# Kindle



## GuitarsCanada (Dec 30, 2005)

*Kindle now shipping to Canada*

Wonder how popular something like this will be?



> The Kindle is finally coming to Canada, just in time for the Holiday shopping season.
> 
> Amazon.com announced Tuesday its popular electronic reading device is available for shipment immediately.
> 
> ...


----------



## lbrown1 (Mar 22, 2007)

wow - was waiting for that to come to Canada....my wife devours books at an alarming rate ...I think I might try to snag one of these....I wonder which cell provider Amazon has partnered with - I work for TELUS but haven't seen any internal bulletins on this subject.....


edit - googled it - apparently Amazon has partnered with AT&T who in turn negotiates roaming agreements...Rogers had resisted it (citing being 2 steps removed from the customer) ...so - as this is coincidental with TELUS' and Bell's launch of 3G networks - I imagine AT&T must have setup roaming agreements with both.


----------



## david henman (Feb 3, 2006)

...i just don't see this happening.

no matter how many books it stores, you can only read one at a time.

i only buy my books second hand so, even if downloading books was dirt cheap, the initial price tag is highly prohibitive for me.

certainly, it will have some use, but i see that as being very limited use.

predictably, however, it will evolve into a restaurant guide, a gaming centre, a recipe book, a dog and cat trainer, a drum machine, a lawn mower, a meat grinder, an automatic weapon, a 48-track home recorder, an espresso maker, a tracking device, a complete video post-production studio, a golf caddy and a drink mixer....

-dh


----------



## Mooh (Mar 7, 2007)

David, that's funny.

Will I be able to download music (ie sheet music and instructional) books? 

How about books that require great resolution like The Book Of Kells, illustrated Bibles, art books...

What is the environmental footprint? Paper versus plastic and electronics? Really, I'm interested.

Peace, Mooh.


----------



## keeperofthegood (Apr 30, 2008)

david henman said:


> ...i just don't see this happening.
> 
> no matter how many books it stores, you can only read one at a time.
> 
> ...


You forgot TOASTER hwopv

Actually, I can download 1000's of books easy enough already. I just cannot read more than a few computer screens at a time without getting eye strain. I know, printing off 300 page pdf files seems counter productive, but its what I have to do to be able to read them. Paper and Monitor are two different experiences for my eyes.


----------



## Jeff Flowerday (Jan 23, 2006)

Hmmm, I've really need to do some/more reading. Being the techno geek that I am this is very interesting.


----------



## Jeff Flowerday (Jan 23, 2006)

Only $70 for shipping and import fees. 

Needless to say I didn't complete the checkout...


----------



## GuitarsCanada (Dec 30, 2005)

Jeff Flowerday said:


> Only $70 for shipping and import fees.
> 
> Needless to say I didn't complete the checkout...


Why does someone not get them into Canada vs the whole shipping thing?


----------



## Jeff Flowerday (Jan 23, 2006)

Why would Amazon allow that when they can charge these awesome fees to international customers.

It is their device.


----------



## GuitarsCanada (Dec 30, 2005)

Jeff Flowerday said:


> Why would Amazon allow that when they can charge these awesome fees to international customers.
> 
> It is their device.


Rotten swines


----------



## Jeff Flowerday (Jan 23, 2006)

GuitarsCanada said:


> Rotten swines


Amazon has alway been a pig to Canadians. The dollar is on par pretty much and still a blu-ray will cost $10+ more on .ca than .com

Ignorant really!


----------



## cheezyridr (Jun 8, 2009)

i dunno, but for me, there's something tactile (is that even the word i'm looking for?) about a book that i just couldn't get from a kindle. i'm sure there will be people who get alot of use from it. i doubt i would be one of them. something about the feel of a book i just....don't think could be substituted.


for those of you who like to read books online, here is an excellent read, for free:

http://borderpilot.com/


----------



## keto (May 23, 2006)

I got a Sony reader from the Mrs for Xmas last year. Hated it, it went back (and I got an awesome set of isolation headphones out of the deal). I read a lot, this thing was clumsy and not very user friendly - the Kindle has a better reputation, but I'm still not interested.

If I fall asleep reading, I'd rather be whapped in the face by a paperback than a hard piece of plastic lol.


----------



## GuitarsCanada (Dec 30, 2005)

For me, it's the idea of storage. I mean, once you have read the book your done. I don't see the big hoopla about the massive storage capability.


----------



## noobcake (Mar 8, 2006)

I love technology, but ebook readers just don't work for me. Reading a book without physically feeling the texture of paper just feels too awkward.


----------



## shoretyus (Jan 6, 2007)

Just heard a thing on the Toronto Cbc afternoon show. 

You can't share the material it is only leased 

The Kindle is not the full product in Canada.. Kindle Lite....

Renewing my Library membership :smilie_flagge17:


----------



## lbrown1 (Mar 22, 2007)

well - I took the plunge and snagged one for the better half....

from a marketing standpoint - this thing is positively brilliant...hype and demand are built and supply will be "somewhat" limited...keeping the price up there....As a dude who's in marketing, I admire Amazon for this piece of business they're doing....the same content available to Iphones hasn't worked really - due mainly to the size / shape / usability of the Iphone - I mean - Who really wants to be reading a book and then get interrupted by the frikkin book ringing at you....

I do expect though, to see a divestiture from the electronic device itself....if I'm not mistaken, the format is proprietary - for now...but that'll open up in time and amazon will get back to their core - which is content....now offering over 300000 titles to Canadians....that'll keep the wife busy for a while.

as said before, my wife ploughs through books at a freakishly fast pace so we have this great big stack of used books that we have to deal with......once its read, it no longer holds any value to her, but the way I understand it is that Amazon keeps a record of what you have purchased, so if you purge the book from the Kindle, you can re-download it without paying for it again.

personal documents can also be uploaded to this device as well.

the device may not be actual paper - but the size, shape, the way you hold it (minus the annoying hand cramping trying to hold the ages apart ) is very "book like" vs reading off a PC....and - its backlit...but in the end - aside from dark / vs light, it is used like a book - i.e. works where a book works, and doesn't work where a book doesn't work generally.......I think its going to catch on quite famously....IF - they keep it simple - and don't try to add in all that other crap like gaming and drink mixing and toasting....


----------



## david henman (Feb 3, 2006)

...the cost of downloading individual books is way more expensive than it needs to be. especially for guys like me who _only_ buy used.

however, this could be absolutely huge for students, who have to spend exorbitant amounts on textbooks, AND have to lug them around all day.

there's no question that there is very attractive to the _avid_ reader, especially if you can download your favourite newspapers and magazines.

-dh


----------



## lbrown1 (Mar 22, 2007)

david henman said:


> ...the cost of downloading individual books is way more expensive than it needs to be. especially for guys like me who _only_ buy used.
> 
> however, this could be absolutely huge for students, who have to spend exorbitant amounts on textbooks, AND have to lug them around all day.
> 
> ...


never even thought of the University student angle...I wonder how many if any textbooks are available.....My daughter is in her second year at Carlton....but I'm wondering if this is or isn't for her....she MIGHT be perfectly happy to read off her netbook......whereas my wife would not like that at all......hmm - might need to think about that


----------



## Jeff Flowerday (Jan 23, 2006)

From what I've read in reviews the kindle interface for searching and jumping around like most students do with a text/reference book, isn't very good. It works best for the linear reader.


----------



## Guest (Nov 18, 2009)

lbrown1 said:


> never even thought of the University student angle...I wonder how many if any textbooks are available.....My daughter is in her second year at Carlton....but I'm wondering if this is or isn't for her....she MIGHT be perfectly happy to read off her netbook......whereas my wife would not like that at all......hmm - might need to think about that


I'm usually right up there adopting new technologies but for some reason I have a strong aversion to the whole eBook/eReader thing. The whole pulling-of-1984 was freaky -- what if someone decides the word "God" should be replaced by "George Bush" in the version of The Bible I bought for my eReader? I know that sounds fantastical, but I think you see what I'm getting at: reality can be changed too easily when nothing is tied to a physical medium. Witness that farce that are politician pages on Wikipedia -- being constantly spun and respun, by the supporters and detractors, to the point where they're not very useful.

As for school books: I'm am staunchly against eBooks for school. School books are where you learn the power of paper, and note taking. My school books are littered with my own addendum and notes in the margins and white space. The real learning, so to speak. Where I worked out what the book was saying for myself.

I don't know what it is, but I love books just the way they are.


----------



## lbrown1 (Mar 22, 2007)

an interesting take on the conspiracy angle......Electronic format might make it easier but I don't think that it's inconceivable that print on a page is equally susceptible......

the purpose of my latest acquisition of the Kindle was purely for ease of procurement, consumption and disposal of fiction material for the purpose of entertainment...the only non fiction my wife reads is fitness books (although the pictures in those look pretty fictional to me )

I think the earlier threads are onto something though - perhaps my University student kid is better off without it as it relates to textbook material...in the end - I think she'd appreciate a lump of cash much more than a material object for Xmas


----------



## Guest (Nov 18, 2009)

lbrown1 said:


> an interesting take on the conspiracy angle......Electronic format might make it easier but I don't think that it's inconceivable that print on a page is equally susceptible......


You don't? How can you change the words in books that are already out there when it comes to printed material? You can't. If someone owns your now non-approved version of your book they own it. Nothing you can do about it. But with eBooks you can change reality for everyone at any time. The God/George Bush thing was an extreme joke, but it's a nice sense of security when I buy something physical that what I've bought is mine, no one can take it away or change it on me.



> the purpose of my latest acquisition of the Kindle was purely for ease of procurement, consumption and disposal of fiction material for the purpose of entertainment...the only non fiction my wife reads is fitness books (although the pictures in those look pretty fictional to me )


For fiction I can see it making good sense. Although my wife would argue that it's probably the wrong thing to read fiction on if you like to read in the tub or the shower as she does.


----------



## lbrown1 (Mar 22, 2007)

iaresee said:


> You don't? How can you change the words in books that are already out there when it comes to printed material? You can't. If someone owns your now non-approved version of your book they own it. Nothing you can do about it. But with eBooks you can change reality for everyone at any time. The God/George Bush thing was an extreme joke, but it's a nice sense of security when I buy something physical that what I've bought is mine, no one can take it away or change it on me.
> 
> True - unless it already got "changed" before you came into possession of it - but yes - I get your point
> 
> ...


she reads in the shower?...


----------



## Guest (Nov 18, 2009)

lbrown1 said:


> she reads in the shower?...


Truly one of the quirks I love about her. :smile:


----------



## david henman (Feb 3, 2006)

iaresee said:


> I don't know what it is, but I love books just the way they are.


...as do most of us. same with newspapers and magazines.

but, change will come, inevitably, along with new generations that grow and grow up with it. and for those new generations, digital reading may become as natural and second nature and picking up a book is for us.

my only concern is health issues.

i am hearing, for example, that the radiation from cell phones may, indeed, be harmful, despite recent studies that suggest otherwise.

-dh


----------



## Lester B. Flat (Feb 21, 2006)

I wonder how it handles fonts. None of the fonts used on computers are the preferred fonts of publishers. Ease of reading has a lot to do with how much information is retained by the reader. Out of 350,000 fonts only about 20 or so are used in books and magazines.


----------



## Jeff Flowerday (Jan 23, 2006)

david henman said:


> i am hearing, for example, that the radiation from cell phones may, indeed, be harmful, despite recent studies that suggest otherwise.
> 
> -dh


Note to self: Quit carrying cell phone in front pants pocket!


----------



## mhammer (Nov 30, 2007)

david henman said:


> ...as do most of us. same with newspapers and magazines.
> 
> but, change will come, inevitably, along with new generations that grow and grow up with it. and for those new generations, digital reading may become as natural and second nature and picking up a book is for us.
> 
> ...


There will NEVER be a time when digital reading will become universal. Yes, there may be wealthy peole in every nation who can afford to own one and certain social sectors where the computer literacy will be adequate, but the vast majority of the world will still be using word of mouth or paper.

Do not mistake what is feasible, for what will necessarily be omnipresent. We've had telephones, televisions, and automobiles for a VERY long time, but there are still many places in the world where these are the possessions and actvities of "others".

Another mistake that should not be made is to confuse identifiability with easy legibility and low fatigue. Can I identify the characters and words on such a device? Sure. Can I stand to look at it for hours in a hammock without getting a headache? Not necessarily. The same way I can recognize a tune when encoded to a 64k MP3, and I can see what's around me by means of a flickering buzzing fluorescent bulb, but I sure as shooting couldn't listen to music like that all day long, or work with that lighting for very long.

Incidentally, back when Maximum PC was a different magazine, and well before that, it was CDROM Today magazine (1994-99), and came with a cover disc. Like all cover-discs, it came with game demos and freeware/shareware apps, but many issues also came with tons of classic books that Project Guttenberg had been converting from printed to digital text. I've got the equivalent of an entire wall of books on those CDs in my rack. Doubt that I've ever read any of them.


----------



## Morbo (Aug 26, 2009)

A couple of interesting considerations:

http://boingboing.net/2009/07/20/amazons-orwellian-de.html
http://boingboing.net/2009/11/08/ebook-license-agreem.html

I have books that are 80 years old, schoolbooks of my great-grandfather. At the library at Laval University I can check law books dating back to the 19th century. The danger of going "all digital" would be that we have to actively maintain the existence of the books, because it can easily be deleted and over time, files get corrupted, even physical media (like CDs) have a pretty short lifespan. And books that are considered boring or unimportant will be deleted promptly, but these books might be of some importance later. How many classic books had a cold first reception and then was rediscovered decades later?


----------



## Starbuck (Jun 15, 2007)

Nah, I love books, the feel, smell everything about them. This might be nice for traveling, but I'll stick to paper thanks.


----------



## david henman (Feb 3, 2006)

mhammer said:


> There will NEVER be a time when digital reading will become universal..


...there will never be a time when any of us can predict the future.

you may be right. but i'd hesitate to bet on it.

if you'd claimed a few hundred years ago that we'd be flying, communicating with wireless devices or "allowing" women to vote, you'd have been burned at the stake.

-dh


----------



## mhammer (Nov 30, 2007)

I agree that to predict some specific achievement is not possible ever is likely folly. Which is why, in that spirit, I say the likelihood that such technology becomes commonplace among *some* corners of the globe and segments of society is high, but the likelihood that it becomes commonplace enough that paper gets left behind is close to nil, simply because the elimination of economic disparity is something the entire globe has been hard at work on for several thousand years, and shows little sign of success. The same way that much of the world has and uses combustion-engine vehicles, but there are a great many people and places in the world where traditional "organic vehicles" are the exclusive mode of transport. Horses, burros, camels, et al will not disappear from the landscape anytime soon, no matter how far advanced cars get, because they're made for roads not mountain trails or deserts. Similarly, because some form of brain tissue transplant may be able to "cure" Parkinson's Disease does not mean that everyone on the planet will be having tissue-transplant surgery, because it is expensive, there aren't enough surgeons and ORs in the world, and not everyone would survive surgery. 

So, from where I stand, paper will not disappear anytime soon, no matter how easy on the eyes and portable such reading devices become, because many people around the globe will have no other alternative BUT paper. I'll get back to you in 200 years and then you can say "I told you so". :wave:


----------



## hollowbody (Jan 15, 2008)

As much as I love the ability to digitally download and have access to all sorts of information, I can't give up hard-copies of books.

I don't mind looking up wikipedia articles and that kind of stuff, even longish ones, but I can't get into reading books on a computer screen, or any other digital device.

When I was in university studying Eng Lit, I stumbled across Project Gutenberg, which is doing to works of literature what Google is doing to everything else - digitizing them. PG only digitizes works that the statute of limitations has expired on (so author's been dead 50+ years, no one's renewed, it's now public domain) and they offer a DVD you can order for free (just pay shipping) or download via .torrent (yes! legal torrent downloads FTW!).

I thought this was going to change how I studied and reduce the cost of books incredibly. I was wrong. Sort of. I found reading on a computer screen to be extremely tedious and straining, so I went back to hard copy books. What I _did_ like about PG was that you could ctrl+F to find anything you were looking for a book. Try _that_ with you 800-page copy of Ulysses when you're writing a paper!

IMO - digital books have their uses and are pretty neat, but the tactile sensation of reading a book can't be beat. I'm with Mark on this one.


----------



## david henman (Feb 3, 2006)

...on the other hand, i still have never texted, much less tweeted. and the only listening devices i have are my car stereo, which is radio/casette, and my cd players at home. and my recording studio is completely computer free!

-dh




mhammer said:


> I agree that to predict some specific achievement is not possible ever is likely folly. Which is why, in that spirit, I say the likelihood that such technology becomes commonplace among *some* corners of the globe and segments of society is high, but the likelihood that it becomes commonplace enough that paper gets left behind is close to nil, simply because the elimination of economic disparity is something the entire globe has been hard at work on for several thousand years, and shows little sign of success. The same way that much of the world has and uses combustion-engine vehicles, but there are a great many people and places in the world where traditional "organic vehicles" are the exclusive mode of transport. Horses, burros, camels, et al will not disappear from the landscape anytime soon, no matter how far advanced cars get, because they're made for roads not mountain trails or deserts. Similarly, because some form of brain tissue transplant may be able to "cure" Parkinson's Disease does not mean that everyone on the planet will be having tissue-transplant surgery, because it is expensive, there aren't enough surgeons and ORs in the world, and not everyone would survive surgery.
> 
> So, from where I stand, paper will not disappear anytime soon, no matter how easy on the eyes and portable such reading devices become, because many people around the globe will have no other alternative BUT paper. I'll get back to you in 200 years and then you can say "I told you so". :wave:


----------



## lbrown1 (Mar 22, 2007)

Morbo said:


> A couple of interesting considerations:
> 
> http://boingboing.net/2009/07/20/amazons-orwellian-de.html
> http://boingboing.net/2009/11/08/ebook-license-agreem.html
> ...



you bring up an interesting point.....the content can "feel" less valuable as its so easy to replicate or own - much like MP3's......I'll always love music....but teh file itself for example - I'm much less careful with than maybe I would have been with the '45 record for example - because its so easy to just go get another one - or have a backup of it....whereas a book that's 90 years old - its the book itself (or the CD or the record) vs the content that maybe provides the perceived value


----------



## david henman (Feb 3, 2006)

lbrown1 said:


> you bring up an interesting point.....the content can "feel" less valuable as its so easy to replicate or own - much like MP3's......I'll always love music....but teh file itself for example - I'm much less careful with than maybe I would have been with the '45 record for example - because its so easy to just go get another one - or have a backup of it....whereas a book that's 90 years old - its the book itself (or the CD or the record) vs the content that maybe provides the perceived value


...interesting. i wonder if that is at least part of the reason that there is no longer any perceived value to music, hence the mentality that one should not be obligated to actually pay for acquiring it.

-dh


----------



## lbrown1 (Mar 22, 2007)

david henman said:


> ...interesting. i wonder if that is at least part of the reason that there is no longer any perceived value to music, hence the mentality that one should not be obligated to actually pay for acquiring it.
> 
> -dh


maybe - I remember I used to absolutely treasure the actual cassette tape or Record because it was the ONLY source I had to listen to that music...but today - if I want to listen to Zeppelin's Kashmir - I can find it very easily from a wide variety of sources...so the original media it came on is not necessarily valuable to me anymore....sad really


----------



## Lester B. Flat (Feb 21, 2006)

Morbo said:


> A couple of interesting considerations:
> 
> http://boingboing.net/2009/07/20/amazons-orwellian-de.html
> http://boingboing.net/2009/11/08/ebook-license-agreem.html
> ...


Can you imagine the Dead Sea CD's? Also, there's the fact that once a book is printed it is useful by itself as long as you understand the language. A CD or other storage medium requires a heap of supporting technology to make it useful.


----------



## mhammer (Nov 30, 2007)

One of the summer jobs I had as an undergraduate was in a public library sorting through boxes of books that had been donated. The feeling you get when you open a box and find a first edition of something that is over 250 years old is really something special. Holding a first edition Voltaire in my hands and wondering whose hands were touching it in the thick of the French revolution was quite the bit of time travel, let me tell you. 

I also remember, as an undergrad, taking out a volume of one of my favourite journals from the early 1900s, The Journal of Philosophy, Psychology, and the Scientific Method. It was one of those curios that existed before psychology became its own discipline and was situated within philosophy departments (as it was at my alma mater, McGill). There in the margin of an issue from 1913 or so, where J.B. Watson had expounded the doctrine/school of "behaviourism" for the first time, someone had written "f**k". While I don't normally cotton to those who deface shared university property as valuable as old books, it made me smile to think that someone, a Freudian I suppose, was so irritated by Watson's approach that they had to write something angry in the margins. A student from the 1920's? From the war years? From the 1960's? It made me curious. It is also an experience or phenomena that I doubt the digital medium will ever provide us.


----------



## Guest (Nov 19, 2009)

mhammer said:


> One of the summer jobs I had as an undergraduate was in a public library sorting through boxes of books that had been donated. The feeling you get when you open a box and find a first edition of something that is over 250 years old is really something special. Holding a first edition Voltaire in my hands and wondering whose hands were touching it in the thick of the French revolution was quite the bit of time travel, let me tell you.


Crazy. If you're in Toronto there's a tower attached to Robart's Library called the Fisher Rare Book Library at U of T's downtown campus that's dedicated to rare books. They have a first edition of Principia that is amazing to gaze at from one side of the glass. :smile: If you've got an alumni card from any Canadian university or college they'll usually let you in.

I always enjoyed looking up papers from professors and other famous engineers in the university archives.

I have a question for you about donated books: my wife has always talked me out of dropping boxes of books off at the public library. She says they'll usually destroy them because they don't want many copies of fiction and what not in their catalogs thanks to the whole having to pay royalties on checkouts now. Was that your experience?


----------



## keeperofthegood (Apr 30, 2008)

Digital only lasts until a hard drive head impact happens.

Or an EMP from a nuke or nuclear reactor happens.

Or you forget what was on that old drive and a format d:\ happens.

Or the OS upgrades so much your old drive is no longer a supported format and thats is IF you can still get the wires for it happens.

Paper has lasted 1000's and 1000's of years when under the right conditions. Um, clarifying, "paper" being a metaphor for "things we have vandalized with script or pictograph".

I love the graffiti left behind by some unimaginable age of tomb builders in the quarries of Egypt XD http://www.asmmag.com/features/mapping-ancient-egyptian-sites even then f**k was used to express your 'on the job' satisfaction.


----------



## mhammer (Nov 30, 2007)

iaresee said:


> I have a question for you about donated books: my wife has always talked me out of dropping boxes of books off at the public library. She says they'll usually destroy them because they don't want many copies of fiction and what not in their catalogs thanks to the whole having to pay royalties on checkouts now. Was that your experience?


Well, my experience was pretty much before you were born, Ian so things may be a little different now. The library I worked in had us sorting the books into 3 piles:
- books that might make the stacks by virtue of condition and interest
- books that would not hold up in the stacks, might take too much space and restoration, and would pull in big bucks from antiquarian dealers that could then be turned into books that *would* circulate
- the discard pile; things that wouldn't circulate and wouldn't appeal to the antiquarian dealers

The thing is that libraries are generally cramped for space, so any new holdings they acquire have to be something that they know will be used by patrons. If it is too delicate or frail, it can't go into general circulation, so it has to provide some *serious* bragging rights to be the sort of thing they would hang onto without putting into circulation. As for the royalty thing, this is the first time I've ever heard of it. Not denying it, I've just not heard of it.

I got a lot of things from the discard pile, many of which are gone now as gifts to friends, but some of which I kept. I have a King James Bible from 1776 that belonged to a Clark family, whose family tree (up to the early 1830's) is inscribed in sepia ink on the back of the table of weights and measures between the old and new testament. I have an "anthropological text" from fascist-era Italy (Dept of Anthropology, Univ of Florence, specifically) called "Sexual relations of Mankind" that has to be one of the most jaw-droppingly racist things I have ever seen in my life. I also saved early psychology textbooks from the 30's and 40's that I still find kinda cool. But I also had early editions of Alice in Wonderland and several books from the late 1800's illustrated by Gustav Doré ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gustave_Doré ) that I unfortunately don't have anymore.

Probably the coolest thing I saw/held was a first edition Spinoza from the late 1600's, that appeared to be on parchment, with a leather cover. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baruch_Spinoza


----------



## hollowbody (Jan 15, 2008)

mhammer said:


> But I also had early editions of Alice in Wonderland and several books from the late 1800's illustrated by Gustav Doré ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gustave_Doré ) that I unfortunately don't have anymore.


I _love_ Doré! I've been looking for an inexpensive copy of his Inferno forever! I almost bought a gigantic leather-bound 19th C. copy in London when I was there in '97, but the £250 price tag was tough to swallow and it's heft would have put me way over luggage limits too 



lbrown1 said:


> maybe - I remember I used to absolutely treasure the actual cassette tape or Record because it was the ONLY source I had to listen to that music...but today - if I want to listen to Zeppelin's Kashmir - I can find it very easily from a wide variety of sources...so the original media it came on is not necessarily valuable to me anymore....sad really


I think this sort of reverence for media went away with CDs. While CDs do get damaged, the availability is so large that they're easily replaced, whereas an older pressing of Kashmir has historic, sentimental _and_ monetary value. 

I've had to replaced numerous CDs over the years because they got damaged. I'm on my 3rd copy of _Hatful of Hollow_ and _Ten_ and 2nd copy of many others, but I never felt any pangs about the "original" copy getting ruined. On the other hand, I have a couple older pressings of Zeppelin and Stones that would really annoy me if anything were to happen to them.

I think the "tangible value" of LPs in light of the throwaway convenience of mp3s is what really sparked the analog resurgence in the last little while (though it's petering out now).


----------



## mhammer (Nov 30, 2007)

hollowbody said:


> I _love_ Doré! I've been looking for an inexpensive copy of his Inferno forever! I almost bought a gigantic leather-bound 19th C. copy in London when I was there in '97, but the £250 price tag was tough to swallow and it's heft would have put me way over luggage limits too


Um, I think it was an "Inferno" that I gave away.kqoct
The one I had was not leather-bound, but it was fairly large, and had a sheet of "onion skin" paper between the plate side of each illustration and the page of text facing it.


----------



## Big_Daddy (Apr 2, 2009)

I work for a multi-billion-dollar-a-year publishing company in Michigan which prints large volume reference materials for public libraries, universities, K-12, etc. In the 11 years I have been with the company, we have seen our publications go from almost 100% printed materials to less than 40% and this trend is continuing. This is market-driven. Online and electronic products make up the bulk of our revenue now.

Some statistics....

"U.S. libraries in the survey spent an average of 25.4% more in 2007 than in 2006 (on e-Books), lower than the sample average of 36%. Between 2006 and 2007, non-U.S. libraries showed a dramatic increase of almost 90%.

Well over 81% of the sample cataloged their e-book collection and listed it in their online library catalog. Academic and other types of libraries did not differ significantly in this practice; under 79% of U.S. participants but nearly 93% of non-U.S. participants cataloged e-books and included them in the library’s online catalog.

More than half of all patrons reported either extensive or significant use of e-reference books, and nearly a quarter of the college libraries in the sample reported that their patrons used e-books quite extensively.

*Only a shade more than 10% of the libraries in the sample owed any kind of e-book reading device that was not a traditional computer workstation. Library size, type of region, or origin did not have a great impact on the tendency to own an e-book reading device that was not a traditional computer workstation. Only about 4% of the libraries in the sample owned an Amazon Kindle e-book reader and these were almost all in the public/special library category. All owners were U.S.-based libraries. 2.7% of libraries in the sample owned a SONY e-book reader. Most owners were in the public or special library category and all were U.S.-based libraries. No libraries in the sample owned a Franklin Ebookman or a Cybook. About 8.1% of the libraries in the sample said that they planned to purchase an Amazon Kindle within the next year*."

This is a small sample of material taken from a survey of our current customers. There is a massive shift away from printed reference materials going on right now. The numbers for fiction and the classics are substantially lower but are gradually changing.

I personally love the feel of a real book in my hands when I am reading. However, with our 40% company discount on Kindles, I will probably buy at least one and give it a try, just to see what all the fuss is about. My daughters are avid readers and I suspect they will gobble this thing up.:smile:


----------



## mhammer (Nov 30, 2007)

Where a well-organized index is paramount to optimal usability, it's often hard to beat an e-text for searches and referencing. Most indexes are generally wanting, because they are very difficult and time-consuming to prepare. At the same time, direct explicit search tends to suppress random flipping and serendipitous discovery - a very important and oft-overlooked function. And if you're reading for pleasure, rather than reference information, the index is moot.

Of course, because institutional libraries are always cramped for space, and because physical processing of books ups their operating costs, they prefer e-books. There is also something to be said for an e-book being loanable to more than one person at once.

It should also be said that often e-books and e-reading-material merely offloads the shipping and printing costs to the end-user. We have all manner of subscriptions to e-journals here at work, and despite how snazzy a monitor they insisted on buying me, I can't read stuff on that screen. I have to print out the PDF and read from THAT. The library didn't pay for the paper when they got the e-subscription, but the organization pays for the paper when I print it out in order to *make* it readable.

As a former university prof, I have a certain distaste for all this e-stuff. While I enjoy the convenience of electronically available journals, I started out with paper by going through the current periodicals at the McGill Library once a month, from A to Z, and seeing what was new in my discipline and areas of related interest. Doing so gave me a sense of what the important journals were, how picky they were in what they published, who was showing up all over the place, what the hot areas were, where to find current info on certain topics, and so on. It also gave you a sense of where quality was to be found, and where not. My students, on the other hand, who were raised on e-access and never passed through a paper stage, see everything as having equivalent value. They would do an e-search and cite research from Nobel prize-winners alongside undergraduate papers in journals that indiscriminately published over 500 articles a year. If they had lived in the paper world first, they would not likely have done that because they would have seen that THIS author is published in a journal that comes out twice a year, has 4 papers per issue, and a list of editors that includes anyone who is anyone in the field. You don't see any of that electronically.


----------



## Jeff Flowerday (Jan 23, 2006)

Well I broke down and got the Kindle DX today.

It's fast approaching the time where I need to buy a bunch of new technical manuals. From all reviews the DX is the only acceptable screen size to actually read technical manuals on it.

Finally i won't have to lug 20lbs of manuals with me.

I can store lyric sheets and other cheat sheets on it for band practice.

Hopefully I find other great uses for it since it now supports PDF and CutePDF printer is free after all.


----------



## Jeff Flowerday (Jan 23, 2006)

nkjanssen said:


> Apparantly, it's not just a standard computer screen. The eye fatigue from the Kindle is supposedly less than from ordinary book-stock paper. I havn't tried one myself, so can't confirm that. I do like the concept of the e-reader, though.


I've heard the same. I'll find out next week, I guess.


----------



## Duster (Dec 28, 2007)

Couple points:

1. This reminds me of the "Book City" bookmark: http://www.bookcity.ca/bookmark/

2. I've looked at these electronic readers, and I think they need to do more to be useful. They need to have some of the features of a tablet computer in addition to the e-reader itself. Otherwise I don't think they have all that much of an edge. Speaking of edge, my money is on something more like this, particularly for students: http://www.entourageedge.com/

3. I think there's a lot of different kinds of reading in the world, and like most things in the world today, there will be increased fragmentation. Something like this would be great for technical manuals, textbooks, newspapers, etc., but won't necessarily replace curling up with a novel in your good chair under a good reading light. We always tend to think of new technologies sweeping in and replacing the old, but it doesn't work that way. New technologies come in and are applied in SOME areas where we used to use old technology, but don't replace the old technology in all applications. And usually, the new technology mixes with the old to create entirely new technologies and applications again. We have several ways of communicating with people now, including fax, email, instant messenger, etc., but everyone I know still has a telephone on their desk. The telephone was never replaced. In fact, it mated with new technology to create new kinds of telephones. A friend of mine has four cell phones. The telephone seems to still be going strong. And for all the talk of the "paperless office", we likely consume more paper in offices than ever before...

--- D


----------



## Guest (Jan 13, 2010)

nkjanssen said:


> Apparantly, it's not just a standard computer screen. The eye fatigue from the Kindle is supposedly less than from ordinary book-stock paper. I havn't tried one myself, so can't confirm that. I do like the concept of the e-reader, though.


It is a new display technology! And it's pretty good. It's a bit like an etch-a-sketch. There are particles in front of a semi-reflective screen and you can alter their opacity using a charge of varying value. The very cool thing about it is: once you change the particles opacity, it sticks. You don't have to "keep it lit" with a continuous flow of current.

That's what gives the Kindle amazingly good battery life. It uses power to change the display, but once it's changed there's nearly no power draw to keep showing you that page. It means they can get away with really small batteries.

And the easy-on-the-eyes thing comes from a very high DPI and no back lighting. They use a semi-reflective surface behind the particles that requires ambient light, just like real paper, for you to be able to see things. Backlighting is hell on your eyes.

Jeff, I think you'll like it. I had a chance to fool around with one over the holidays and it's impressively slick. Slick enough to make me forget all my initial hesitations about "renting" instead of "buying" books. That they offer free wifi anywhere on it for the purchase prices is nice too.


----------



## Jeff Flowerday (Jan 23, 2006)

iaresee said:


> It is a new display technology! And it's pretty good. It's a bit like an etch-a-sketch. There are particles in front of a semi-reflective screen and you can alter their opacity using a charge of varying value. The very cool thing about it is: once you change the particles opacity, it sticks. You don't have to "keep it lit" with a continuous flow of current.
> 
> That's what gives the Kindle amazingly good battery life. It uses power to change the display, but once it's changed there's nearly no power draw to keep showing you that page. It means they can get away with really small batteries.
> 
> ...


So you played with the regular Kindle 2? From what I've read the display on the DX has blacker blacks and a higher overall contrast ratio.

I won't lie I'm a little excited about it.


----------



## Guest (Jan 13, 2010)

The smaller one. So I guess that's not the DX? It was new though. As a replacement for books it's compelling now that I've seen it in action. I don't recall if you can make notes on pages, which is something I do frequently with manuals and text books.


----------



## Jeff Flowerday (Jan 23, 2006)

iaresee said:


> The smaller one. So I guess that's not the DX? It was new though. As a replacement for books it's compelling now that I've seen it in action. I don't recall if you can make notes on pages, which is something I do frequently with manuals and text books.


From the Kindle User's Guide:

Quote:
_You can highlight lines of text and add notes to any of the content on Kindle. Amazon automatically stores all of your annotations in the "My Clippings" file and even backs them up on Amazon servers so they will never be lost even if you lose your Kindle_

The "My Clippings" file is a text file which can be transferred to your computer.


----------



## Guest (Jan 14, 2010)

Jeff Flowerday said:


> From the Kindle User's Guide:
> 
> Quote:
> _You can highlight lines of text and add notes to any of the content on Kindle. Amazon automatically stores all of your annotations in the "My Clippings" file and even backs them up on Amazon servers so they will never be lost even if you lose your Kindle_
> ...


Fantastic!


----------



## torndownunit (May 14, 2006)

I absolutely hate reading off a screen. I work with computers, and the last thing I need is to stare at another form of screen. I can't imagine being actually able to read a whole book. I get migraines already, and that thing just seems like an instant migraine trigger.

I could never use it for casual reading, but the school angle definitely sounds interesting. Or for books I have to buy relating to my work.


----------



## Duster (Dec 28, 2007)

iaresee said:


> The smaller one. So I guess that's not the DX? It was new though. As a replacement for books it's compelling now that I've seen it in action. I don't recall if you can make notes on pages, which is something I do frequently with manuals and text books.


That's why I think that in order for it to be better than a book, (or even as good as a book), it would need more features. I like the Edge's ability to take notes on the page, in the margins, etc., and keep them. That's interesting to me.

--- D


----------



## torndownunit (May 14, 2006)

nkjanssen said:


> Apparantly, it's not just a standard computer screen. The eye fatigue from the Kindle is supposedly less than from ordinary book-stock paper. I havn't tried one myself, so can't confirm that. I do like the concept of the e-reader, though.


I just noticed this post. I have yet to see ANY type of screen that doesn't give me eye fatigue after long periods of looking at it. Especially when focusing on a lot of text. I'll have to see one in person, but a screen is a screen and rendered fonts are rendered fonts so I am pretty skeptical.

As a very avid reader, I like the idea, like some of the capabilities, and like the future capabilities. But I just have no interest in reading from a tablet. Plus, I have no interest in carrying one around with me. I don't even like carrying my cell phone around with me.

To those who have experienced the screen, does it work well in bright sunlight? I do most of my reading outdoors in the summer.


----------



## Duster (Dec 28, 2007)

nkjanssen said:


> To be useful to me, they just have to allow me to easily browse and download books and then read them without straining my eyes.


Like I said, different segments of the market will adopt it for different reasons. If all you want is something to read without straining your eyes, then regular books already do that. If you need to download books immediately, and the 1-2 day wait time for ordering physical books is too long for you, then it's an advantage. And if you travel and want to take a bunch of books with you, then it's an advantage there too. But again, that's only part of the reading market. Many people will be happy with traditional books. 





> Depends what you want. Is it a substitute for a computer or a substitute for a book? I can't check my e-mails or make phone calls on a book either, but that doesn't make them useless. There's something to be said for doing one thing and doing it well. Again, I don't know how well the Kindle does all this. But the concept is appealing.


I don't think it's a substitute for either. That's part of the problem when new technologies come into the market - people always think in terms of existing technologies, and whether the new technology will replace the old. It doesn't happen all that often. Usually the new technology augments the old, or takes away some part of the market for the old. People sometimes think GPS is a substitute for paper maps, but actually they're different things, used in very different ways. This will be the same thing. It's not a replacement for a book, or a replacement for a computer. Hence why I say it needs to do more. If all it does is aspire to be "as good as a book", or "a replacement for the book", well, why would you want one - we already have books.

But if it can be used in a different way or appeal to readers by doing things a regular book can't, then I think the idea has potential. I think offering immediate download of books and the ability to store a bunch of books offers some advantage, but it's an advantage that will be important to a limited number of people. 




> I would actually think it would be the opposite. Textbooks and technical manuals are the kind of things you don't necessarily read in a linear fashion. Lots of flipping around. I wouldn't think this would be great for that (other than the search capabilities that I assume it has). I think this would be more suited to reading in a linear fashion, and particularly great for travelling.


I'm on the fence on the whole travelling thing. Part of me says it will be great for vacation travel, because you can take a lot of books with you. But when I'm on vacation I'm by a pool, on a beach, or skiing, or travelling by motorbike. In the setting where I vacation a paper book makes a lot more sense. No batteries or recharging, no worries about cold, heat, water, sand, etc. to damage it. And when I travel on business, I usually have my laptop and blackberry, so I don't really feel like adding another electronic device. It will be interesting to see people's experience with these things. 

Keep posting, as I'm definitely curious. I almost bought a Sony reader a couple of years ago, so I'm definitely on the fence about adopting this. I see the appeal, but still not quite convinced.

--- D


----------



## Duster (Dec 28, 2007)

torndownunit said:


> I just noticed this post. I have yet to see ANY type of screen that doesn't give me eye fatigue after long periods of looking at it. Especially when focusing on a lot of text. I'll have to see one in person, but a screen is a screen and rendered fonts are rendered fonts so I am pretty skeptical.


You should try one out. A lot of work has gone into this e-paper idea over the last decade or so. The whole thrust of all the development has been to make something that doesn't give eye fatigue and is very close to paper. They are almost reluctant to call these things "screens", because they are different. 

I haven't spent enough time reading with one to say that they're right, but from the few minutes I've spent looking at them in stores, it's promising.

--- D


----------



## torndownunit (May 14, 2006)

Duster said:


> You should try one out. A lot of work has gone into this e-paper idea over the last decade or so. The whole thrust of all the development has been to make something that doesn't give eye fatigue and is very close to paper. They are almost reluctant to call these things "screens", because they are different.
> 
> *I haven't spent enough time reading with one to say that they're right, but from the few minutes I've spent looking at them in stores, it's promising.*
> 
> --- D


See that's the problem with trying one. A book doesn't take me a few minutes to read. It takes me a few days. I'll sit and read for 4-5 hours at a time when I have a day off. That is where I think the issue will come in.



> I'm on the fence on the whole travelling thing. Part of me says it will be great for vacation travel, because you can take a lot of books with you. But when I'm on vacation I'm by a pool, on a beach, or skiing, or travelling by motorbike. In the setting where I vacation a paper book makes a lot more sense. No batteries or recharging, no worries about cold, heat, water, sand, etc. to damage it. And when I travel on business, I usually have my laptop and blackberry, so I don't really feel like adding another electronic device. It will be interesting to see people's experience with these things.


I share that perspective. I like to read on the beach or poolside while on vacation. I would just be worried about my new gadget. Plus, no one is likely going to steal my old worn out paperback book if I take a swim in the ocean. They would steal the Kindle. I can't throw the kindle in my worn out backpack and hike in the rain etc. So ya it might be useful for BUSINESS travellers, but not for all types of travel.

I am not knocking them either, I just completely agree with you and others who say they have a limited use and will only appeal to a certain market.


----------



## Duster (Dec 28, 2007)

torndownunit said:


> I am not knocking them either, I just completely agree with you and others who say *they have a limited use and will only appeal to a certain market.*


And that's why I suggested that to make more inroads, they'd need to have more features. If I could do email on it, make notes, and maybe even do a bit of word processing, I could probably take it on business trips instead of a laptop, or fire it up on the couch at home instead of simultaneously using a book/magazine and laptop, which is how I often operate in my off hours (unfortunately!). When I look at that Entourage Edge, I see something that offers more advantages. If I was a student I would have loved to have something like that in my bag, especially since today all campuses are WiFi'd all over the place.

--- D


----------



## lbrown1 (Mar 22, 2007)

*update.......*

update on the experience my wife is having with hers since she opened it Xmas morn.......she's read 12 rather large books on it so far since Xmas day....absolutely LOVES it........its lightweight, not bulky - easy to carry around many books with it (it doesn't get heavier when you add books to it )....

as previously posted, she consumes books at an alarming rate which is why I got it for her - but the pace has picked up to unprecedented speed.

the screen causes absolutely no eye fatigue (no more than you'd get from a normal printed page)...the actual screen itself looks much different than a standard LCD screen - you have to give it a double take cause it actually appears like the look and texture of a real piece of paper...they've done a GREAT job on it.

I recommend getting a protective cover for it - that's on order - its durable - but it would be really annoying if the screen got scratched.

ordering books is a cinch.....clickity click and wait for 30 seconds - poof - its there.

one correction to a previous post I made on this - it does NOT have a backlight.....so - just like a regular book - you would need a book-light (they sell clip-on ones) .

will have to start looking into how books can be shared from one Kindle to another - which would help out on the cost of new books - if she could use books others have bought......

I wonder however - if this whole e-book thing is opening a new can of worms...


it isn't illegal to lend or resell used books any more than it is to led or resell old casette tapes for example (at least I don't think it is) .....so I wonder if sharing the files themselves is even possible - or are they licensed to the device.......the point is moot anyway till some of her friends get one....or if bit torrent has ebooks posted in the Kindle format.


----------



## Big_Daddy (Apr 2, 2009)

I've had pretty much the same experience. I absolutely love this thing and have read 3 books in the last 2 weeks. As lbrown1 said, it is very easy on the eyes and actually easier to read then a book because it's one-handed (no page turning, no losing your place, built-in dictionary in case you want to quickly look up the meaning of a word). The Kindle is a winner in my books (bad pun):smile:


----------



## torndownunit (May 14, 2006)

Well, I'll have to at least check it out. While I am not 100% sold on it, the fact is I probably buy an average of $40 a month worth of books over a year. At that rate, I would be saving a lot of money on books and shipping fairly quickly.


----------



## Guest (Jan 14, 2010)

torndownunit said:


> I just noticed this post. I have yet to see ANY type of screen that doesn't give me eye fatigue after long periods of looking at it. Especially when focusing on a lot of text. I'll have to see one in person, but a screen is a screen and rendered fonts are rendered fonts so I am pretty skeptical.


"a screen is a screen" is not exactly a universal truth. This screen is different. It uses no backlighting to display information. It's lit entirely by ambient light _just like a book_. That's the big advantage to it, and your eye fatigue complaint was a major factor in the design of this screen. They wanted it to be like a book. And really: it's scary close.



> To those who have experienced the screen, does it work well in bright sunlight? I do most of my reading outdoors in the summer.


Yes. As I said: it's not a backlit screen. It looks better in bright light. Just like a book. It's like looking at a book that redraws itself.


----------



## Jeff Flowerday (Jan 23, 2006)

lbrown1 said:


> I recommend getting a protective cover for it - that's on order - its durable - but it would be really annoying if the screen got scratched.


I haven't read a good review on the screen protectors yet, so I'm hesitant to order any. I eagerly await your revew on it.

I did get the leather case which should greatly reduce the chance of scratches, since they should barely happen when actually using the device.


----------



## Guest (Jan 14, 2010)

lbrown1 said:


> will have to start looking into how books can be shared from one Kindle to another - which would help out on the cost of new books - if she could use books others have bought......
> 
> I wonder however - if this whole e-book thing is opening a new can of worms...


Ah! Well here is where I'm still a little bothered. You don't buy the book from Amazon. You buy a a license to read the book. And the license is tied to your Kindle. Not without breaking the terms of your license can you put that purchase on another Kindle. We read a lot here, my wife sounds like yours in her reading rate, and books trickle down from her to me. A Kindle would certainly make that trickier.



> it isn't illegal to lend or resell used books any more than it is to led or resell old casette tapes for example (at least I don't think it is) .....so I wonder if sharing the files themselves is even possible - or are they licensed to the device.......the point is moot anyway till some of her friends get one....or if bit torrent has ebooks posted in the Kindle format.


It's a license. Not a physical copy. Amazon is going to great lengths to make it sound like you're buying the book, but your not for all the reasons you mentioned above. You can't resell it. You can't loan it to someone else. You can only read it on your one device. Cory Doctorow has been taking Amazon to task on this in posts on Boing Boing. See:

http://www.boingboing.net/2010/01/12/even-amazon-cant-kee.html
http://boingboing.net/2009/04/15/if-you-lose-your-ama.html

There's more. That's just the start.


----------



## Jeff Flowerday (Jan 23, 2006)

iaresee said:


> "a screen is a screen" is not exactly a universal truth. This screen is different. It uses no backlighting to display information. It's lit entirely by ambient light _just like a book_. That's the big advantage to it, and your eye fatigue complaint was a major factor in the design of this screen. They wanted it to be like a book. And really: it's scary close.
> 
> 
> Yes. As I said: it's not a backlit screen. It looks better in bright light. Just like a book. It's like looking at a book that redraws itself.


To add it not a typical screen in that there is no refresh rate or refreshing period. The words etc once displayed are static.

I liked your etch and sketch annology before. :smile:


----------



## Starbuck (Jun 15, 2007)

Big_Daddy said:


> I've had pretty much the same experience. I absolutely love this thing and have read 3 books in the last 2 weeks. As lbrown1 said, it is very easy on the eyes and actually easier to read then a book because it's one-handed (no page turning, no losing your place, built-in dictionary in case you want to quickly look up the meaning of a word). The Kindle is a winner in my books (bad pun):smile:


Well that certainly sounds intriguing to me, but I can read a book a day (I don't watch tv much) and it's tough to finance that habit, so I rely on libraries, used book stores & book swaps. I would think the cost of books is comparable to the paper variety? OR are they making paperless cheaper? It IS greener I would think. Much like an entire album can be purchased on itunes for $7.99 but would be $14.99 at HMV?


----------



## Jeff Flowerday (Jan 23, 2006)

iaresee said:


> Ah! Well here is where I'm still a little bothered. You don't buy the book from Amazon. You buy a a license to read the book. And the license is tied to your Kindle. Not without breaking the terms of your license can you put that purchase on another Kindle. We read a lot here, my wife sounds like yours in her reading rate, and books trickle down from her to me. A Kindle would certainly make that trickier.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


If you own multiple kindles, you can have up to 6 of them on one account sharing the books your rent/purchase.

So you and your wife just need to each get a kindle.

:smile:


----------



## Jeff Flowerday (Jan 23, 2006)

Starbuck said:


> Well that certainly sounds intriguing to me, but I can read a book a day (I don't watch tv much) and it's tough to finance that habit, so I rely on libraries, used book stores & book swaps. I would think the cost of books is comparable to the paper variety? OR are they making paperless cheaper? It IS greener I would think. Much like an entire album can be purchased on itunes for $7.99 but would be $14.99 at HMV?


Have a search and check out the prices. Here is the kindle book store.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/search/ref...=kindle&ie=UTF8&qid=1263483843&rnid=133141011


----------



## torndownunit (May 14, 2006)

Jeff Flowerday said:


> If you own multiple kindles, you can have up to 6 of them on one account sharing the books your rent/purchase.
> 
> So you and your wife just need to each get a kindle.
> 
> :smile:


The only thing that makes me nervous about that is how they deal with lost/stolen/damage Kindles and the books you have bought a license for. I guess the license is stored in your Amazon account, and you can just download everything again if that happens? If not, I'd be concerned. I'd definitely prefer to have a physical download that I can backup to another source.


----------



## Guest (Jan 14, 2010)

Starbuck said:


> Well that certainly sounds intriguing to me, but I can read a book a day (I don't watch tv much) and it's tough to finance that habit, so I rely on libraries, used book stores & book swaps. I would think the cost of books is comparable to the paper variety? OR are they making paperless cheaper? It IS greener I would think. Much like an entire album can be purchased on itunes for $7.99 but would be $14.99 at HMV?


They didn't seem substantially cheaper. Not $0.99 compared to $9.99. More like $4.99 compared to $9.99 for the stuff that was out in mass market pb form. If it's only in hardcover it's more expensive for the Kindle. Doubtful it'll ever compete with the library. But even the library gets annoying. I've been on the wait list for Blood Meridian for _months_ now.

Edit: there are ways to get free books on to it. My friend had most of the Project Gutenberg stuff on his Kindle. It wasn't easy, but you can do it.


----------



## Guest (Jan 14, 2010)

Jeff Flowerday said:


> If you own multiple kindles, you can have up to 6 of them on one account sharing the books your rent/purchase.
> 
> So you and your wife just need to each get a kindle.
> 
> :smile:


That's good to know.


----------



## Jeff Flowerday (Jan 23, 2006)

torndownunit said:


> The only thing that makes me nervous about that is how they deal with lost/stolen/damage Kindles and the books you have bought a license for. I guess the license is stored in your Amazon account, and you can just download everything again if that happens? If not, I'd be concerned. I'd definitely prefer to have a physical download that I can backup to another source.


Everything is on your account and you can remove it from you device and redownload it as many times as you want.

Also the kindle is registered to your account, so if stolen you'd have to report it as such and remove it from your account. If someone tried registering after stealing it I would be pretty easy to catch them.


----------



## torndownunit (May 14, 2006)

Edit, I was just taking a look through the prices and I am a little dissapointed. I looked through a few, but one example:

I just bought a book called Contagious awhile back for about $12 on Amazon. The Kindle download is the exact same price. The same price for something that requires no manufacturing, distribution, or a physical copy.

The prices in general seem to match up with the above example for stuff I buy.

You save on shipping, but I always get the free super saver shipping on my book shipments anyway.

I was kind of hoping there would be more of a savings on the books.


----------



## Jeff Flowerday (Jan 23, 2006)

torndownunit said:


> Edit, I was just taking a look through the prices and I am a little dissapointed. I looked through a few, but one example:
> 
> I just bought a book called Contagious awhile back for about $12 on Amazon. The Kindle download is the exact same price. The same price for something that requires no manufacturing, distribution, or a physical copy.
> 
> ...


It's not priced at $12 for paper now?

Book:
http://www.amazon.ca/Contagious-Sco...=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1263484721&sr=8-1


Kindle Book:
http://www.amazon.com/Contagious-eb...?ie=UTF8&s=digital-text&qid=1263484696&sr=1-1

That said, I was hoping for greater savings as well.

*Edit: never mind.*

The paper back is the same price.

http://www.amazon.ca/Contagious-Nov...=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1263484721&sr=8-2


----------



## torndownunit (May 14, 2006)

Jeff Flowerday said:


> It's not priced at $12 for paper now?
> 
> Book:
> http://www.amazon.ca/Contagious-Sco...=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1263484721&sr=8-1
> ...


Ya I was comparing paperback. But, even the hardcover isn't that much more considering it's a hardcover book. If they can manufacture and distribute a hardcover for $17, then it's hard for me to see why the Kindle version would only be $6 less? Not only are you not getting anything physical, you aren't even getting an actual download.


----------



## J S Moore (Feb 18, 2006)

All of the main reasons why I am not interested in e-readers have all been said. 

The thing that truly concerns me is the issue of licensing. It's nothing new but when you have the physical media it's hard to revoke the license. No matter what the record companies want I can still listen to my cds. It doesn't matter what the publisher thinks I can still read my books. Buried deep in the endless lines of the EULA of just about everything is the right of the licensor to change the EULA at any time without notice. Easy to do with digital files, hard to do with physical media. I read an article about how easy it would be to for Apple ( just as an example) to update their ipod software to subscription based services and there wouldn't be a thing you could do. Want to listen to the latest tune from Black Eyed Peas? 50 cents please. Oh, you want to listen to it again? That'll be another 50 cents. I'm not saying it's likely to happen but the technology makes it possible. You have the cds you say? Not until you buy that next generation disc player that doesn't support them. 

I find it a rather paranoid view but like I said the technology makes it possible. And if we don't pay attention to the possible ramifications of technology someone else will do it for us, and not likely in a way that benefits us.

And to David: I think the main reason people don't want to pay for music or movies is that we have a large group of people who have had everything handed to them without having to work for it and have not learned to value anything or anyone. The "corporation as evil entity" is simply a smokescreen for selfishness. I've met so many people who are first in line to demand payment for what they've done and are the first to refuse to pay for what others have done.


----------



## Jeff Flowerday (Jan 23, 2006)

Next question becomes:

How much does a soft cover or hard cover book cost to produce is mass quantities by the big publishing houses?


----------



## J S Moore (Feb 18, 2006)

Not as much as you would think. It's the distribution that costs the most money. Costs of production are irrelevant, it's the perceived value to the end user that's the thing.


----------



## Guest (Jan 14, 2010)

Jeff Flowerday said:


> Next question becomes:
> 
> How much does a soft cover or hard cover book cost to produce is mass quantities by the big publishing houses?


I think the Kindle prices kind of allude to that: not much at all really. That most of the cost of the book is in the royalties to the publisher and writer.


----------



## lbrown1 (Mar 22, 2007)

*interesting*

http://www.techcrunch.com/2007/12/02/stealing-books-for-the-kindle-is-trivially-easy/


----------



## Jeff Flowerday (Jan 23, 2006)

Distribution to retail stores maybe, but to the amazon warehouse from which they then charge you shipping not so much.

Kindles electronics distribution does have a cost as well, though you would hope if isn't as expensive as physical. Amazon has worked out deals with the cell providers allowing the use of their networks for media distribution. Our beloved Canadian cell phone companies are probably raping them similar to how the they rape us.


----------



## Big_Daddy (Apr 2, 2009)

Just a tip for all of the current Kindle owners....turn off the wireless when you aren't downloading anything. My battery life went from about 2 days to over a week by just doing that.:smile:


----------



## lbrown1 (Mar 22, 2007)

Jeff Flowerday said:


> Distribution to retail stores maybe, but to the amazon warehouse from which they then charge you shipping not so much.
> 
> Kindles electronics distribution does have a cost as well, though you would hope if isn't as expensive as physical. Amazon has worked out deals with the cell providers allowing the use of their networks for media distribution. Our beloved Canadian cell phone companies are probably raping them similar to how the they rape us.


Amazon worked out a deal with AT&T Wireless. AT&T Wireless then works out the roaming deals with carriers in other countries and or other service areas in the US. It was unable to negotiate anything with Rogers for reasons I mentioned earlier in this thread - but when TELUS and Bell finished the HSPA network buildout in Nov - the Kindle was available in Canada shortly afterward - which leads me to assume AT&T Wireless negotiated with both Bell and TELUS successfully.


----------



## J S Moore (Feb 18, 2006)

As I said, it's perceived value. The Amazon warehouse may cost less than a Chapters store front, but Amazon has to package and ship each order individually which is a cost Chapters doesn't have. So in the end the total costs are probably even. Most people actually don't factor in the cost of driving to a store and transporting the item home even though that is part of the total cost. People don't think anything of spending $20.00 of their time and gas to get something but will begrudge Amazon a $10.00 shipping cost.

This thread is getting dangerously close to an argument about how much profit "should" be made. The concept of "reasonable profit" implies "reasonable loss" which, if you own a business, is a concept you will realize does not exist. Also, that is a discussion I won't get in to.


----------



## Jeff Flowerday (Jan 23, 2006)

J S Moore said:


> This thread is getting dangerously close to an argument about how much profit "should" be made. The concept of "reasonable profit" implies "reasonable loss" which, if you own a business, is a concept you will realize does not exist. Also, that is a discussion I won't get in to.


Don't worry, no one is arguing with you. But, some have brought up the fact they hoped the price gap would be larger and I thought it warranted a discussion on the topic.


----------



## Guest (Jan 14, 2010)

J S Moore said:


> People don't think anything of spending $20.00 of their time and gas to get something but will begrudge Amazon a $10.00 shipping cost.


I'm linking hunting now, but I read a great story about the psychology of savings a few months ago. How people will drive for hours to save $50 on a $100 item, but won't drive across town to save $50 on a $1000. The absolute savings are the same, but our perception seems to be fixated on percentages. "I'm already shelling out $1000, what's $50?" to save yourself a 10 minute trip is an easy rationalization.

The mind is a funny thing.

I'll find that link...it was by an author, excerpted from a book he release this year IIRC...


----------



## Jeff Flowerday (Jan 23, 2006)

Other end of the specrum:

I have a friend who will travel 20-30 minutes to return a cd or dvd just to save a couple bucks because he found it elsewhere cheaper.


----------



## Jeff Flowerday (Jan 23, 2006)

nkjanssen said:


> The concept is new enough that I think the pricing structures and licensing rights still have a ways to go before they stabilize to what the market will bear. Even iTunes doesn't exactly have all that figured out yet, and they've been around awhile. Sometimes it's more economical overall to buy a CD; and sometimes the digital download is better. In a perfect (or "mature") market, all of that will stabilize and make more sense.


True. As it gets more popular I see the price dropping and/or more sale items. Amazon certainly has dropped the price on the device agressively lately. It's almost half the price it was when they first introduced it.


----------



## lbrown1 (Mar 22, 2007)

nkjanssen said:


> I recall reading that, in the 1950's, it was estimated by the U.S. government that the entire worldwide demand for computers would be six.
> 
> You might be suprised may have no interest in it, but they sure have sold a lot of these things. I think it's a pretty cool idea.


give it a few years.......(ok maybe more than a few) but things like netbooks and google etc are going a long way to fulfilling that prophesy......maybe more than 6 - but some really big computers that do all the processing which get accessed by users by things like netbooks (today's version of dumb terminals with some storage space and an OS) and or whatever netbooks evolve into - i.e. no more OS, some storage - no applications

I suppose this is off topic though.


----------



## torndownunit (May 14, 2006)

J S Moore said:


> All of the main reasons why I am not interested in e-readers have all been said.
> 
> The thing that truly concerns me is the issue of licensing. It's nothing new but when you have the physical media it's hard to revoke the license. No matter what the record companies want I can still listen to my cds. It doesn't matter what the publisher thinks I can still read my books. Buried deep in the endless lines of the EULA of just about everything is the right of the licensor to change the EULA at any time without notice. Easy to do with digital files, hard to do with physical media. I read an article about how easy it would be to for Apple ( just as an example) to update their ipod software to subscription based services and there wouldn't be a thing you could do. Want to listen to the latest tune from Black Eyed Peas? 50 cents please. Oh, you want to listen to it again? That'll be another 50 cents. I'm not saying it's likely to happen but the technology makes it possible. You have the cds you say? Not until you buy that next generation disc player that doesn't support them.
> 
> ...


Not looking to debate or argue. In fact in a lot of cases I agree. But not when it comes to just trying to be an educated consumer. 

One of the big benefits of these technologies IMO is that not only could they be more convenient, but they could also cost way less. This should be especially true with something like Kindle. You are getting rid of the manufacturing and distribution of a bulky item like a book, and are replacing it with a download. I know books (or CD's for that matter) aren't a huge cost to make nowadays, but a downloadable version costs even a fraction of that. So I don't think it's unreasonable to expect price they sell for to be significantly cheaper as well. Especially when you are paying money to buy the hardware from them as well.

As others have said, the prices will likely drop. I was just a little surprised with my initial research to see how high the prices are at this point. If I went shopping for a bunch of books on my wishlist right now, it appears I would only save a couple of $'s a book. That doesn't really motivate me to invest in the reader at this point. If there was a clear savings in the book prices, I would be more motivated.


----------



## Duster (Dec 28, 2007)

nkjanssen said:


> I recall reading that, in the 1950's, it was estimated by the U.S. government that the entire worldwide demand for computers would be six.
> 
> You might be suprised may have no interest in it, but they sure have sold a lot of these things. I think it's a pretty cool idea.


That's actually exactly my point.

The worldwide demand for the computer of the 1950s probably was about six.

But then computers grew in features and capabilities, and in so doing, appealed to a bigger market. In the 1950s, computers had features that would appeal to governments. In the 1960s, computers developed features that appealed to large engineering programs, like space exploration programs. In the 1970s computers developed features and capabilities which appealed to large business, and were adopted by them. It wasn't until the 1980s that computers developed the features and capabilities that allowed them to become appealing to the average person, like office productivity software and a graphical user interface. 

Even then, it was mostly for business use, and gaming. With the development of internet accessibility in the 90s, computers became something on every desk in home and office.

I would say the computers of the 1950s had very limited appeal and demand would have been very small.

The current e-reader has a relatively simple feature set, which will appeal to a part of the book-reading crowd. In the future, other e-readers will develop with expanded feature sets, which will appeal to more segments of the book-reading market.

--- D


----------



## Duster (Dec 28, 2007)

nkjanssen said:


> I'm not saying the e-reader would appeal to everyone, but you seem to think that they are useless to all but a very small niche. I disagree with that, and I think the sales figures disagree with that as well. Look at iPods/iPhones. An iPhone does everything an iPod does and more. So, why does anyone buy anything less than an iPhone? Size, cost, simplicity, etc., etc. A lot of people prefer a smaller, scaled down version of a device. Not everybody needs or even wants every device they use to be able to check e-mail, prepare dinner, download movies, walk the dog, etc. There's something to be said for a specialized device. You apparantly disagree. But they are selling a lot of these, so obviously a lot of people like the idea. Seems a silly thing to argue about.


I definitely hope we're not arguing about this. I think either I didn't communicate my thoughts well, or you're thinking I've said something I didn't.

I certainly don't think it's useless to everyone except a small niche. I only think that it's usefulness is limited because of its limited features. It is still very useful to a whole bunch of people. I just think that "whole bunch of people" is a relatively small subset of "everyone who reads books", and as the feature set expands, or becomes more refined, or the machine gets more capable generally, that subset will grow.

Right now I don't think there's enough there for me, but it's close.

--- D


----------



## Duster (Dec 28, 2007)

nkjanssen said:


> About 1.5 million of them purchased so far. Not bad considering it's still relatively new. Amazon e-book sales are now also outpacing hard-copy books.


I'm not disagreeing that they're cool, and as I've said, I'm on the edge of buying one. I just think there's a lot more to come from developing this product, and I'm likely to be in on the next wave of development.

--- D


----------



## lbrown1 (Mar 22, 2007)

it appears for the most part the Kindle is catering to a market that only wants to read a book and have the experience as close to a book as possible with an electronic instrument......

I think Duster - you'd be in a different market segment that wants a little more..

yer both right - the Kindle isn't catering to the entire book reading market....but is hitting the segment of the market looking for ease of procuring, handling, storing content while consuming it in a book like fashion very well.

one interesting thing with the Kindle is that the segment of the market that reads a lot of tech manuals - or has to carry a lot of technical otherwise book content around with them are eating this thing up.....opting for something like this to read stuff on an airplane for example vs firing up the laptop and MS Word.

its going to be very interesting to see where this goes.....an all in one device? - maybe but I doubt it...we're still humans in a non digital world - our eyes , ears and hands haven't changed - so things like device size, screen size, ergonomics are many times specific to the function the device it performing.....but give 'er some time, maybe some technology to do all these things will be invented that will allow bypass of the human / device interface issue - i.e. an implant.


----------



## Duster (Dec 28, 2007)

lbrown1 said:


> it appears for the most part the Kindle is catering to a market that only wants to read a book and have the experience as close to a book as possible with an electronic instrument......
> 
> I think Duster - you'd be in a different market segment that wants a little more..
> 
> ...


I would have loved to have something like this for my job about 5 years ago. I used to fly all over the place with a briefcase full of research documents and trade publications. Typically I would read what I needed to, tear out the pages I wanted to keep for future reference, and dump the rest of the document in the trash at my hotel or airport as the trip progressed. This would have been great, provided that I could get the documents I needed to onto the device. Can you just load any document onto these devices through a cable or SD card? And can you load on pdf's and standard text formats?

--- D


----------



## Jeff Flowerday (Jan 23, 2006)

It supports pdf. With the free CutePDF printer you can convert anything to PDF as easily as printing to a printer.


----------



## hollowbody (Jan 15, 2008)

Jeff Flowerday said:


> It supports pdf. With the free CutePDF printer you can convert anything to PDF as easily as printing to a printer.


I think this makes its business applications much stronger, but I still don't see myself reading a book on it. I might use one to brief myself on what needs to get done today on the subway ride to work, or to look at notes about different projects, but when I want to read a book, I want to read a book.

Unfortunately, for me, the Kindle is a glorified and pricey notepad so far. I'll be keeping my eyes on it and others like it, though, because the e-reader/e-book segment has made huge strides recently.


----------



## Duster (Dec 28, 2007)

hollowbody said:


> I think this makes its business applications much stronger, but I still don't see myself reading a book on it. I might use one to brief myself on what needs to get done today on the subway ride to work, or to look at notes about different projects, but when I want to read a book, I want to read a book.
> 
> Unfortunately, for me, the Kindle is a glorified and pricey notepad so far. I'll be keeping my eyes on it and others like it, though, because the e-reader/e-book segment has made huge strides recently.


Unfortunately, it's not quite a notepad, because you can't actually make notes on it. (As far as I know - please correct me if I'm wrong). It really is strictly for reading.

I don't think the application is for reading to-do lists or project lists or anything like that. I still think a Blackberry is better. This thing is more for if you have a document and you actually want to read the document.

I think we'll see a great merger between this reading technology and stripped-down tablet computers within the next 12 months. Then you'll really have glorified notepads with reading and writing capabilities... 

--- D


----------



## hollowbody (Jan 15, 2008)

Duster said:


> Unfortunately, it's not quite a notepad, because you can't actually make notes on it. (As far as I know - please correct me if I'm wrong). It really is strictly for reading.
> 
> I don't think the application is for reading to-do lists or project lists or anything like that. I still think a Blackberry is better. This thing is more for if you have a document and you actually want to read the document.
> 
> ...


Hahaha, sorry, I shouldn't have said notepad. You're right, that implies you can input into it.

What excites me about the Kindle is the actual interface being non-backlit and requiring ambient light to read. Although this can be seen as a shortcoming, I like the move away from backlighting to reduce strain on the eyes.

Still, I would likely use it more as a repository for work-related notes (or notes of any variety) than to read novels. Although, I did just put up with carrying a hardcover on the subway for a week, and that was enough to drive me bonkers.


----------



## Jeff Flowerday (Jan 23, 2006)

The e-reader screen is made for just that, reading. It's slow and pretty much useless for anything else. It does static images very well and with no eye strain. It's extremely hard to implement any cool features because of this limitation.

A tablet computer has a screen that is horrible for reading anything in quantity.

A merger between the 2 just isn't practical and won't be for quite some time unless you are willing to live with running e-reader software on a tablet and dealing with the eye strain. From what I've read we are years away from even having color with the type of screen the e-reader uses.


----------



## lbrown1 (Mar 22, 2007)

Duster said:


> Unfortunately, it's not quite a notepad, because you can't actually make notes on it. (As far as I know - please correct me if I'm wrong). It really is strictly for reading.
> 
> I don't think the application is for reading to-do lists or project lists or anything like that. I still think a Blackberry is better. This thing is more for if you have a document and you actually want to read the document.
> 
> ...


yes - you can add notes / comments etc / annotations.....hightlight text etc...


----------



## Duster (Dec 28, 2007)

Jeff Flowerday said:


> The e-reader screen is made for just that, reading. It's slow and pretty much useless for anything else. It does static images very well and with no eye strain. It's extremely hard to implement any cool features because of this limitation.
> 
> A tablet computer has a screen that is horrible for reading anything in quantity.
> 
> A merger between the 2 just isn't practical and won't be for quite some time unless you are willing to live with running e-reader software on a tablet and dealing with the eye strain. From what I've read we are years away from even having color with the type of screen the e-reader uses.


That's why I'm digging that Entourage Edge thing. I don't know if it's on the market, or just in development. One screen for reading, one screen for tablet computing, and folds in half like many tablets do.

You can write on the kindle screen and make notes? Like, with a stylus? I thought you could only type with the keyboard. Hm, maybe that's enough.

I think after all this reading and writing about it, I'm going to have to go spend some time with one of these things. I have a weakness for books, and can't stop myself from buying way more than I can read, and a weakness for gadgets, buying way more than I can use. This sounds like a really bad combination for me. 

--- D


----------



## lbrown1 (Mar 22, 2007)

Duster said:


> That's why I'm digging that Entourage Edge thing. I don't know if it's on the market, or just in development. One screen for reading, one screen for tablet computing, and folds in half like many tablets do.
> 
> You can write on the kindle screen and make notes? Like, with a stylus? I thought you could only type with the keyboard. Hm, maybe that's enough.
> 
> ...



no stylus - ...notes are added via the keypad...a stylus would be better if it didn't risk scratching the screen


----------



## Jeff Flowerday (Jan 23, 2006)

I decided to cancel my DX order. I want to wait a few months to see what develops in this rapidly changing technology. I don't really need to buy any tech manuals for a few months.


----------



## Jeff Flowerday (Jan 23, 2006)

Interesting read related to book prices:

http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/20/amazon-to-start-paying-70-royalties-on-kindle-books-that-play-b/


----------



## Guest (Jan 20, 2010)

Saw an interesting tweet this morning suggesting Amazon _give away_ the Kindle, subsidize it with book sales. Because Apple is about to release a tablet on Monday that'll kick it's Kindle butt.

Not my words mind you. But I sure am curious for Monday's announcements from Apple...


----------



## Duster (Dec 28, 2007)

iaresee said:


> Saw an interesting tweet this morning suggesting Amazon _give away_ the Kindle, subsidize it with book sales. Because Apple is about to release a tablet on Monday that'll kick it's Kindle butt.
> 
> Not my words mind you. But I sure am curious for Monday's announcements from Apple...


Well, Apple's pattern has usually been to launch a technology that has already generally been proven in the marketplace, but dominate the competition by adding style and usability. The core of its technology generally isn't revolutionary. That's essentially what they've done with MP3 players, laptops, desktops, and even the iphone. 

It's the interface and the usability where they rock. So I'm guessing they're going to have a tablet with a highly readable, low-fatigue screen that can also run apps like the iphone, have wifi connectivity, and tap into the itunes store. The itunes store will then start offering e-books for sale, and they'll start dominating that market too. I don't think the screen will be as good as the kindle's, because they'll want it to be more like a computer screen, but that won't stop people from buying it. Apple's products aren't generally as objectively good as their competitors, when compared based on specification. But that doesn't matter, because the interface and usability is what draws people in.

I think we're about to see a huge change in the laptop/reader/big-screen mobile computing industry.

--- D


----------



## Guest (Jan 20, 2010)

Duster said:


> Apple's products aren't generally as objectively good as their competitors, when compared based on specification. But that doesn't matter, because the interface and usability is what draws people in.


In part I agree. The other secret ingredient is that when Apple announces something: it's available immediately. It's not a watered down version of the prototype you were shown 12 months ago. It's the real deal, here and ready to go. Please buy it today because you can.


----------



## Stratin2traynor (Sep 27, 2006)

My buddy just downloaded a Kindle App for his iPhone. Works exactly the same apparently. He's trying to convince me to get it as well for my iPod Touch. I tried to explain that I prefer flipping through an actual book. May be good for some applications but, I prefer reading the old fashion way.


----------



## Duster (Dec 28, 2007)

Yeah, I have a beautiful copy of Robertson Davies' Deptford Trilogy that I'm reading right now. Beautiful binding, great illustrations, nice heavy pages. It's a pleasure to read, and I couldn't imagine doing it on an e-reader. But I appreciate the Kindle isn't really meant to replace that kind of reading experience.

--- D 



Stratin2traynor said:


> My buddy just downloaded a Kindle App for his iPhone. Works exactly the same apparently. He's trying to convince me to get it as well for my iPod Touch. I tried to explain that I prefer flipping through an actual book. May be good for some applications but, I prefer reading the old fashion way.


----------



## torndownunit (May 14, 2006)

Stratin2traynor said:


> My buddy just downloaded a Kindle App for his iPhone. Works exactly the same apparently. He's trying to convince me to get it as well for my iPod Touch. I tried to explain that I prefer flipping through an actual book. May be good for some applications but, I prefer reading the old fashion way.


One of the benfits of these readers is the screen from what everyone on here has posted. Woudn't reading off an iPhone make that void? The iPhone screen is normal LCD screen isn't it? And a small one at that. Wouldn't you get the same eye fatigue/strain issues that a device like the Kindle is trying to prevent?


----------



## Duster (Dec 28, 2007)

Yeah, I don't think the iphone/ipod screen is good enough. But we read plenty over the course of the day off LCD screens, so I guess people tolerate it.

It's not as relaxing as reading an e-ink screen, for sure. But it's still widely done. I'd hate to think how many pages I read off an LCD computer screen today....

--- D



torndownunit said:


> One of the benfits of these readers is the screen from what everyone on here has posted. Woudn't reading off an iPhone make that void? The iPhone screen is normal LCD screen isn't it? And a small one at that. Wouldn't you get the same eye fatigue/strain issues that a device like the Kindle is trying to prevent?


----------



## Jeff Flowerday (Jan 23, 2006)

iaresee said:


> In part I agree. The other secret ingredient is that when Apple announces something: it's available immediately. It's not a watered down version of the prototype you were shown 12 months ago. It's the real deal, here and ready to go. Please buy it today because you can.


I'm betting that when Apple announces this one, it won't be available immediately. If it is the screen won't be what we are all hoping for.


----------



## hollowbody (Jan 15, 2008)

Stratin2traynor said:


> My buddy just downloaded a Kindle App for his iPhone. Works exactly the same apparently. He's trying to convince me to get it as well for my iPod Touch. I tried to explain that I prefer flipping through an actual book. May be good for some applications but, I prefer reading the old fashion way.


I can't imagine how it's the same. It's still a backlit screen. It might _look_ the same, but it isn't and that's a pretty important difference.

You know what's funny with Apple? They make "stylish" and "intuitive" products, but they ALWAYS get it wrong as far as I'm concerned. I've been waiting for YEARS for an iPod with a button designated to shuffle on/off on the front or side of an iPod. Shuffle on/off is the feature I use most right after Next and Play and I can't stand going through the menu to toggle it. 

I find for all it's R&D, Apple products aren't all that snazzy, we're just told they are by the huge wads they blow on marketing. I can think of countless products that I've tried to use and found completely counter-intuitive, or missing something that would make it 10x better. I look forward to seeing their Kindle competitor, and I'm sure it'll look cool, but I'm not going to hold my breath about how awesome it'll be til I actually see it.


----------



## lbrown1 (Mar 22, 2007)

the ipod shuffle has a "shuffle on / off" button on the bottom of it...but yer right - there isn't one on the nano....I also don't get why there's no power on / off button on the nano - the shuffle has that too - if only it had a screen to se what's playing


----------



## hollowbody (Jan 15, 2008)

lbrown1 said:


> the ipod shuffle has a "shuffle on / off" button on the bottom of it...but yer right - there isn't one on the nano....I also don't get why there's no power on / off button on the nano - the shuffle has that too - if only it had a screen to se what's playing


Haha, good point. I forgot about the Shuffle. But seeing as it's the only feature the Shuffle has, it's no surprise it has it, but honestly, how hard is it to put that button on the Classic?

Case in point, I have a 60Gb iPod Video (5th gen, I believe) - I have a bunch of playlists and stuff that I like to listen to on shuffle, but when I have a new album I want to listen to, I want to hear it as it was recorded and meant to be heard, so I have to dig the iPod out of my pocket, sift through some menus, select the correct doo-hickey and then return to the music folder and hit play. All this takes FOREVER because the stupid wheel thingy is really sensitive and I keep passing the thing I want to click on because I'm riding a bus or subway. As opposed to hitting a single button to take it off shuffle and then browsing around within the music folder to find what I want.

How long's the iPod been out? How many emails have I sent??? Boo!!!

Anyway, this thread ain't about the iPod, so 

/end_derail


----------



## Duster (Dec 28, 2007)

For me, the biggest feature miss on the entire ipod line is the most basic: No FM radio. I mean, it's a portable music player. I would think the FM Radio would be the starting point for the feature set.

When ipods first got hot, I bought myself an iRiver MP3 player. Korean-made, high quality player. The navigating interface was brutally bad, which is why they lost out, but that thing had optical output, GREAT sound quality, MP3 and WAV recorder, FM player, and could play any format, including some lossless stuff, ogg vorbis and other weird things. I still have it, it's been modded with a different operating system and I use it to record my guitar playing. Great unit, but had no chance against the ipod because of its interface and its total lack of cool factor.

--- D



hollowbody said:


> Haha, good point. I forgot about the Shuffle. But seeing as it's the only feature the Shuffle has, it's no surprise it has it, but honestly, how hard is it to put that button on the Classic?
> 
> Case in point, I have a 60Gb iPod Video (5th gen, I believe) - I have a bunch of playlists and stuff that I like to listen to on shuffle, but when I have a new album I want to listen to, I want to hear it as it was recorded and meant to be heard, so I have to dig the iPod out of my pocket, sift through some menus, select the correct doo-hickey and then return to the music folder and hit play. All this takes FOREVER because the stupid wheel thingy is really sensitive and I keep passing the thing I want to click on because I'm riding a bus or subway. As opposed to hitting a single button to take it off shuffle and then browsing around within the music folder to find what I want.
> 
> ...


----------



## Guest (Jan 21, 2010)

Duster said:


> For me, the biggest feature miss on the entire ipod line is the most basic: No FM radio. I mean, it's a portable music player. I would think the FM Radio would be the starting point for the feature set.


If you're trying to sell music, not having a radio seems advantageous. While the iPod is nice, the real star and its entire raison d'etre is to sell you tracks via the iTunes Store.



> When ipods first got hot, I bought myself an iRiver MP3 player. Korean-made, high quality player. The navigating interface was brutally bad, which is why they lost out, but that thing had optical output, GREAT sound quality, MP3 and WAV recorder, FM player, and could play any format, including some lossless stuff, ogg vorbis and other weird things. I still have it, it's been modded with a different operating system and I use it to record my guitar playing. Great unit, but had no chance against the ipod because of its interface and its total lack of cool factor.


I used an iRiver for years. Black, square, HD, blue screen. The mic support was great. I used it to record rehearsals using a Sony stereo condenser mic. The iRiver software was appalling but the RockBox stuff made it a little more feature rich at the cost of stability (it'd crash from time to time). When it gave up the ghost I was sad.

I used to fill it using my subscription to emusic.com -- great service.

And I can't think of one time I used the radio on it. I was a subway commuter then so radio signals weren't available.


----------



## hollowbody (Jan 15, 2008)

iaresee said:


> If you're trying to sell music, not having a radio seems advantageous. While the iPod is nice, the real star and its entire raison d'etre is to sell you tracks via the iTunes Store.
> 
> 
> I used an iRiver for years. Black, square, HD, blue screen. The mic support was great. I used it to record rehearsals using a Sony stereo condenser mic. The iRiver software was appalling but the RockBox stuff made it a little more feature rich at the cost of stability (it'd crash from time to time). When it gave up the ghost I was sad.
> ...


Yup, I had an iRiver m3 for a while. Loved it! The remote on it was fantastic (til it broke after a year and a bit). I still think it is the best, most intuitive mp3 player I've ever used. I'd replace my iPod with one in a jiffy, although I'm pretty committed to iTunes these days after years of holding out.


----------



## Guest (Jan 22, 2010)

nkjanssen said:


> I just shake my nano to shuffle it, and then select an album to play when I don't want to shuffle. Then if I want to go back to shuffle, i shake it again. Easier than a button, even. I don't have to go through any menus at all (other than to select the album to play).


Ditto. I shake to shuffle as well.


----------



## Jeff Flowerday (Jan 23, 2006)

eBook readers in general are starting to look less and less attractive with the increase in eBook prices.

Sad really!


----------



## Duster (Dec 28, 2007)

Jeff Flowerday said:


> eBook readers in general are starting to look less and less attractive with the increase in eBook prices.
> 
> Sad really!


I haven't been following too closely - has there been an increase in pricing announced?

--- D


----------



## Jeff Flowerday (Jan 23, 2006)

Duster said:


> I haven't been following too closely - has there been an increase in pricing announced?
> 
> --- D


Apple has agreed to the higher pricing from publishers. Amazon was forced to increase prices or have to remove those particular ebooks from their website on initial release and delay the release for 3 months.


----------



## hollowbody (Jan 15, 2008)

nkjanssen said:


> I just shake my nano to shuffle it, and then select an album to play when I don't want to shuffle. Then if I want to go back to shuffle, i shake it again. Easier than a button, even. I don't have to go through any menus at all (other than to select the album to play).





iaresee said:


> Ditto. I shake to shuffle as well.


Shakey-shake is a no-go for me. I have an older iPod pre-shake. Besides, I carry it in my jeans pocket 99% of the time and don't want to be bothered taking it out to shake it. Trying to give it a shake while it's still in my pocket will result in strange looks from fellow TTC riders.

I think the shake feature is silly. It would be much easier with a button on the front fascia. Just as easy to use and can be trigger unseen. I never take out my iPod to skip tracks or adjust volume, and I've pretty much had to memorize the keystrokes required to switch playlists.



Jeff Flowerday said:


> Apple has agreed to the higher pricing from publishers. Amazon was forced to increase prices or have to remove those particular ebooks from their website on initial release and delay the release for 3 months.


Yeah, Macmillan was threatening to walk for a while, but Amazon caved. I believe the price for Macmillan books is supposed to be $15. I think that's ridiculous for an eBook. Absolutely ridiculous. If the music industry with all it's middlemen, etc. can get an album on iTunes for $9.99 and still make a profit, so can publishers.


----------

