This post was published 1 year 10 months 20 days ago which may make its actuality or expire date not be valid anymore. This site is not responsible for any misunderstanding.

Jakob Nielson, one of the world’s leading experts on usability, has posted the results of a four way ebook reading test on his Alertbox website. He pitted the iPad vs the Kindle vs the PC vs Dead trees, using 24 text subjects and a few Hemingway short stories as a way to test the reading experience of each.

Some of his conclusions could have been anticipated. All the readers hated trying to read on a PC (too much like work). Their satisfaction levels were almost identical for iPad, Kindle and normal books. They felt the iPad was a bit heavy however, and weren’t fond of the look of E-ink on the Kindle as opposed to the iPad and nomal books.

Satisfaction aside, the way that the test subjects actually read on the four options is where things get interesting, and a bit controversial.

Each of the 24 test subjects read a short story by Hemingway on each of the four reading options. In tests following, they all seemed to understand what they read about equally and on average, each story took around 17 minutes to read. However, according to Nielson not all devices can be read at the same speed. He says that based on the tests, it is clear that reading on the iPad is more difficult then a normal book, as the story took 6.2 percent longer to read with Apple’s tablet. That means that the 17 minutes story basically took around 18 minutes to read on the iPad. The Kindle was even slower, coming in around 10 percent slower, or roughly 19 minutes to read what took 17 minutes inscribed on a dead tree.

Based on this data, the study concludes that Books are still better for reading than ebook readers….however that conclusion has some major flaws.

First of all, even though the testers showed the respondents how to use each device in advance, they had a lifetime’s experience with books, while ebooks were still new to them. It was going to take a certain amount of learning curve. Books required no such learning curve, no discomfort to get over. I think it is very telling that the touchscreen iPad device was faster to read on then the Kindle which required using buttons. Touchscreens are almost always highly intuitive, more so then physical buttons. That could easily account for the increased speed of the iPad over the Kindle.

There is also the novelty factor to consider. Most people, when they first use any device, spend a little time admiring or at least looking at the device itself, not the content. There has been so much media attention to the Kindle and the iPad that I would be shocked if a person didn’t check the device out a bit while using it, slowing down their reading.

The length of the test also makes it more than a little inconclusive. 17 minutes is not enough time for certain things which make a difference in device to become apparent, such as eyestrain on the iPad, or a problem with device weight. While this test was heavily weighted towards books, it also skewed a bit towards the iPad’s advantages.

17 minutes also means that while the testers were able to get into the story, that is it wasn’t “scan and pan” reading as is typically done on websites, they didn’t get a chance to explore some of the real advantages of the iPad or the Kindle. No searching, no bookmarking or dictionary use, no font changing or zooming in, no adjustment to lighting conditions and certainly no need to notice the sheer number of books that can be stored on the device.

Reading quickly does not always mean reading better, or reading more enjoyably or more effectively. As I tell my son over and over, there is no prize for finishing first. While interesting, I think all this test proved is that people are still more used to books than they are ebooks., but that’s about it. Not exactly shocking news.

However, I would be much more interested if Nielson conducted the same test again, but using people who had experience using iPads and Kindles for reading, and a story that takes about an hour. If you had been using a Kindle or iPad for 6 months, would you still read a physical book more quickly? Somehow, I doubt it….and we may actually learn something more valuable about how people use ebooks and books differently.