Slashdot Mirror
Prices Slashed For Nook, Kindle E-Readers
b0bby sends in a report from ZDNet about the sudden outbreak of a price war in e-reader devices. "On Monday, Barnes & Noble cut the price of the 3G Nook to $199. It also launched a $149 Wi-Fi version. Just hours later, Amazon responded by cutting the price of the Kindle to $189. At $259, the price of the Kindle and Nook just 24 hours ago, an e-reader purchase competed with an Apple iPad, which started at $499 for a Wi-Fi version. Below $200, a dedicated e-reader purchase makes a lot more sense." Sony dropped prices for its readers three months ago, but the move didn't kick off a price war at that time. Some believe that dedicated e-readers are doomed in the long run to lose out to general-purpose devices such as the iPad — and its coming imitators, many of which will be based on Google Android.
Until they drop Ebook prices, they can pound sand...... For those prices, Kindle/Nook should be free
Self Defense - A Human Right www.a-human-right.com
It's a lot easier to say that it's over and the iPad/tablet rush will kill the eReader revolution.
Not to mention the fact that the nook/Kindle are much, much cheaper. That makes taking it to places like the beach (large zipper plastic bag keeps it safe and readable) or just on the go in general is something you don't have to worry about.
Yes, the iPad will have its fans. But there are people who don't want a "do everything" device, they want something that reads books really, really well. And the nook, Kindle, and other eReaders do that. Until there's a radical revolution in color screen technology that gains the benefits that e-ink has (which are great for a book reading device)
Not to mention that the 3G iPad is $130 extra, and doesn't include free 3G for the store so you can make an impulse book buy wherever you are. That's major in the convenience factor of the device.
e-Ink is more expensive than you think (I don't have a definitive price, but according to this link the cost to Amazon for the e-Ink display on the Kindle is $60 by itself). Tack on the cost of the processor, memory, networking gear, battery, casing, quality control, etc., and the supposed cost to Amazon is $185. Given that prices have probably dropped a bit since that report, I suspect they are making a small profit on each device (though of course the cost of warranty replacements probably removes even that). The money is in e-Book sales; each sale may be for less than the hardcover, and the publishers may take a large cut, but what remains is pure profit; sale and distribution of pure data is effectively free.
$_ = "wftedskaebjgdpjgidbsmnjgcdwatb"; tr/a-z/oh, turtleneck Phrase Jar!/; print
iPad meh...
Is that Apple's version of Natalie Portman?
"Android will be better next year!"
In my opinion Android is better _this_ year.
For phones: My girlfriend updated her iPhone 3GS to the new OS last night. I see that she now has a phone that still can't compare to my HTC Desire with Android 2.1. (2.2 upgrade due within 2 weeks)
For tablets: I don't want a locked-down tablet like the iPad. There are some sucky Android tablets out now, yes, but inevitably there will be some very good ones. And even if they aren't as pretty and slick as the iPad, they will be _better_ than the iPad because, whichever one I choose, it will be my device to do whatever I want with.
I'm surprised that anyone would currently think Android needs to catch up with iOS. Android is far ahead. It's just that a lot of Android devices lack the "shiny factor" of the iDevices.
Reading the details the Nook will allow you to hook up for free to any B&N or AT&T WiFi hotspot. If you're in a B&N bookstore, you can "read" any of the ebooks for free. You can't take them with you if don't buy them. So, you can just come in and kill a few hours drinking over-priced coffee and reading like at a library.
They also have a "lending" function, as long as you use their software. I won't buy DRM books, but for people who don't mind you can "lend" an e-book to a friend for 14 days. Works with the iPod, Android, Mac & PC as well as some other platforms. Oh, and the Nook runs Android.
Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
I disagree. I've owned a Sony Reader and an iPad. The iPad is, hands down, easier on the eyes.
The Kindle and other eInk displays have a contrast ratio of 6:1 to 7:1. The iPad backlit IPS display is 750:1 to 930:1.
You do realize that overly high contrast is precisely what causes eyestrain? (in general, and especially common when staring at a computer/gadget screen)
That's why it only sells on the closed networks in the US.
Which closed network? T-Mobile? AT&T? Verizon? Sprint? MetroPCS? Is there even a single actual network that doesn't sell Android phones anymore? Go ahead. I dare you. Name a single one. Or did you mean Android only sold on all the networks of the US (therefore implying that all the networks in the US are closed)? Because, I can tell you. I'm currently in the UK right now, and there isn't a single shop in the UK that doesn't have Android devices on sale right now and that aren't selling like hot cakes. And sure, the iPhone is still very popular in the UK right now, but at the sales counter where it counts, it's getting assaulted by several very good Android phones that are all selling just as well as the iPhone. It's not fair fight anymore. One phone against 39 phones, several of which are actually far superior to the new iPhone.
That's why 75% of Android devices run v1.6.
No, it's more like 50% of the Android devices are running v2.1. I can cite my source. Can you even cite yours?
Being able to port desktop C apps over rather than rewrite in Java only becomes even more important.
Please repeat after me: The C and C++ apps of the Android NDK do not run on the Dalvik VM. The C and C++ apps of the Android NDK do not run on the Dalvik VM. Please repeat this one hundred times.
and the next thing you know "Android will be better next year!"
If anyone is saying that, and repeating it ad nausea um, you're the only one. I've corrected your strawman argument plus several of your other factual errors in your other threads. But you don't even seem to even read my responses, or even care about citing your sources.