Compare Raindrop, Instapaper, Readwise Reader, PaperSpan, and Pocket: Which App is the Best?

Raindrop.io has lots of useful features:

• Sync bookmarks across all your devices
• Organize with collections and tags
• Add your own icons for a personal touch
• Pro plan gives you full-text search and saves copies of pages

We wish there were more ways to highlight and connect with other apps, but overall, it covers what most people need. 8 out of 10.

PaperSpan is pretty good at the basic stuff. It takes messy web articles and makes them actually readable, which is honestly the main thing you want from an app like this. No ads, no random pop-ups, just clean text that's easy on the eyes.

• Saving Articles: Click one button and it's saved. The app even sorts them into categories automatically, which actually works most of the time.
• Clean Reading: Articles look way better in the app than on the original websites. No clutter, just the content.
• Offline Reading: Download stuff to read on the subway or plane. Really handy when your internet is spotty.
• Listen to Articles: The text-to-speech thing is useful if you want to "read" while doing dishes or whatever.
• Works Everywhere: Save on your computer, read on your phone. It syncs pretty well most of the time.
• Kindle Thing: You can send articles to your Kindle, which is nice if you prefer reading on e-ink.

The annoying part is that sometimes the text gets cut off halfway through an article, so you have to switch to the web view to finish reading. Also, the search could be better. It's a solid app for basic use, but if you want fancy features, you might be disappointed. We'd give it 7.3 out of 10.

Performance presents a tale of two experiences - the core reading functionality works smoothly and reliably, but recent updates have introduced stability issues that affect the overall user experience.

The strong points are evident during daily use. Reading feels responsive with smooth scrolling and quick page navigation. Content synchronization across devices works consistently, and importing articles, PDFs, and RSS feeds processes efficiently. The basic reading, highlighting, and annotation functions that form the app's foundation operate reliably.

Recent developments tell a different story though. The significant drop from a 4.3 overall rating to 3.78 for recent reviews signals genuine stability problems with newer versions. Android users report more issues than their iOS counterparts, including navigation problems and functionality regressions. Some users have experienced critical issues like being unable to add new content after updates, while others consistently note that search performance remains poor.

Device compatibility also varies, with particular issues reported on e-ink devices and certain Android configurations. While active development appears to be addressing these concerns, the reliability issues prevent the app from achieving the stability users expect from a paid service.

Performance is PaperSpan's biggest weakness. When everything works correctly, the app is fast and responsive. Article saving is quick, reading is smooth, and offline functionality is excellent. The problem is consistency—too many things go wrong too often.

The most common issues we encountered include sync problems between devices, network connectivity failures during signup, and the frustrating text view cutoff that interrupts reading sessions. The discontinued Chrome extension also limits desktop integration significantly.

These aren't dealbreaking problems, but they add up to an inconsistent user experience. The positive news is that recent ratings have improved significantly (4.13/5 for the last 100 reviews compared to 3.8/5 overall), indicating the developers are actively addressing these issues. Performance score: 6.9/10.

The design philosophy centers on creating a distraction-free reading environment, and it largely succeeds. Users consistently describe the app as "gorgeous," and the overall aesthetic genuinely supports focused reading with clean typography and thoughtful spacing.

Design strengths that impressed us:

• Clean Reading Interface: Minimal distractions with focus on content consumption
• Consistent Visual Language: Cohesive design across different content types (articles, PDFs, ebooks)
• Customizable Reading Experience: Good control over fonts, spacing, and display preferences
• Intuitive Navigation: Logical information architecture for managing large content libraries

The cross-platform execution reveals some inconsistencies though. The app clearly prioritizes iOS, and this shows in the Android experience. Navigation elements don't always follow Android design conventions, and gesture interactions occasionally feel foreign to the platform. While the core reading experience remains visually appealing, the iOS-first approach creates noticeable polish differences that affect the overall experience on Android devices.

PaperSpan's design prioritizes function over form, which works well for the reading experience but falls short everywhere else. The article reader itself is excellent—clean typography, perfect spacing, and smart image handling make reading genuinely enjoyable.

• Reading Interface: Distraction-free design that puts your content front and center.
• Article Formatting: Excellent text sizing and spacing that's comfortable for extended reading sessions.
• Navigation: Simple menu structure that anyone can understand immediately.

The problem is everything outside the reading experience. The overall interface looks and feels outdated compared to modern apps. Multiple users mentioned this in reviews, and we completely agree—PaperSpan desperately needs a visual refresh. The functionality is solid, but the dated appearance undermines the user experience. Design score: 6.2/10.

The free plan is generous and works for most people. The Pro plan adds some powerful extras, but it might be a bit pricey if you just want the basics. If you use bookmarks a lot, the upgrade is worth it. We'd like to see more pricing options. 7.5 out of 10.

The value proposition is complex and heavily depends on your reading habits and tolerance for subscription models. The subscription approach generates polarized reactions - some users find it completely worthwhile while others strongly prefer one-time purchases.

For power users, the comprehensive feature set justifies the cost. AI assistance, advanced highlighting, deep integrations, and reliable infrastructure create genuine productivity benefits. The 30-day trial period (with no credit card required) provides ample time to evaluate whether the app fits your workflow, and active development means you're paying for ongoing improvements.

The subscription model does create barriers though. Unlike competitors, there's no permanently free tier with basic features, and the recurring cost adds up over time. Some users feel the subscription requirement should be more prominently displayed upfront, and occasional bugs or missing features (like robust search) can impact the perceived value when you're paying monthly.

For serious readers who can utilize the full feature set and don't mind subscription costs, the value proposition is solid. Casual users or those preferring one-time purchases will likely find better alternatives elsewhere.

The usability picture is mixed - while the core reading experience feels intuitive once you're up and running, several barriers can frustrate new users during the initial setup and exploration phases.

Where the app excels in usability:

• Intuitive Reading Controls: Highlighting, bookmarking, and annotation tools are discoverable and easy to use
• Smooth Content Import: Adding articles, PDFs, and connecting RSS feeds works reliably
• Logical Organization: Content management and library organization follow expected patterns
• Responsive Interface: Most interactions feel immediate and predictable

The friction points become apparent early on though. The mandatory account creation before even testing the app frustrates many potential users, and Android users face additional hurdles with gesture navigation that doesn't behave as expected. The wealth of features also means there's a genuine learning curve - power users eventually find everything intuitive, but newcomers need time to discover and understand all capabilities. These initial barriers prevent the app from being truly accessible to everyone, despite its strong foundation once you're familiar with it.

PaperSpan gets this right from the first minute. The app is genuinely intuitive—no complex setup, no overwhelming feature lists, just straightforward functionality that works exactly as you'd expect. Within minutes of downloading, you're saving and reading articles effortlessly.

The basics are seamless. Save articles with one click from your browser, and the automatic categorization handles organization without any input from you. Reading controls are exactly where you'd expect them, and switching between text and web view is instant when needed.

We did encounter some frustrating technical issues. Network connectivity problems during signup affect multiple users, and we experienced sync delays between devices. The text cutoff issue can be annoying mid-article. These problems don't break the app, but they create unnecessary friction in what should be a smooth experience. Ease of use score: 7.8/10.

Security and privacy aren't PaperSpan's strongest selling points, mainly because there's limited transparency about how your data is handled. The app stores your reading data on their servers for syncing across devices, which is standard practice but means your reading habits and saved articles aren't kept locally.

What concerned us most was the lack of detailed privacy documentation. For an app that handles your reading preferences, article URLs, and potentially sensitive saved content, clearer communication about data protection would be reassuring. We didn't encounter obvious security problems during testing, but the transparency gap is noticeable.

Most users probably won't find this problematic for everyday use, but privacy-conscious readers might want to dig deeper into the terms of service or consider alternatives with more transparent data practices. Security and privacy gets 6.8 out of 10.