Slashdot Mirror
The Cult of Kindle
DaMan writes "ZDNet's Hardware 2.0 blog is pondering the Kindle this week. There have been many attempts at an ebook reader in the past; why does Amazon think it can do any better? Given the high cost and DRM issues, will cachet be enough to win them financial success? Will the 'Cult of Kindle' help guarantee Amazon's success in the ebook reader market? 'A group of people willing to give it a five star rating just because someone else didn't, willing to back up every design, engineering and marketing decision that Amazon made, willing to defend the Kindle with their last dying breath. The Kindle doesn't cost money, it saves money. That 0.75 second flash as the pages turn isn't a downside because it gives you an opportunity to take in the previous page. It doesn't harm your eyes, in fact, it fixes them. Ergonomic issues that other reviewers have bought up are dismissed by the Cult of Kindle as flaws with the reviewer, not the device. The Kindle is perfect, and the Kindle 2.0 will be a little more perfect.'"
Alright, Amazon, I'm only going to tell you this one more time. People who don't like books aren't going to come around if you put them on a screen. People who like books like, well, BOOKS. And as the reviewer points out, $400 is a load of money for what is essentially a blank, fragile, battery-powered book.
Tags != Comments, and -1 (Troll) != -1 (I Would Respond Angrily To This Poster So They Must Be Trolling)
Tags != Comments, and -1 (Troll) != -1 (I Would Respond Angrily To This Poster So They Must Be Trolling)
I don't really get the whole ereader thing; sure the Iliad looks nice, but my Palm TX works perfectly. I have 4 ebook applications on it and combined with FontSmoother it looks great. I always have it with me (because it contains my calendar) and it plays MP3's at the same time. Why would I want to spend twice that money on a dedicated reader?
No, I don't think this is flamebait. It's more like an useless anti-fanboyism pointless and sour rant. It does not bring anything new, it just states what tests said and that strangely, ZOMG people can be satisfied by an imperfect product and not wait for the next vaporware E-Reader.
Stupidity is the root of all evil.
Tags != Comments, and -1 (Troll) != -1 (I Would Respond Angrily To This Poster So They Must Be Trolling)
Amazon has a problem in that, books are a "traditional" thing. Most of the books that Amazon sells are for personal enrichment and entertainment. I mean, there's more to a book than its content. Sure, if we're working and doing techy stuff, Google is good for finding things, but, if you want to just relax and unplug, a book is a beautiful thing. You hold in your hand a tradition of printing that goes back hundreds of years, of writing that goes back thousands. There's a whole literary culture floating out there, waiting for you to join it. For a brief time, when you do read a book, you do.
Yes, you could argue, that an e-book could hold 10 million books. But, what of it? A book by itself is something that holds more than enough for you to read for a few hours, and you get the smell and feel of the paper, the binding, the immediacy, history and intimacy. An e-book is just another plastic appliance, lacking in craft.
This is my sig.
Most of that paper is farmed. I suppose next you'll be telling us we'll have to forgo the luxury of killing vegetables because they taste good.
Because your objection is incredibly stupid and ignorant?
I've always has the impression that slashdot posts stupid articles on hot topics because it is a little more subtle than saying "Kindle: Discuss."
Slashdot is a discussion site, not a news site, if you haven't realized yet.
A slashdotter who didn't build his own computer is like a Jedi who didn't build his own lightsaber.
Guess what, books don't have backlights either. Unless you've actually seen the e-ink technology it's hard to understand but a backlight would suck on a device like this. Stop in a Borders bookstore sometime, I've seen the Sony e-reader on display at a few of them and it will show you that it doesn't make sense to add a backlight to the product.
Battery life with a backlight is a whole different issue.
That being said, as much as it pains me to say I'd rather by the Sony e-reader than the Kindle. Somehow it just seems less restrictive.... who would have thought Sony would get it more right than Amazon.com?
I was given a Sony E-reader recently as part of an airline promotion. I was as skeptical as most in this thread about their utility, etc., but have become a bit of a convert:
1. On vacation they're absolutely brilliant. I was out of the country for two weeks. The reader plus charger took almost no space, especially compared to the space ten or eleven books would have taken. I had my notebook with me as well, and was able to buy additional books -- which let me keep going on a series I particularly liked.
2. The slow page refresh isn't terrible, and I gather the Kindle is faster than the Sony.
3. I like the feel of the Sony reader. I suspect the Kindle is clunkier, but I defer to Pogue in the NYTimes who said it was fine. The screen works well in open daylight, and I quickly enough was able to ignore the medium and get into the content.
4. It looks like Amazon is given customers a price break on e-books. Sony charges as much as a paper book.
Bottom line: they're more useful than would appear to a non-user -- especially during travel.
And to the cult thing: I suspect like most people, I am not particularly loyal to any online store. I am willing to pay *slightly* higher prices to Amazon for both the convenience and their excellent handling of (very rare) problems.
I just got a Kindle, but I feel like both sides of the debate are being unreasonable. First, probably the reason that most people who buy the Kindle give it very good reviews is that they researched the issues with the Kindle beforehand and decided that those flaws didn't matter to them (I know I did, before I paid my $400). Those who give it horrible reviews decided the flaws made it not worth it to them. (I also suspect people are inflating their good reviews to compensate for all the 1-star reviews by the Kindle-haters).
Now, why did I get the Kindle?
First of all, the argument that book-readers like physical books isn't always true. I read a lot of law books (big, heavy, unwieldy things that are miserable to handle). I need to read the content. I hate the physical book. I have to lug several around with me when I travel (my backpack is fantastically heavy) and I can't read them in bed without wearing out my arms after a few minutes. The Kindle solves all of these problems. This applies not just to law books, though. Even moderately heavy hard-backed books are difficult to read in bed for long durations.
As to the Kindle vs. other devices, I keep seeing people claiming that their iPhone is sufficient. Maybe they don't get eyestrain reading backlit lcds, but I do. The e-Paper is much easier on the eyes. It's not QUITE at the level of printed books (and you have to be a little forgiving of the typography--the Kindle doesn't seem to have a hyphenation dictionary), but I can read it for long durations without going blind.
Finally, the biggest attraction for the Kindle is that it has the books I want or need to read. Amazon has law books (at least some, and hopefully more will be coming soon). They also have novels, etc. that I want to read. I looked into other e-books in the past and the major reason I didn't get them (even if their specs are better on paper) is because they don't have the content I want or need. The Kindle (mostly) does.
As for the other issues, I would like PDF ability, but from what I understand there is no ebook reader that handles PDFs really well, and you CAN convert PDFs to Kindle's format if you need, though it is a hassle. The Kindle's web browser is decent, and makes a nice backup when I'm not around a WiFi spot, but there is Sprint service (and it's free). I also don't care about the looks of the Kindle (it actually looks better in person, I think, but even if it didn't, I want it for its function, not its form).
Sure, the Kindle isn't for everyone. If you read mostly paperback novels, one at a time, the Kindle isn't for you. If you read enormous, unwieldy books that you have to lug across the country when you go home for Christmas vacation so that you don't fail your exams, the Kindle is wonderful. Same if you don't travel, but just like to read big, bulky books without having to sit up. Anyway, yes, there are legitimate reasons for the Kindle.
The Sony Reader, is a better device for display, form-factor, battery life, format support (like PDF) and ergonomics, but lacks the cellular component. The Kindle is chunky, lots of buttons, smaller screen, etc. I wouldn't by either though since they are still fairly costly and both have crappy software (some of which is necessary to operate it, but still buggy).
The next version of the Sony Reader has the possibility to be great, but Sony will complicate it rather than refine it and won't come up with a reasonable DRM scheme (which, iTunes, despite it's wrinkles, is perhaps the most palatable today).
I read around 1 book a month right now, and except for a few series I get most of these from the Library. Since they already have DRM on these things, let DRM do what it does best.. limit access. Let me for a fee (5-10 bucks a month, or .99 a book) check out a book for 2 weeks. After 2 weeks the DRM can function and stop letting me access the book. I am ok renting something as long as it is known as a rental. I want to OWN what I purchase, and as we all know here on slashdot... DRM=You don't Own.