybe not. That's a tough call and would certainly depend upon the needs of the user. I now have both, but I realize that most people will choose one platform or the other.

For the record, there are some aspects to the Nook that I actually like better than the Kindle, including its much more modern interface, which is enhanced greatly by a touchscreen. There are clear advantages to a touchscreen with these devices, and I've looked on amused when someone asks to look at my Kindle and immediately tries to turn a page by swiping at the screen. This assumption that all such devices have touchscreens is undoubtedly the influence of the iPad. For better or worse, touchscreens are here to stay. Will the next Amazon Kindle have a touchscreen? Undeniably; I have no doubt of this, although I'm certain that some current Kindle owners will be resistant. But if you want a touchscreen dedicated eReader right now, the Nook is the clear and easy way to go.

The "Home" screens for the Kindle (left) and Nook (right) suggest a difference in philosophy regarding what a home screen is in the first place.

Early descriptions of the Nook described it as only having one button. This is not quite true. It has a power button on the back and a home button on the bottom front in the shape of a lower case n (which looks like an upside down capital U). In addition to these, there are four raised strips, two on each side of the screen, that serve as page forward and page back buttons. These are not required to "turn" the page, of course, since a page can be advanced (or reversed) simply by touching the edge of the left (reverse) or right (advance) sides of the screen. Swipe motions in the corresponding directions can be used as well.

If you're a regular reader of This Lamp, I know what you're thinking: "Wait...you've got an iPad, you've got a Kindle...why on earth would you want (let alone need) a Nook?" That's a fair question. I've written previously about how it was the iPad that actually made me decide to get a Kindle, and in getting the Kindle, I became sold on reading an E Ink screen for straight reading of ebooks. But thanks to the iPad, not only did I accumulate Kindle-formatted books, I also built up a library of about 40 books in the Nook app for the iPad. It was great to have these books, but I had no desire to read them on a backlit screen. My preference for e-reading is now solidly colored in E Ink.

The Good
Physically, the new Nook is a radical departure from its predecessor in both look and navigation. And although it's not more than a millimeter or two wider than the Kindle, it seems like it is significantly wider. Both the Nook and the Kindle have 6" screens, but the Nook's lack of a physical keyboard, which shortens its length, makes for a very different device. This Nook is shorter. It fits into the hand differently, especially with its concave backing, which allows for a comfortable one-handed grip with little concern for dropping it. Like the Kindle, the Nook can easily slide into the front pocket of Dockers-like pants.

The "Library" screen. Pardon the fingerprints.

The wider bezel is a lesson that touchscreen makers have learned from the iPad, which was initially mocked when first displayed. Yet the reality is that a touchscreen quickly loses its value and becomes a source of frustration if there's not ample room to grip it without accidentally touching the screen, resulting in unintended behavior.

The shell of the Nook, both front and back, is essentially a type of rubber. It's soft and could doubtlessly withstand much more abuse than the average eReader. In fact, this Nook may not even need any external case as its natural covering is tough enough, and the device itself begs to simply be held without anything extra. Nevertheless, I bought a case so as to protect the screen, but I imagine that many will decide it's not necessary.

In fact, when I see the new Nook, the way it's designed, the rugged materials from which it's made, I can't help but think that B&N is not simply trying to create something more clever than the Kindle. Rather, they're also designing the perfect eReader for students—especially young students who would throw them in a backpack to be tossed and dropped throughout the day. Honestly, I believe the new Nook would stand up to much greater abuse than the current Kindle 3.

In spite of the Nook's rugged design, I bought a cover for it, primarily to protect its screen when I'm transporting it; although the screen itself is recessed, which will undoubtedly add a level of protection of its own. All of the cases made by B&N declare that they give full access to all of the Nook's controls. I initially thought this wasn't true as having the Nook in its case seemed to block access to the power button at the top back of the device. Then I discovered that the case includes a Nook symbol on the back, positioned right against the power button on the Nook. The Nook symbol on the case conceals an extra layer of what is probably plastic that enables the user to press on the back of  the case to turn the Nook on or off.

I got my Nook a few days before I bought a case for it. Early on, I noticed two cavities on the top of the Nook and two more on the bottom. I thought that perhaps these were present to allow taking the device apart if it needed to go back to B&N for repair. However, when I got the case, I noticed immediately that the Nook is held in place by hooks that use two of those cavities. I found that to be quite ingenious, and it shows me that B&N has really thought through the details of this new eReader.

A few months back, I spent some time in a physical Barnes & Noble store looking over their first generation E Ink Nook. I'll be honest: I hated it. You may remember it as this odd combination of an E Ink screen on top with a color LCD screen for navigation on bottom.  I respect B&N for trying to be innovative, but the original Nook was just an exercise in frustration (although admittedly it did/does have its fans). I decided to wait, and I'm glad I did. B&N announced their new Nook on May 24 with promises to ship them by June 10. In a surprising case of "under promise and over deliver" (I mean, when does anything in technology ever ship early?), many who pre-ordered the new Nook (including myself) began receiving them in the first two or three days of June.

Options for adjusting the reading experience.

People often praise the Kindle's interface with phrases like "zen-like simplicity" (really, they do). And in truth, I appreciate the Kindle's basic, non-complicated approach. However, when looking at the home screen of the two devices side-by-side, the Kindle begins to look a bit long in the tooth compared to the second generation Nook.

On the Nook, whether looking at the home screen, looking at one's library (which is different from the home screen), or shopping for new Nook titles, every screen is a combination of text and graphics. The library has tabs and drop down menus. The home screen has a rotating, animated advertisement of recommended books. I'm sure that some Kindle diehards will be aghast by this, but this interface comes across as neither intrusive nor overly busy. It's intuitive, and perhaps even more intuitive than the Kindle's menu-driven, text-based interface. The Nook's interface is intuitive because it draws upon modern computer interface, which the Kindle's really does not.

The touchscreen interface is very responsive, more so in my experience than the touchscreen on the Nook Color, which I often found myself tapping multiple times because of delayed response.  Speaking of responsiveness, the new Nook is significantly faster than the Kindle. Turning pages—even multiple pages—is much faster on the Nook than the Kindle. And the Nook now caches up to five pages, so that only on the sixth page turn will you see the black flash that occurs at every page turn on the Kindle as the E Ink refreshes to go to the next page.

The loss of a physical keyboard does not mean that text cannot be entered. The Nook uses a touchscreen keyboard akin to that on the iPhone, but significantly bigger. The virtual keys are quite responsive, and I've been quite pleased that I can thumb-type a note fairly quickly or simply use my index finger to hammer a comment out.

Another advantage of the touchscreen can be found in accessing endnotes. On a Kindle, I always have to determine whether a hyperlinked endnote is closer to the top or the bottom of the page since I can move the five-way controller from either end. Then it's a series of multiple taps as I go down (or up) line by line, and finally over word by word until I reach the superscript number or asterisk that I'm after. On the new Nook, however, accessing an endnote is as simple as touching the symbol in use. The screen changes to the section of the book containing the endnote with a small square labeled "Back," which returns me to the originating page.

In reading physical books, I've always preferred footnotes to endnotes because I like to see the information of the note right there in the context of the main text. However, eBooks don't offer any way to create footnotes, and endnotes become the exclusive method for extra information or the listing of sources. On the Kindle, honestly, it's a pain to maneuver to the endnote symbol. Doing so takes the reader "out of the moment" to have to maneuver to the extra content. On the Nook, it's now a breeze to touch and then touch back without shifting much thought outside of the book's message.

The Nook is also getting a lot of attention in regard to its battery. Supposedly it will last for two months, twice the life of the Kindle's battery. The fine print on these numbers is quite dubious though. Neither the Kindle nor the Nook will get keep their advertised/promised battery life unless the wifi antenna is turned off and the device is only read for less than an hour or two a day. Real use will see much less time between charges. But who cares? The battery life on both devices is very good. You can go days, perhaps a couple of weeks between charges through normal, regular  use. Supposedly the Nook's battery is better than the Kindle, and maybe it is, but I will never know for certain since I keep wifi turned on for both devices, and I regularly let my Kindle read to me when I'm driving, which drains the battery slightly faster. The key is to know where your charging cables are. When my devices get below about a half charge, I recharge them. Better safe than sorry.

The Not So Good
Yet in the midst of all the positives, the Nook is not a perfect platform and actually has a number of shortcomings—some of them quite significant. Some of these issues may be corrected by software updates since, as of this writing, the second edition Nook has only been officially released for less than a week.

First, let me start with a couple of items imparted to me from owners of the first generation Nook such as the fact that this Nook is silent—literally. The original Nook, as well as the Nook Color, can play audio, whether music or audio books. They have a headphone jack, built in speaker, and volume controls. All of these are conspicuously missing on the new Nook. This would not be surprising if it weren't for the fact that the first Nook did have these abilities.

For a device that is mostly more advanced than its predecessor, why would B&N opt to lose audio features? My only guess is that perhaps they want to strongly differentiate the low-end E Ink Nook strictly as a reading device, while positioning the Nook Color as the device that it is—a multimedia tablet with strong eReader capabilities.

Of course, this disappoints those Nook loyalists who had hoped that the Nook would eventually get a text-to-speech feature, like that of the Amazon Kindle. However, I think this Nook really is intended to be the low-end model, for reading only. And this may mean that a mid-point device with features between the Nook and the Nook Color will eventually be released. It also means that the Nook's current price of $139 is probably just inflated for the early adopters who are always willing to pay more. I've said before in regard to devices like the Nook and even the Kindle, that these eReaders should really be priced below $50 based upon the actual materials from which they're made. And I've no doubt that eventually the price will settle below that line, perhaps significantly below it.

I also had a friend tell me that he really missed the display of the current time that was ever-present in the top of the original Nook's screen while reading a book. He said that it was convenient to have a clock right in front of him that he could glance at, instead of having to pull himself from his book and look elsewhere for the time. The good news is that the time can be summoned as easily as touching the middle of the screen while reading, also displaying a number of options such as search, go to, and the ability to change text size, layout and font.

While the Nook uses the same Pearl E Ink screen that's on the Amazon Kindle 3, when held side by side, viewing the same book, with the same approximate typeface, it appears to me that the Kindle's screen is mildly sharper. I thought that perhaps it was just me until I read that others had noticed the same thing. This may just be a contrast issue, but there's no way for the user to adjust the contrast in the settings. Perhaps this issue can be corrected in a software update. On the other hand, I must emphasize that the screen looks great, and if I didn't have a Kindle to put beside the Nook, it would not be something that stands out.

The Nook allows for highlights and personal notes (see icon for note in the right margin).

In my use of the Nook, I've had difficulty syncing notes and highlights between it and the Nook app on my iPad. I've heard similar difficulties in regard to the platform across the board on all devices. For instance, I wanted to add a note earlier today that due to its length, seemed as if it would be easier to enter on the larger virtual keyboard of the iPad.  I had already highlighted the text for which I wanted to add the note on my Nook, but it wasn't showing up on the iPad. Then I discovered the iPad Nook app has a sync icon designed to pull information from B&N's servers and create identical interactions across all devices. There's a sync button on the Nook, too, but touching it does not always deliver instantaneous delivery of notes and highlights added from another device. In trying to get my Nook to sync with content added to the Nook app on my iPad yesterday, I tried turning the Nook on and off, leaving the book I was reading and coming back, but nothing helped. Late last night, I noticed that my note had finally appeared on the Nook. But this is nearly 12 hours later (although I would think it surely couldn't have taken that long).

Related to this difficulty in syncing notes is a difficulty entering them at all. One aspect of computers that I've always appreciated is that they're patient with me. If I don't respond immediately or in short fashion, most of the time a computer will continue to wait without any time limit or pressure. But I've noticed twice now that the Nook will close a note window if I take too long to enter or finish the note. And if I already had entered partial content, it is not saved and I have to start over! This is why I decided to enter a longer note on my iPad today where this technological impatience is not an issue.

Adding highlights on the Nook is as difficult for me here as it was on the Nook Color. To add a highlight, I have to hold down my finger on a word until two "handles" appear on either side of the word. I can then "grab" one of these handles with my finger and drag to the endpoint of where I want my highlight to appear. Simple enough, right? Well, not so simple to me. I always have trouble knowing where to end my highlight because my finger is in the way of the actual text. I mentioned this issue in my review of the Nook Color, pointing out that on the iPad, if one highlights text, there is usually a magnified view of the text above a location, showing the user exactly where the endpoint currently rests. Moreover, the "handles" are above and below the line of text, so that grabbing them doesn't obscure the text itself. There're no such conveniences on the Nook. Not only is it difficult to know where a highlight is ending, if I do stop, it seems nearly impossible to grab the handle again to complete my highlight, and the progress I've made so far disappears, requiring me to start over. I also find it nearly impossible to add ending punctuation to my highlights.

Editing a note in a Nook eBook. The virtual keyboard is superior, in my experience, to the Kindle's physical keyboard.

Earlier I mentioned the onscreen back "button" that allows the reader to go back to the main text after viewing a endnote or other hyperlink in a book. This works well enough unless the reader decides to go to the next page after that endnote, or if the endnote is simply long enough to go to the next screen. Then the back button completely disappear and the reader has to manually find the original place in the book. Contrast this with the Kindle's physical back button on its keyboard. The Kindle's button can be pressed repeatedly, taking the reader back to an indefinite number of previous screens (okay, maybe not truly indefinite, but I've never tested out the limit).

Having grown used to the page advance and reverse buttons on my Kindle, I still prefer to use these as opposed to touching the screen, but this is probably more habit than anything else. However, the problem comes when reading the Nook for any significant length of time in that the optional page advance buttons take considerable pressure to use. Pardon me if this sounds wimpy, but my thumbs actually began to feel tired the other day after reading for a couple of hours. I realized it's often too easy to accidentally turn the page on the Kindle (something I've heard lots of complaints about), but at least I don't get sore thumbs doing it!

Kindle users have long enjoyed social features in their reading, and B&N is trying to catch up with the Nook. Quotations from books can be shared from the Nook over Twitter and/or Facebook as can Kindle users. On the other side, though, a Nook user still cannot "follow" the highlights and notes of another Nook reader as Amazon allows for Kindle users.

Recently, B&N instituted "Nook Friends" (in beta) that allow the Nook reader to create a social reading circle of sorts among his or her friends and family who also read from Nook devices. Nook Friends makes it easy to see what books others in your group have available for lending. Nook Friends sounds like a great idea, but honestly, I've yet to get it to consistently work. One friend of mine, who is also a Nook user, has tried and tried with me to get connected via Nook Friends. He's never been able to see my loanable books, and I've been able to see his only once before he disappeared from my device. The last time I looked, he was no longer listed as a Nook friend. So, I sent him yet another invitation. We'll try yet a third time. Update: as of this morning, we can see each other's books. So maybe it's working now.

Oddly, though, for me to see any books belonging to my Nook Friends, I have to go to the settings screen, click on "Manage my NOOK Friends," and then the person's name. It would seem more logical to me to have an option on the Library screen to see someone else's books in my Nook Friends circle. Why in the world do I have to go to my settings screen? And how is anyone going to find these books?

Deal Breakers for Some?
On a more serious note, those who spend a significant time pursuing biblical studies, especially at the most serious of levels, will probably be better off with a Kindle over the Nook for a couple of reasons. First, there are simply more books related to biblical studies available for the Kindle than the Nook. Yes, we've always known that Amazon had more titles, but in this particular area, it's striking. Most of the larger religious publishers are represented on both platforms, but when I started tracking down title for title between the two, I often found the Nook coming up empty on a fairly consistent basis. I've been told that part of the problem is that the ePub format used on the Nook is not near as robust and feature capable as the mobi format used by the Kindle. I'm no expert on that issue, so if anyone who works for a publisher would like to speak to this issue, I would welcome your comments at the end of this post.

Second, and this will the real deal breaker for some, it's nearly impossible to do biblical languages correctly on the Nook. There are, for example, no quality Greek New Testaments available for the Nook. I learned that part of this problem stems from the fact that the Nook cannot display polytonic Greek. I did come across a Wescott-Hort/ASV diglot, but the Greek was text only—no accents or breathing marks to be found.

The Nook will display Greek, but in unaccented text only.

I tried to see if I could make my own Greek New Testament. I exported a few chapters from Matthew's Gospel in Unicode Greek from Bible software—I tried using both Accordance and Logos for this—and then converting the text to ePub. After side-loading the text onto the Nook, I was disappointed to find missing characters in the text, which essentially made it unusable.

The Nook simply won't handle polytonic Greek. Compare the Kindle on the left and the Nook on the right.

It's true that you can get a book like Daniel Wallace's Basics of New Testament Syntax for the Nook, but the Greek text is represented as graphics interspersed with the English text. These graphics can't be adjusted in size, so it makes for a very awkward book to read. Bible software makers will be glad to know that eReader platforms aren't going to replace them anytime soon.

On the other hand, there are at least two quality-formatted Greek New Testaments on the Kindle, including the SBL Greek New Testament, which I recently wrote about.

In regard to Hebrew, technically, neither the Kindle, nor the Nook can display right-to-left text. However, that didn't stop Miklal Software from recently publishing a Hebrew Bible (see my review here) on both Kindle and Nook platforms. This is done through high quality graphic representation of the words in the Hebrew Bible, and of course page turning has to be implemented from left to right because of the limitations of the devices, but it's usable nonetheless. Yet I suspect we shouldn't look for any books that use Hebrew heavily, let alone finding a Hebrew grammar for the Nook.

Hebrew Bible for Nook from Miklal Software

Future Use?: Undocumented Features
New gadgets are never out long before they're dissected (as in physically taken apart), hacked, and used in ways that the creators may not have ever imagined. Since the Nook runs Android 2.x in a proprietary interface, some folks have already hacked the device to run the straight Android install, which allows for other software, including games like Angry Birds and other eReader apps such as that of the Kindle app for Android.

Early on, users discovered that the new Nook has a hidden web browser. However, it's pretty useless at the moment with its ability to load some webpages, but not others. The web browser is discovered easily enough by searching for a URL instead of a word or string of text. There are even bookmarks already in place such as specific B&N pages some third party sites such as YouTube (although I can't imagine any scenario in which I'd want to watch YouTube videos on an E Ink display. The user can add a bookmark linking to any site, too. Again, in it's present state, the browser is pretty useless for actual surfing, but at least the potential is there.

The Kindle has a web browser, too, but it's been in the "experimental" stage since its release, accessible from the menu on the home screen. Many have wondered if perhaps there's no direct access to the Nook's browser because it's not ready for prime time. That may be, but then, why include a browser right now at all? That's a good question, but the answer is pretty straightforward. A number of public wifi spots, especially those in places of business, require the user to log in or agree to a particular use policy. This requires a browser. So, if you're in Starbucks with your Nook, and you want to connect to the AT&T wifi, you have to first select the AT&T signal from a wifi screen, and then the Nook's browser will launch so that you can agree to the terms and conditions of using AT&T's/Starbucks' internet access.

Just today, I read that Bluetooth has been discovered in the Nook, but with no way to directly access it in the current software. This may signal other future use of the Nook. Perhaps in a future update, users will be able to lend books to each other via Bluetooth. I'm not certain what other advantage Bluetooth would be for an eReader, although I'm certain some would have lots of creative ideas.

Undoubtedly, new features will come along and many of the Nook's current shortcomings will be addressed and hopefully resolved. Don't take my criticisms of the Nook to think that I don't care for the device. That's not true at all. I'm very impressed with the touchscreen Nook, especially with the areas in which it trumps the Kindle. But I point out its weak spots to help you better make an informed decision if you're needing to decide on one platform only.

Final Choice: Kindle or Nook?
You'll have to decide if any of my criticisms or frustrations with the Nook are a deal breaker for you. If I could only use one platform, and I needed to use titles that incorporated biblical languages, the Kindle would clearly be the better, although far from perfect, choice. If theological works are a big part of your library, the Nook's offerings, in terms of both quantity and quality, simply aren't up to par yet.

On the other hand, on both the Kindle and the Nook, I've enjoyed reading a lot of popular titles that I might not have ever read had I not had one or both of these devices. Therefore, if your main goal is reading for escape (always a worthy goal in my opinion), the Nook might be your best ticket to other realms, especially with the convenience of its touchscreen, which I find to be a superior interface to that of the current Kindle.

[Side note from behind the scenes: I would have preferred to offer direct screen captures for the images of the Nook's screen in the photos above, but as far as I can tell this is not possible on the touchscreen Nook. I asked about this in the Nook forums on the B&N website, and was hit with a barrage of questions and misinformation from Nook loyalists. Why would you want a screen capture for an eReader? was the first response. Perhaps they thought I wanted to capture screens, run the text through an OCR and bootleg eBooks! A couple of folks even suggested that with the nature of the E Ink display, a screen capture simply was not technologically possible. This is untrue as I can capture a screen on my Kindle (shift-alt-G), which uses the same display technology. After explaining my intentions (the writing of this review), I was told that even if I could get a screen capture, it would not give an accurate view of what the Nook's screen looked like in person. I realized this already, of course. This is not my first rodeo. For that matter, photos don't do E Ink screens justice either. I merely wanted to show layout of the various screens. From what I gather, there was no way to grab a screen on the original Nook either. The Nook Color, however, does allow them, and I used this feature fairly extensively in my review of it. ... Oh, and yes, I know there's a split infinitive in the first paragraph, but I didn't like the way it read when I corrected it.]

Full disclosure: while the new Nook was not directly given to me, I did acquire it by trading the Nook Color that Barnes and Noble sent me for it; so in a sense, it's a gift in that I did not expend any funds for it, although it was not directly given to me by any outside source.



As always, your thoughts, questions, comments and rebuttals are welcome below.

Nook Color (A Review with Images)

When powering up a Nook for the first time, you see the words "Read Forever." I simply love this slogan that Barnes & Noble has adopted for their Nook line of eReaders and tablet devices. It captures the essence of what makes me enthralled with eReaders to begin with: the ability to carry an entire library in one handheld device.

Barnes & Noble was kind enough to send me a complimentary Nook Color for use in a seminar on tablets and eReaders in the classroom, which I led at an education conference in Indianapolis last week. As of this writing, I've spent almost a month with the Nook Color, and I have to admit it's an impressive little device. I say "little" because it's difficult not to compare it to my iPad, which with a 9.7" screen is significantly bigger than the Nook Color's 7" screen. At the same time, the Nook Color's screen is slightly larger than my Kindle's 6" screen or the screen of the same size on the new second edition Nook with a touchscreen E Ink display (review forthcoming). But the Nook Color is not only dimensionally positioned between an iPad and a Kindle, it is also functionally in-between the two popular devices as well. The $249 Nook Color, existing not just as an eReader, but also as a full-fledged Android tablet, incorporates a bit of the best of both worlds for these kinds of devices that often overlap in function.

iPad & Nook Color

Now if you're a regular reader of This Lamp, you might be surprised to read my words of acclamation for the Nook after seeing so many posts about the iPad, and more recently, about the Kindle. But you need to understand that while I will use the device that suits my needs best, I'm not all that partisan. I'm simply pro-tablet and pro-eReader. If you don't have an iPad or a Kindle or a Nook or one of the many other devices recently bursting onto the market, I suggest you examine your needs and get the one best for you. I don't care if it's different than what I'm using; you should simply use whatever benefits you best.

Nook Color & Kindle 3

Moreover, although I'm partial to reading eBooks on a Kindle, Amazon needs competition to keep them honest and to keep both the market and technology moving forward. And Barnes and Noble is best positioned to do just that with a device like the Nook Color. The same can be said for the Nook Color against the iPad. Some will look at the features of the Nook Color and realize they don't need an iPad; the Nook Color handles all their needs just fine.

Nook Color and E Ink Nook (second edition)

Plus, now I don't have to feel guilty about neglecting great bookstores like Barnes & Noble. With a Nook, I can still offer give them my business. B&N has easily been the most aggressive bookseller second only to Amazon in regard to making a strong foray into ebooks and hedging their bets as the market changes (probably) more towards electronic texts and paper declines. That's not to say the physical book is ever going to go completely away. And hopefully there will always be physical B&N stores, but my hunch is there will be fewer of them in the future. Fortunately, the company is keen to discern the times and make the transition as they need to.

The always-accessible primary menu system for the Nook Color. This displays at the bottom of the device by pressing the arrow icon that appears on every screen

The Nook Color is a deceptive little device. It initially presents itself as a color eReader, but it is much more than that. In fact, it is really a tablet computer, running Android 2.2, that gives primary attention to its eReader app. The Nook Color doesn't look like a standard Android tablet because of its proprietary interface that gives emphasis to reading. But other features are as near as the menu system found by touching the arrow icon at the bottom of the screen. Pressing this symbol brings up options for Library (one's purchased books), Shop (where one can buy more books), Search (which will search books, content on the device, as well as on the internet), Apps (non-eReader programs), Web (a basic internet browser), and Settings (for customizing one's experience).

Reading a book on the Nook Color

When I set up the Nook Color, I was surprised to discover that I already had over 40 Nook titles thanks to the Nook app on the iPad and the NookStudy app on my MacBook Pro. Most of the titles I have were free, but I also have a few others that I bought because they were cheaper for the Nook or because I took advantage of special offers. Logging in with my B&N account was easy enough, and I immediately had access to all my books and even a copy of Newsweek that I'd inadvertently bought a few weeks ago, mistakingly thinking I could read it on my iPad. It wouldn't read on my iPad, but it certainly reads just fine on the Nook Color.

Magazines have been very popular on the Nook Color

In fact, the Nook Color has been very successful by taking advantage of the second part of its name: color. From what I've read, magazines have been very popular on the Nook Color, as well as children's books. Speaking of the latter, my Nook Color came with two children's books that include an optional recorded narrator's voice. This is a professional reader, mind you—not a digitized voice like on the Kindle.

The Nook Color now has apps!

Setting up the Nook Color also involved  adding my Google account. I'm not a diehard Google user like some, but I do have an email address and at some point, I must have synced my address book with the Google address book. Once you add your credentials, the calendar and contacts app immediately populates with data. I did find the contacts app to be a bit lacking as it only allowed for one email address and phone number per person. I have listings in my address book that have multiple instances of each. However, there are already more robust PIM apps in the built-in Nook app store.

Email composition on the Nook Color. I believe this would be more functional if it could be viewed (and typed on) horizontally, but this is one of the apps that I never could get to change orientation.

The Nook Color is designed to rotate the screen when it's turned to the side. However, this doesn't always work, and evidently, some apps simply aren't programmed to do so automatically, although it always works just fine when reading. The touchscreen was also different in its responsiveness from what I'm used to with the iPad. It's not as reactive as the iPad, and often I found myself touching something multiple times before a response was acknowledged. The more I've used the Nook Color, the better I am at using its touchscreen. I'm certain that there's a different technology at play than what's in the iPad, and it simply takes some getting used to.

I was impressed that Pandora comes on the Nook Color by default. All I had to do was add my Pandora user name and password and my "channels" immediately appeared (including the 80s channel as seen above).

The Nook Color is completely navigable by touchscreen. That is to say, there are no optional page buttons like there are on the new E Ink Nook. This works fine, and pages can be turned by either swiping the screen in one direction or another or merely by tapping at the screen's edges. Of course, the downside, like on the iPad, are the fingerprints left behind. If such things bother you, keep a cloth handy or just learn to get over it.

What about memory? The Nook Color has 8 GB of built-in memory. If that sounds like a lot at first compared to E Ink eReaders, keep in mind that the Android OS and downloaded apps take up considerably more space than eBooks. On my Nook Color, I currently have about 5 GB free after loading in my books, a few of my own documents, and downloading a handful of apps. As an advantage over some devices, including the iPad, a micro-SD memory card can be added to expand memory. The memory card is protected by that funny-looking loop on the bottom left of the device. This protects the card and prevents it from accidental ejection.

Documents can be loaded onto the Nook Color. It natively reads Word documents and PDF files. These are "side loaded" via a USB cable or emailed and saved if an optional micro-SD memory card has been added (I was unable to save a document from an email without the additional memory card). Any added document is accessed on the Library screen by selecting "My Files."

I find selecting text on both Nooks more difficult with touch than selecting text on my Kindle using the five way controller, or selecting text on the iPad, for that matter. The problem is my finger is in the way, and I can't see what I'm selecting. This isn't a problem on the Kindle where the finger is not used and the screen remains unobscured. The same goes for the iPad in which a magnified portion of one's selection appears above the line. There's no such feature on the Nook, and I often find myself having trouble getting a highlight to end exactly where I want it to.

The longest uninterrupted amount of time I spent with the Nook Color was the night I first had it. After setting it up and thoroughly exploring it, my eyes were very sore after about four hours. This confirms why I prefer reading on E Ink—it's simply easier on the eyes.

More apps can be added to the Nook Color. Some are free and some for pay, but prices are comparable to what's seen on iOS devices.

The Nook Color has been extremely popular since B&N expanded its functionality a few weeks ago and introduced the ability to add apps. This move didn't diminish its role as an eReader, but certainly put it in greater standing as a full-fledged, multi-purpose tablet. At the moment, there are only a little over 200 apps available for the Nook Color, all discriminatingly selected by the PTB at B&N. That may seem like an even greater walled garden than Apple enforces with its screening process for iOS apps, but it doesn't strike me that B&N is going after high numbers of apps for the Nook. I believe they're looking to make certain that all the important categories are covered with solid representation.

For hackers, the Nook Color has been popular as a device to root and add a non-proprietary version of Android. Some have even called it one of the best Android tablets on the market, especially in its price range. And some believe it deserves that title, even as it exists out of the box.

The Nook Color also plays video, but it's not necessarily a robust video-playing device. I noticed early on in some of the tutorial videos that frame rate was a bit choppy. I doubt that anyone is going to buy a Nook Color just for playing videos, but if that's a strong need, keep in mind that this isn't the best device for that task.

Social features are built into the Nook Color. Any highlight or note can be shared over Twitter or Facebook. The Nook family also has its own social network called "Nook Friends." Adding other Nook owners you know to your circle of Nook Friends allows you to share with each other which books you're reading and allows for easy lending of books.

Highlighting text offers a popup menu with a number of different options.

All Nook devices primarily read titles in the ePub format. This means that ePub titles from other sources, such as Google eBooks and even Christian Book Distributors, can be read on the Nook. ePub is also the primary choice for thousands of libraries across the country that have added eBook library lending to their services (Amazon has promised that Kindles will be able to participate later this year, but they can't yet).

As already mentioned, files can be transferred via USB cable, but that cable attachment alone will not charge the battery as it will with a Kindle. The Nook Color needs to be connected to an outlet to charge. The battery won't last anywhere near the amount of time that an E Ink device will, but it's probably closer to the kind of battery life with an iPad. I never really tested the battery, and there hasn't been a time that I've used the Nook Color all day either. I would guess that if it's being used pretty heavily, in whatever manner, that it's going to need to be charge overnight daily just like an iPad.

Who is the Nook Color for? It's for the person who wants ebooks, but needs more than a dedicated eReader, and probably doesn't need or want an iPad. With the ability to carry documents and access email, calendar, and contact information, the Nook Color makes a great device for business that has a larger screen than even the most capable smartphone, yet at the same time can still fit in the average suit pocket or purse. I don't know of any way to connect the Nook Color to a projector, but it's really not designed for that.

The Nook Color "home screen" which displays when turned on. Background image can be changed to another image provided by B&N or from personal pictures added by the user.

I don't know if anyone who already has an iPad needs a Nook Color. There's simply too much overlap, but that's not to say someone might very well choose a Nook Color over an iPad if it meets that person's needs. I must say, however, in evaluating the Nook Color on its own terms, I have very few criticisms.What it does, it does well, and Barnes and Noble has been aggressively improving it through software updates. And the Nook Color may just surprise you with some features you won't expect to find if you're only expecting an enhanced eReader.

True Grit 2010 (A Review with Comparisons to the 1969 Version)

Hailee Steinfeld as Mattie Ross. Her performance is the unexpected surprise of this movie. Too bad the promoters of this film didn't have the decency to add her name to the movie poster.

After seeing an advance screening of the Coen brothers' True Grit earlier this week, I reflected upon other good movies I've seen this year. 2010 wasn't necessarily a stellar year, but there were some good films (Inception, The Social Network). Nevertheless, I can say without reserve that True Grit is easily the best movie I've seen in a very long time.

No movie is made in a vacuum, and that's especially true of any remake. But it's even more true of True Grit. This movie had haters from the moment that Joel and Ethan Coen announced they were making it. The original 1969 True Grit is not only associated with American icon John Wayne, but the movie became his only Oscar win in a career that spanned four decades. The True Grit character Rooster Cogburn is practically synonymous with John Wayne. Try to name Wayne's character in The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance or The Shootist. I realize that the hardcore John Wayne fans among you can do that, but most who are reading this cannot.

But let's be honest: the 1969 True Grit was flawed. John Wayne read Charles Portis' 1968 book and immediately started pushing for a movie staring himself as the federal marshal. While the Duke's portrayal is laudable, the screenplay was hastily written, and some of the other primary roles were poorly cast.

It's no surprise that Glen Campbell is still better known for his singing than his acting. His portrayal of La Boeuf in the original movie becomes painful to watch as he delivers his lines with all the expression of a teenage actor in a bad high school play. Supposedly, Glen Campbell was selected for the role so that there could be an opening theme for use as a popular song on the radio promoting the film. Of course, it could have been worse. Originally, Elvis Presley was considered for the role. While I enjoy Presley's music much better than Campbell's, I can't imagine he would have been a a suitable choice either.

And clearly, Kim Darby, while a better actor than Glen Campbell, was simply not right for the role of 14-year-old Mattie Ross. Darby was actually 22 at the time. And while they tried to make her look much younger, she's never quite right. While she certainly captures Mattie Ross' determination, Darby does so with a little too much perkiness at times. She's simply not ever somber enough. And her boyishly short haircut, in retrospect forty years later, seems extremely out of place for a western taking place in 1880.

The Coen brothers have insisted that they weren't attempting to remake the 1969 film as much as they were actually making a new adaption of Charles Portis' original novel. Regardless of which movie version is better remembered decades from now, the Coen brothers have undeniably made a much closer adaptation of the book. From the beginning of the novel to the end, True Grit is the story of a little girl seeking to avenge her father's death, to bring justice to the man who struck him down. The book tells the story in retrospect from a Mattie Ross who is much older, remembering the events that she fell into when she was no longer quite a child, but also not quite yet a woman.

In the 1969 movie, Mattie is only the focus of the story until she meets marshal Reuben "Rooster" Cogburn. In that version, once John Wayne steps into the frame, the movie is clearly his until the final scene. While filming, he even told the crew, "This is my show; you're just along for the ride!"

The Coen brothers, however, stay true to the Portis' original source material. Everything in the movie is from Mattie's perspective. Young Hailee Steinfeld, who literally just turned 14 last week, delivers an absolutely remarkable performance as Mattie Ross, as if the character had simply stepped out of Portis' book. She every bit looks the part, from her long, braided hair to her ankle length black dress (Kim Darby's version of the character wore gaucho-style pants, I suppose for easier horseback riding). Steinfeld captures the spirit of Mattie Ross, somber and determined to bring her father's killer to justice. I don't believe I even saw Steinfeld smile until about 2/3 into the movie. She is very much the biblical ‏גֹּאֵל הַדָּם/"avenger of blood" (see Numbers 35:9-34 or the Wikipedia entry for "Goel") bent on securing her family's financial stability and bringing justice to her father's murderer. And while little Mattie Ross is looking for someone with "true grit" to help her track down her father's killer, Steinfeld's portrayal demonstrates to the audience that it is really Mattie who has the most grit of any of the characters.

Matt Damon portrays Texas Ranger La Bouef much better than his predecessor in the role. Although this won't be considered Damon's most memorable part, he has enough acting experience to keep the portrayal authentic, even if I did feel that his Boston accent may have briefly slipped through once or twice.

Certainly Jeff Bridges has seen a renaissance in his acting career recently. His portrayal of Rooster Cogburn will continue to give momentum to his recent acclaim. Surely, it would be intimidating to most actors to even consider taking a role so closely associated with John Wayne. I thought about this long and hard, and I really can't imagine anyone from today's crop of actors besides Bridges who could have pulled this role off. However, when we first see Bridges as Cogburn testifying in "Hanging Judge Parker's" courthouse, his delivery of dialogue was so very slurred that I wondered if he was going to be mostly unintelligible throughout the entire movie. Fortunately, though, having seen the 1969 version recently, most of his lines were familiar, and this allowed me to adjust my ears to Bridges' dialect.

There is a striking feeling of authenticity to the settings, props and dialogue throughout the entire movie. Careful attention has been given to every detail, much more so than the earlier version. Most of the actors' lines are taken straight from Portis' own novel. The particular and sometimes peculiar phrasings seemed to wash delightfully over me as I sat still waiting to hear every word of every sentence spoken. In fact, much of the dialogue that was also used in the first movie, simply makes more sense in the 2010 version of True Grit. The newer script has a much greater cohesiveness than the previous version.

Of course, while the unique dialogue seemed perfect for a Coen brothers movie (which I cannot adequately explain, but many of you will understand), there were a few times that the particular tone and enunciation seemed a bit more reminiscent of O Brother, Where Art Thou? than True Grit. Surely this was a directing decision, but it may have been a bit overplayed at times. Yet those who are familiar, know that the movies made by the Coen brothers tend to carry a style of humor that is never overt, but yet almost always subtly present in nearly every scene. Portis' novel contains a great amount of humor, especially in the dialogue of the exchanges between the characters, and this is simply better captured in the 2010 version of the movie than in its predecessor.

I won't give away the ending of the new version, but I will tell you that it's different than that of the first movie. The Coen brothers stay true to the novel. The 1969 version may have stayed more true to a certain actor's ego (no disrespect intended).

Although Kathy and I saw this movie for free, I would gladly pay to see it in the theaters again (something we rarely do anymore with the high cost of movie tickets). If you're one of the ones who feels as if it's almost an act against the sacred to remake this film, I urge you to set aside your cinematic piety. Westerns these days are few in the theaters, and good westerns even more rare. The 2010 version of True Grit is a welcome addition to the genre, even if it is a story we've been told before.

True Grit arrives in theaters nationwide on December 22.

Harry Potter & the Deathly Hallows, Part 1: Some Quick Thoughts

I saw Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows at a midnight showing last night (this morning) with a friend of mine. I'm not so into Harry Potter that I'd normally be a candidate for a midnight showing of this series, but I'd got through teaching at 10 PM, and I'm normally wired afterwards, so I agreed to go. This morning, another friend of mine asked me on Facebook what I thought of the movie. What is below is a slightly modified adaption of what I wrote this morning.

I was struck while watching the movie how very different it "felt" from earlier movies. I don't mean that as a criticism, and I don't believe it's different just because the characters/actors are older. This installment not only had a very different tone and setting(s) from the previous movies in the series, it also had a very distinct directing style that was different from all the previous movies. I can't remember if a handcam has ever been used in any of these movies before, but if so, it's never been used as much. It was fairly pervasive in the outdoor scenes. Along the lines of all this, it's undeniable that the style of this movie has been influenced by the Twilight films. Parts of the movie very much felt like a Twilight movie.

The Harry Potter movies, like the books (which I stopped reading after the second or third installment), have always grown increasingly darker, but obviously, this movie was the darkest of all. Early movies always had a certain element of whimsy, but there was very little of that this times around. A couple of scenes were quite scary to me, even as an adult. And knowing how popular the books and movies are with children, I'd wonder about the wisdom of letting a child see this movie, regardless of his or her level of maturity.

Splitting the last book into two parts clearly had some element of profit involved, but at the same time, fans have often complained that too much from the books is left out in the movies, so I'm certain that many fans will be quite happy for events to slow down. How close the movie stayed with the book, I have no idea, but the film definitely seemed to feel less rushed than previous installments. Although the ongoing camping scenes became a bit tedious after a while, it was difficult to follow how much time had elapsed at various points until someone would mention that "months" had passed by since some previous event.

I think I may actually have an ear infection at the moment in my right ear, so it may have been my own hearing, but many of the British accents were so thick, especially in some of the early conversations, that I had great trouble keeping up with dialogue in some places. I don't know if that was just me or not. I felt like I'd be too much of an old man to constantly ask my friend, "What'd he say?" so I just figured I'd see it again with Kathy later.

Overall, my feelings toward the movie are positive, but 20 minutes in, I wished I'd seen the previous movie again before this one. For those who aren't strong Harry Potter devottees, I'd recommend reviewing at least the sixth installment before this one. I should have.