On Sunday, December 22, 2002, at 12:47 PM, Jon Glass wrote:
<snip>
> Actually, it's in between. Its screen is much better than the 2100, but
> nothing compared to the 120. I had all three just recently, sitting on
> my
> desk, and the difference between my 2100 and the 120 was
> amazing--until the
> backlight was absolutely necessary, the 120 won, hands down. The 130,
> having
> a backlight, is not quite as contrasty as the 120, but because its
> B&W, it's
> much more contrasty than the 2100 with its 16 shades of gray.
-- <snip>
Also, one of the reasons that the 120/130 looks easier on the eyes is
that the pixels are larger. In many ways, I still feel the 120 was the
ultimate newton design. It has a solidness to it that the 2100
lacks(man my 120 took some HARD knocks), and its shape fits into a lot
of places that 2100 doesn't(ie pockets).
Of course the 2100's speed is ultimately much more important to me then
the other issues, and the backlighting is damn useful too, not to
mention the two PCMCIA's...
I'm rambling, but at least it's about Newt.
marty
-- This is the NewtonTalk list - http://www.newtontalk.net/ for all inquiries List FAQ/Etiquette/Terms: http://www.newtontalk.net/faq.html Official Newton FAQ: http://www.chuma.org/newton/faq/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Wed Jan 01 2003 - 10:02:50 EST