No Opt-Out For Ads On New Kindle Fires

An anonymous reader writes "Lost amid the announcements for Amazon's new tablets and e-readers was the news that their latest Kindle Fire tablets would include advertisements. So-called 'Special Offers' would place ads on the devices' lock screens in a similar fashion to the lowest price Kindle e-readers. However, on the e-readers, you had the option to 'buy out' the ads by simply paying the difference in price between the cheaper device and the regular version. But Amazon has no confirmed there is no way to opt out of the ads on the new Kindle Fire tablets." Update: 09/09 03:02 GMT by S : Reader Aoreias sends words that Amazon has now changed its mind. A spokesman announced that users will have the ability to opt-out for a fee of $15.

Comments

Expect more of the same

[NixieBunny]

Ads will take over the world. We'll have to jailbreak our devices with illicit ad-blocking software.

Re:Expect more of the same

[goombah99]

I wonder if they will accept ads for ipads.

Re:Expect more of the same

[cpu6502]

I wonder why ads bother people so much. Especially on the kindle where the ads are unobtrusive (you only see them on the power-off screensaver). My kindle came with ads disabled, and I got bored with the default images of authors, so I turned the ads on to get $50 refunded to my account.

Re:Expect more of the same

[publiclurker]

I don't have any problems with adds on an advertising payed for device, but in this case, you are being forced to take the adds on something that you payed for in entirety. I think I'll just stick with my nooks.

Re:Expect more of the same

[msauve]

"you are being forced to take the adds on something that you payed for in entirety."

Do you work for Amazon, so you have some special insight into their pricing decisions? Because, common sense would say that if they didn't have ads, it would cost more, as with the Kindles which offer that option.

Re:Expect more of the same

[_KiTA_]

I wonder why ads bother people so much. Especially on the kindle where the ads are unobtrusive (you only see them on the power-off screensaver). My kindle came with ads disabled, and I got bored with the default images of authors, so I turned the ads on to get $50 refunded to my account.

It's on the lock screen, which means that like the eInk model, your battery life will be crippled because these ads will be displayed and cycled when in theory your device should be idle (in the case of the eInk versions) or have the screen off (in the case of the LCD versions).

I think we can all understand where Amazon is coming from here -- although given that we pay good money for the device kinda harms their case somewhat. However, I would really have preferred they find a different way to do this.

For example, a faux "loading" screen the first time you unlock the device after ~15 minutes which displays an ad. Book themed ads in the UI. That sort of thing.

Re:Expect more of the same

[amiga3D]

I don't see where they're coming from at all. They make money when they sell the device although admittedly not much. They make money when they sell the ebooks to you for damn near what it costs to get a hardcover delivered to your house. Greedy Bastards need to quit.

Re:Expect more of the same

[ultranova]

I wonder why ads bother people so much.

Ads lower the signal-to-noise ratio by saturating the environment with irrelevant misinformation. Even if every ad was 100% honest and trustworthy, they would still distract you from more relevant inputs. But of course they are typically extremely dishonest and manipulative.

Furthermore, ads perpetuate the idea that life's purpose is to work your ass of so you can consume an endless stream of useless (and sometimes actively harmful) crap. They do their part in making people waste their lives chasing after a winning lottery ticket for the benefit of the 1% at the top who run the lottery. They feed various neurosis and addictions to manipulate people into spending their hard-earned cash to try and fix imaginary problems by illogical means of buying an unrelated product.

An ad campaign is basically information warfare. People disliking them is simply their self-protection instincts at work.

Re:Expect more of the same

[hairyfeet]

Tell me friend, are the ads targeted to you, like the ones in the Amazon emails? if so then I'd have NO problem with them, those ads have saved me probably a good grand in the past 2 years on things I was looking to buy anyway!

If ads are done right they can be really nice, its when the give you ads for crap you'd never buy in a million years that they suck. For example I recently bought a 32gb flash from Amazon for $16 with free shipping. I had been looking at flash drives so i got an email saying "Select flash drives 45% off today" and looked and they had the size i wanted for $8 less so I bought. Now why would an ad like that, that shows you only things you want to buy, bother anybody? That's why I signed up for the Tigerdirect and NewEgg emails, that way i don't buy anything list price anymore.

So i'm really curious as to what kind of ads they show. if they show only stuff that is connected to what you've previously bought I'll be picking up one of these for my mom for Xmas, she already loves the heads up she gets from Amazon when her favorite authors put out new books so targeted ads would be just fine for her, but if it shows you crap you'll never buy, like BBQ sets and baby diapers, then I can see saying screw it and buying the previous ad free version.

Re:Expect more of the same

[hairyfeet]

Don't these things have an off switch? never owned one so I don't know, but as far as "killing your battery" from the pics I've seen we are talking static pictures, not some "punch the monkey to win an iPod!" flash mess. You could probably have a week's worth of them loaded in 5Mb of RAM and its not like you're gonna need any real CPU power to simply have a slideshow.

I am curious if anybody knows if these things can actually be turned off though, as I'm seriously thinking of getting one for my mom for XMas but she likes to read a little in bed before calling it a day so she'd need to kill it before she goes to sleep.

Re:Expect more of the same

[pla]

I wonder why ads bother people so much. Especially on the kindle where the ads are unobtrusive (you only see them on the power-off screensaver).

Has some of my bandwidth gone to downloading those ads? Has some of my electricity gone to displaying them? Did I lose a tenth of a second of my life hesitating on unlocking it because I thought I saw boobies in the ad?

In all seriousness, I first started blocking ads because of bandwidth, back in the days of dialup. Oddly enough, the ads have kept pace with technology, and you'll still see a noticeable speedup (whether actually my network, or just because they can't be assed to pay for decent hosting so the load takes about 10x longer than the rest of the page combined).

At some point, I came to consider the ads as no different than your run-of-the-mill spammer - They go out of their way to waste my time, get me to look at their crap, try to con me into spending money, all on something in which I have no interest to start with. They fight back against ad-blocking technology with ever more subtle ways of getting around our filters, and yet they still can't take the goddamned hint.

So, you want to know why I loathe ads so much? Because marketers don't know how to take a polite "no" for an answer.

Re:Expect more of the same

[UnknownSoldier]

> I wonder why ads bother people so much

Because some of us don't be want to be visually distracted with crap we don't want nor need.

Re:Expect more of the same

[hawguy]

> I wonder why ads bother people so much

Because some of us don't be want to be visually distracted with crap we don't want nor need.

how do you manage to drive or walk anywhere without seeing an ad? Where I live, not only are most buses wrapped in big banner ads, but there are ads in the bus stops/train stations, and when I sit in my seat on the bus I can see at least a dozen ads. When I drive, I pass a number of flashing billboards as well as traditional billboards. Or do you live locked up in a rural monastery?

An ad on the lockscreen of my Kindle would be unobtrusive in comparison to what I see on my way to work.

Re:Expect more of the same

[thegarbz]

No they don't have an off switch. The switch at the bottom locks the display and then it shows a static picture. Estimated battery life in this state is approximately 8months.

E-ink displays use power only to update the display, and that power is rather consistent. That's why you see battery life quoted in page turns. I'm not sure how fast the adverts cycle but I doubt you'll get 8months out of a device which has to display a new ad periodically unless the ad is static for the entire day or per activation of lock. Then there's the 3G usage in fetching those ads too.

Re:Expect more of the same

[Oliver Wendell Jones]

You push the power button on the Kindle Fire and the screen turns off. You push it again and the screen comes on and you're looking at the lock screen with adds - swipe the screen and the lock screen and ads go away. They are not displayed on the screen when the device is off. On the e-ink displays the ads are displayed when the Kindle is turned off, but it requires no power to maintain the screen in that state - every once in a while the device wakes up, updates the ad and goes back to sleep - it uses very tiny amounts of power and has almost on impact on expected battery life.

Re:Expect more of the same

[Bob9113]

Excellent post. You have concisely captured the costs of advertising to our economy and society. Those costs are too often overlooked.

Re:Expect more of the same

[I_am_Jack]

They'll quit when people stop doing business with them. Based on their sales, I doubt that will happen anytime soon.

Re:Expect more of the same

[I_am_Jack]

Furthermore, ads perpetuate the idea that life's purpose is to work your ass of so you can consume an endless stream of useless (and sometimes actively harmful) crap. They do their part in making people waste their lives chasing after a winning lottery ticket for the benefit of the 1% at the top who run the lottery. They feed various neurosis and addictions to manipulate people into spending their hard-earned cash to try and fix imaginary problems by illogical means of buying an unrelated product.

An ad campaign is basically information warfare. People disliking them is simply their self-protection instincts at work.

...and yet we're here, at an Ad-supported site, posting away and using bandwidth which has to be paid for by some means.

While I agree that advertising can do more harm than good when it trades on someone's already fragile self-worth, there are forms of advertising which are not soul-sucking or promoting conspicuous consumption (I'd also submit that a lot of useless consumption is based on point-of-sale impulse or what your neighbors or family have bought, not what someone saw on TV). Sandwich boards and overhead business signs are advertising. And PSA's and pro-bono non-profit ads do good. So it's not all evil.

Re:Expect more of the same

[Kjella]

At some point, I came to consider the ads as no different than your run-of-the-mill spammer - They go out of their way to waste my time, get me to look at their crap, try to con me into spending money, all on something in which I have no interest to start with. They fight back against ad-blocking technology with ever more subtle ways of getting around our filters, and yet they still can't take the goddamned hint.

What hint would that be, that you want the site to be run by magic pixies that don't have any server costs, don't have any bandwidth costs and don't have any costs creating the content? Most people hate pay-walls and subscriptions with a vengeance so you don't want to give them your money, you don't want to give them eyeball time, you should get the part that benefits you but they shouldn't get the part that benefits them. Nobody wants ads as such, if customers do it's so they can get more content or pay less. It used to be that if you don't like what they're offering, don't buy it. If you don't like all the ads on TV, don't watch it. If you don't like all the ads on a website, don't go there.

Ad blockers are part of a bigger cultural change which is "if you don't like the deal, rewrite it". Don't like all the ads on TV? Get a PVR to skip them. Don't like the web ads? Get an ad blocker to browse the site without them. Don't like the DRM on BluRays? Download it off TPB. It's like a boycott, except the hard part of forgoing something you actually wanted. And there's a lot of people out there that just aren't reasonable in what they want, but nobody's going to sell them a Ferrari for $100. In the digital world there's no limits though, if you don't feel paying a buck for Angry Birds is reasonable and want to pirate it for nothing then you can. And the more unreasonable you are, the more you can justify.

Re:Expect more of the same

[_KiTA_]

You push the power button on the Kindle Fire and the screen turns off. You push it again and the screen comes on and you're looking at the lock screen with adds - swipe the screen and the lock screen and ads go away. They are not displayed on the screen when the device is off.

On the e-ink displays the ads are displayed when the Kindle is turned off, but it requires no power to maintain the screen in that state - every once in a while the device wakes up, updates the ad and goes back to sleep - it uses very tiny amounts of power and has almost on impact on expected battery life.

You push the power button on the Kindle Fire and the screen turns off. You push it again and the screen comes on and you're looking at the lock screen with adds - swipe the screen and the lock screen and ads go away. They are not displayed on the screen when the device is off.

On the e-ink displays the ads are displayed when the Kindle is turned off, but it requires no power to maintain the screen in that state - every once in a while the device wakes up, updates the ad and goes back to sleep - it uses very tiny amounts of power and has almost on impact on expected battery life.

The Fire thing sounds perfectly fine then. That's almost an ideal way to set it up, in fact, I'm surprised there isn't a "Special Offers" iPhone or iPod with the same setup.

The eInk thing, well, I own a Gen 2 Kindle, and my friend owns a newer one with Special Offers, and I know for a fact that his battery lasts nowhere near as long as mine, all other things considered.

Re:Expect more of the same

[ljw1004]

It bothers me that overt $2000/person/year is spent on adertising in the US per inhabitant, i.e. including all babies, children, adults. That's a huge waste, a kind of regressive tax.

Also, ads to me are an unwanted intrusion into my personal space. They're forcing their way into my perception and consciousness. I'd rather keep those two things clear for what's more valuable to me.

Re:Expect more of the same

[Ostracus]

Of course, and here's the kicker. The people on the other side of the deal know what's going on and don't like it, and in some will not tolerate it. Ultimately the deal writers piss in the pool and make certain the rest of us can't have nice things. Truly a tragedy of the commons, with the common being the good will of others.

Re:Expect more of the same

[pla]

What hint would that be, that you want the site to be run by magic pixies that don't have any server costs, don't have any bandwidth costs and don't have any costs creating the content?

Nice strawman, but I have my own website. And not a crappy LiveJournal blog, but a real, live, actual website. Costs me a whopping $10 a year.

Does YouTube differ somewhat from my own website? Sure it does! Do I, however, give the least fuck about whether or not Google makes a profit on a collection of content provided for free by its community

Nope.


See the disconnect here? People will provide content. The internet existed before its "monetization". Advertisers want to cash in on us, but honestly, we have very little use for them.

Google may have a use for them. I... Do not.

Re:Expect more of the same

[Jafafa Hots]

Common sense?
Actual knowledge of how the consumer electronics market works will tell you that the product price is determined by how much the company has determined the targeted consumer is willing to spend... adjusted periodically due to competition... and that that profit margin is already as high as they feel they can make it, ads or no ads.

The ads are added because they add revenue and amazon has determined that people will put up with them. If amazon determined that people would put up with ads on every book page, there would be ads on every page.

If they determined that most people would pay a $9.99 per month fee to use the device, there would be a $9.99 fee.

Remember, you're talking about a company that had as an initial big attraction the fact that it had an army of unpaid volunteer laborers it could exploit with them adding value to every product Amazon sells... reviews.

Nothing like a free sales force.

Re:Expect more of the same

[Anonymous Coward]

because its my device , not theirs and if they want to put that crap on it they can PAY me - isnt that how market forces are supposed to work ie you rent / exploit resources you own?

Re:Expect more of the same

[Anonymous Coward]

I wonder why ads bother people so much.

The vast majority of modern advertising is repetitive spam trying to drown out alternative points of view. It is the opposite of free speech. Free speech can be compromised just as much by too much noise as too little signal and the modern advertising industry takes that to quite ridiculous levels.

Especially on the kindle where the ads are unobtrusive

The whole point of an ad is to gain attention. An unobtrusive ad is a non-functioning ad. It is a non-sustainable business model.

Anybody who claims ad's can be unobtrusive in the long term is either sadly deluded or a lying shill. Which are you?

Re:Expect more of the same

[shutdown -p now]

Do you seriously think that $300 means that you have paid for the entirety of a 9" tablet with up-to-date hardware ?

Re:Expect more of the same

[shutdown -p now]

It's on the lock screen, which means that like the eInk model, your battery life will be crippled because these ads will be displayed and cycled when in theory your device should be idle (in the case of the eInk versions) or have the screen off (in the case of the LCD versions).

For eInk Kindles, I've never seen them cycle when idle. Not saying they don't, but if they do it, say, once a day, it'll take 5 years or so for that to discharge the battery. That can be ignored.

I don't know how it works on LCD Kindles, but I very much doubt that they'll actually turn on the screen to cycle ads.

Re:Expect more of the same

[Anonymous Coward]

Since when is seeing boobies ever a loss?

Re:Expect more of the same

[Anonymous Coward]

You're right that much of the content is free. But serving it, developing the site, investing in the technology to store it, paying an army of lawyers to keep the MPAA off your back... these things are not free.

Re:Expect more of the same

[NeutronCowboy]

Nice strawman, but I have my own website. And not a crappy LiveJournal blog, but a real, live, actual website. Costs me a whopping $10 a year.

Yeah, I know quite a few people too who run their own website. Some even have their own actual business website. You know why it costs you $10 a year? Because no one visits it. A popular website can easily run a grand in monthly hosting costs. At that point, you either make sure your business can support the site as a marketing expense, or you make money off of each person visiting the site.

People will provide content. But they will provide it only for as long as doing so doesn't bankrupt them.

Re:Expect more of the same

[Anonymous Coward]

No one is stopping you from buying one barky.

Re:Expect more of the same

[noh8rz9]

Common sense says they hit a really agressive price target by talking small margins and counting on some ad revenue. So get off your high horse.

Re:Expect more of the same

[Anonymous Coward]

Tell me friend,

He's not your friend. You've just shown you're a sales droid and are thus almost certainly untrustworthy.

are the ads targeted to you, like the ones in the Amazon emails? if so then I'd have NO problem with them, those ads have saved me probably a good grand in the past 2 years on things I was looking to buy anyway!

Targeting means that one ad in a thousand is "relevant" rather than one in two thousand. i.e. useless for the consumer. And to claim that unspolicited advertising saved you money is just silly when a relevant, virtually instant web search is orders of magnitude more objective and more comprehensive.

Re:Expect more of the same

[Anonymous Coward]

Except it doesn't have up to date hardware. Dual core CPU, pffft, please. I'll stick with my Nexus 7, thanks.

Re:Expect more of the same

[koxkoxkox]

So because it is worse elsewhere we shouldn't say anything ? An ad on a bus may be bigger and more distracting than an ad on a Kindle, but I have much less power over the bus company than over the device I bought myself.

And to answer your question: I can't drive or walk without seeing ads. And it does bother me.

Re:Expect more of the same

[rtb61]

That is tied to how low can they go with the purchase and get stuck with people buying just for fun and never really buying any content, with the whole market being devoted to breaking the device free. How close is the Amazon kindle to buy the device for $500 and get $500 worth of content free or rent the device and as long as your purchases achieve a specific monthly level, the rent is free. So have far off is a whole range of purchase options as designed to gain dominance of the content market, based upon using a synced smart phone as a portable players.

Re:Expect more of the same

[Anonymous Coward]

Amazon now says that for $15 you can choose to disable the ads.
http://techcrunch.com/2012/09/08/amazon-kindle-hd-will-allow-users-to-opt-out-of-special-offers-for-15/

Re:Expect more of the same

[antdude]

Ads. are so annoying too. I do watch ads., but only when I want to like on http://adland.tv/ http://www.funnyplace.org/, Super Bowl's TV ads., etc. Overall, I block/ignore them. I skip most of them on TV too.

Re:Expect more of the same

[Seumas]

Idiots are so accustomed to ads and feel that it's their duty to view them (just listen to conversations where people are apologists for the web being nothing but page after page of fucking obnoxious advertising all over the screen) that, ultimately, they're going to be EVERYWHERE. They're even going to be in your books. Not just on the lock-screen of your e-reader. They're going to be either every few pages of the actual book you read or even embedded IN every page of the book you read, just like ads on each web page are. They're going to be fucking EVERYWHERE.

Re:Expect more of the same

[Anonymous Coward]

It isn't the ads. It is:

1: The constant tracking via cookies and other schemes like order of loaded fonts for identifying info.

2: The fact that ad servers are a leading cause of malware delivery.

3: The fact that heavy Flash ads kill a machine.

4: The fact that ads steal bandwidth I pay for. If I pay by the pound at the grocer's butcher department, I don't expect a chunk of beef to have a lead ball advertising crap bundled with it.

5: The fact that ads don't work on a lot of devices, causing websites not to function.

I'll keep continuing to use AdBlock. However, for sites I do use, I will pay explicitly for a subscription in return for zero ad results from me. This is only fair.

Re:Expect more of the same

[Trahloc]

If the only option is one that includes ads it doesn't matter what hollywood accounting they do in the backroom to say the costs would increase by 5000% without the ads. Give people an option without ads and if they choose to buy the ad version they made that choice. Force them to buy the ad device and they have every moral right to remove them.

Just for full disclosure I have preordered the 8.9 HD 32gb version and I would have chosen the ad supported version if it existed as the ads don't bother me. But the point stands that someone else shouldn't be forced to accept ads just because they don't bother *me*. Nor should they have to buy another device that doesn't work with their Amazon Prime membership just because they don't want ads. Give people the choice, let them choose.

Re:Expect more of the same

[Trahloc]

Furthermore, ads perpetuate the idea that life's purpose is to work your ass of so you can consume

If someone wants to measure their life by how many games they play, books they read, computers they've built, lives they've saved, fires they've put out, criminals they've arrested, children they've nurtured, or 'useless crap' they've purchased... there is nothing 'wrong' with any of those. Life has no purpose, life has no meaning.

Re:Expect more of the same

[Anonymous Coward]

What hint would that be

The hint would be along the lines of:

To the Editor of The Economist,

I pay $110 per year for your digital service, yet when I log in to your website you still bombard me with ads including a crawl-up ad suggesting that I subscribe.

For this reason I block any and all ads on your site and any time I share an article with anyone else ( as your site encourages me to do ) I ensure that no ads are included in the snapshot.

Re:Expect more of the same

[MacGyver2210]

We'll have to jailbreak our devices with illicit ad-blocking software.

It's Android - it is free and open-source. There is nothing illicit about 'jailbreaking' (which won't alone fix this issue - unless you're smart and just use a different ROM like CyanogenMod). You could compile your own version from scratch and it would run just fine, and it would never even have heard about these ads unless you told it. There is nothing inherently ad-based about the hardware, other than Amazon's flawed business model directed at the use-as-intended consumer market.

Re:Expect more of the same

[klingers48]

As much as Apple is I'm sure now a company that now commercially leverages a lot of the aggregated usage data it collects, at least for now Apple is still first and foremost a hardware company.

Apple most likely (for now) never do something as crass as putting adds on your lockscreen. Apple's entire marketing juggernaut is based around image, and such obvious ads are both "uncool" and also take away a user's sense of ownership over their own device. That's the last thing Apple wants to happen. The "I must have it! I'll make it be mine" psychology that results in regular hardware refreshes is rather more integral to Apple's bottom line at least right now than advertising revenue is.

Re:Expect more of the same

[hairyfeet]

Riiight, should I address everyone as nigger fuckwit instead? Its called being polite dumbass, which sadly in this day and age qualifies as a superpower.

And thanks for showing you know exactly jack and shit,because I have NEVER, repeat NEVER, gotten an ad from Amazon emails that wasn't based on things I had bought or searched for so even when I didn't buy they at least interested me enough to look.

So keep right on running your adblock, flashblock and cockblock and then be SHOCKED, shocked i tell you! When they give you ads for tampons and adult diapers. The rest of us? Like saving money on our shopping. hell I haven't paid retail for shit in over 3 years now, why should I when I can just wait for a heads up when its on sale?

Re:Expect more of the same

[hairyfeet]

Well if its backlit there goes that idea, i'll have to buy her the previous model...which I'm sure I can find on sale somewhere, so it'll all even out in the wash. I'm shocked that the modders haven't already hacked the things though with the prices so low it seems like a perfect target for some cyanogenmod kinda goodness.

In the end all the thing is gonna do is read books, that's it, no surfing, no chat, all mom would ever use one for is to buy and read her cheesy horror books so hopefully the previous one ought to cut the mustard for that job.

Re:Expect more of the same

[Anonymous Coward]

Can't rate this highly enough. Well spoken. I'm an avid reader and I'm in the Kindle ecosystem. I have a Fire and a regular Kindle. I pay extra, when necessary, for the ad-free version. I like my reading to be as pure an experience as it possibly can without it being an actual book. If you can't escape from ads while reading a book then where? When? Just waiting for the day that books contain copious product placement.

Re:Expect more of the same

[Anonymous Coward]

The amount that it costs to serve up 1 MB of data to each of 1,000 people is decreasing as time goes on and bandwidth gets cheaper. So we should be transitioning to a model without ads, right?

Re:Expect more of the same

[Raenex]

It bothers me that overt $2000/person/year is spent on adertising in the US per inhabitant, i.e. including all babies, children, adults. That's a huge waste, a kind of regressive tax.

There's a saying by marketers that they know half of all their advertising dollars are wasted, just not which half. On the other hand, advertising does work, and it can serve a legitimate function in bringing buyers to products that they really do want and wouldn't have found otherwise.

Not that I like ads, as I use AdBlock and generally try to avoid them, but I'm somewhat sympathetic for their existence.

Re:Expect more of the same

[Kijori]

If it's a strawman, what is the hint that you said you were sending them? What Kjella said boils down to that you want all the benefits of the sites you like to be provided to you for free. That seems to be the case - if not, what message are you trying to send by visiting sites that cost money to provide and then blocking the ads?

A much better strawman is your penultimate paragraph:

People will provide content. The internet existed before its "monetization".

I'm sure people will provide content and that the internet existed before it carried adverts. Frankly, though, that's pretty irrelevant. I don't want the 1990s internet, I want the 2012 internet, and I don't just want random peoples' blogs I want videos, music and professional journalism, and whether you like it or not those things cost money.
It's good of you to recognise that YouTube differs "somewhat" from your website, but I don't think you realise quite how different it is. You can run a website for $10 a year as long as it doesn't do much and few people visit it. A popular website costs a little more. Estimates for YouTube's operating costs run to $700 million a year, including over $1m per month for bandwidth.
You may be inclined to claim that that is a ludicrous overestimate - but it isn't. Since they recently floated, Facebook's financial statements are in the public domain. Their prospectus lists their total expenses for 2011 at almost $2 billion dollars, including $388 million spent on R&D. To put it mildly, using your $10 website as a baseline for the modern internet is ridiculous.

I'll be blunt: I don't want your website - I want YouTube, I want Slashdot, I want quality journalism, I want music. Providing those costs money which either means people have to pay or they have to show adverts. If your vision is to replace that with the sort of content that can be provided for $10/year - no thanks. Almost every website that's cheap to run is cheap because it's bad and because nobody cares.

Re:Expect more of the same

[Anonymous Coward]

A rather extreme example of what your talking about would be my laptop which is pretty damn old now. Without ad blocking measure in place if I load up a video on youtube, even if I set the resolution for 240p, the laptop locks up completely for a couple seconds every time a new add loads. However with ad blocking software enabled the pages load almost instantly and I can watch video up to 720p resolution without the slightest hiccup. It's the same on any modern website that is image heavy, whole thing locks right up just to load some stupid ad that I don't want to see nor do I care about.

Outside of performance aspects, I still have nightmares with that dumb girl saying "Congratulations! You've won a free iPod Nano".

What's even worse is that the fucking ads are invading our search results. I've lost so much time researching various projects because I had to wade through pages of search results laden with ad ring websites just to find one result that had the information I was looking for.

Re:Expect more of the same

[johanw]

So they want more reasons for people to pirate ebooks than DRM and expensive prices?

Re:Expect more of the same

[Anonymous Coward]

Riiight, should I address everyone as nigger fuckwit instead? Its called being polite dumbass, which sadly in this day and age qualifies as a superpower.

It's not polite to assume a relationship which does not exist, particularly one which which is trying to claim un-earned trust. I was not impolite to you, just factual - most sales people are untrustworthy and they frequently attempt to be ersatz friends. I did use the mildly perjurative term sales-droid but if you're shilling in any way then that's more than justified. Shills are scum and should be in jail for fraud. If you're not shilling then my apologies.

And thanks for showing you know exactly jack and shit,because I have NEVER, repeat NEVER, gotten an ad from Amazon emails that wasn't based on things I had bought or searched for so even when I didn't buy they at least interested me enough to look.

Almost meaningless. I didn't save they wouldn't try to target - I said their's (and others) so-called targeting is worthless. Read what I said.

So keep right on running your adblock, flashblock and cockblock and then be SHOCKED, shocked i tell you! When they give you ads for tampons and adult diapers. The rest of us? Like saving money on our shopping.

I just told you: it doesn't save you any particular money - an explicit web search when you decide to buy is faster and much more relevant and it doesn't cost a huge amount of time and attention like unsolicited advertising does. It's really sad how many billion man hours are lost to unsolicited advertising every week (e.g. Americans watch on average 35 hrs/week of TV, say 10+ hrs/week of TV advertising, almost all of which is of no value to the viewer) . Lives being consumed by commercial propaganda. Advertisers like Amazon are trying to pollute the net to the same level.

hell I haven't paid retail for shit in over 3 years now, why should I when I can just wait for a heads up when its on sale?

False economy. So-called sales are rarely actual sales or good value, just lost leaders on stuff the majority are not interested in. Sounds like you like to buy junk you're told to buy rather than leading your own life and getting stuff relevant to your actual needs and desires.

Re:Expect more of the same

[msauve]

You don't know what "force" means. No one is forced to accept ads. Simply don't buy the product if you don't want them.

Re:Expect more of the same

[assertation]

It is not inevitable.

All we have to do is to stop believing that we MUST have these things. Just tell businesses that we will not have ads forced on us after PAYING money to make something OUR property.

Re:Expect more of the same

[0111 1110]

Yes. Yes, I do actually, Mr. Iknowexactlywhateveryproductcoststomake.

Re:Expect more of the same

[macs4all]

I wonder if they will accept ads for ipads.

They sell iPads, don't they?

Then, there's your answer.

Re:Expect more of the same

[baristabrian]

But, but ... is Amazon not the victim of the Apple/Publisher alliance that led to the DoJ taking action with Anti-trust litigation? Time for a facepalm?

Re:Expect more of the same

[gmanterry]

I wonder why ads bother people so much. Especially on the kindle where the ads are unobtrusive (you only see them on the power-off screensaver). My kindle came with ads disabled, and I got bored with the default images of authors, so I turned the ads on to get $50 refunded to my account.

Wait until you are 70+ years old. I am filled to overflowing with ads. If I had to watch them on my TV I would cancel TV and only watch DVDs. I can't stand the constant 3rd grade level crap that is repeated over and over during the same program. When I was young an hour of TV had 10 minutes of commercials. Now it's 20 minutes. In 10 years it'll be 30 minutes. And this doesn't include how disgusting I find vaginal odor products, male enhancements products and butt creams. I have reached my saturation level. I can't absorb any more crappy ads.

Re:Expect more of the same

[admdrew]

Kindles *do* have an off state; hold the switch for a few seconds and it'll turn off (and blank the screen). Otherwise it's just in a hibernate state that still uses battery, but is essentially instant-on.

Re:Expect more of the same

[Anonymous Coward]

You can 'opt out' by... not buying the new e-reader.

Re:Expect more of the same

[infinitelink]

Ideally, of course, if people everywhere were very rational, intelligent, liberal (in mind, not necessarily politics), and good, ads would serve always to connect a provider of a good or service with someone who could without question benefit from it: to make known something that potential consumer does not know, or a provider they don't know, to become aware either of something of value or help in life or someone who gives more value in providing that something. My father runs "Floormart" in Colorado, for instance. There is a very preliminary website with very hastily written content--1 page of and some sentences--just to get it started in the search engines here, floormartcolorado.com. The reason it's preliminary? He's not tech savvy, he's a flooring guy: been installing and crawling on rug since he was 14 (moved out of his parents house ~15, and at one point was a larger supplier in the Denver Metro). Moving him into the e-space is worse than pulling teeth. Me: "so we need to talk about what we want to say, and how to say it such that it makes people and search engines happy, and doesn't offend either. What would you like to say?" Him: "Just get something up so someone can find me." Me: "But there this thing called rankings..." Him: "How is this talk selling anything?"

But the thing is, he's a sales guy, but he's the type, like today when I helped him (he asked) at a tear-out job, with a woman from New York who wanted to put down wood throughout her entire house, including a basement concrete warping and other defects that would show through such flooring, who will sell less to take care of people: "Ma'am, you have cresting here, which will be very apparent when overlaid with wood flooring, and I have to advise you that in Colorado it's a good idea to have carpet at least on the ground level, for insulation." If he kept silent he could have sold 30Gs of wood, but instead he drastically reduced his potential profits.

And actually, that (and real skill in what he does) has meant a devoted network of repeat customers, individual, builders, realtors, you name it: the problem, of course, is that if their sectors slow down...and he still has to eat. So we're thinking about reaching out to new customers online. Of course, as you put it, there are a lot of wolves, and people's gut tells them "ignore the advertising", but probably more than half of the people out are barely cognizant that you can even get floors cleaned professionally (another thing he does), or that it is even required by manufacturers of carpets to maintain warranties; most who do know, probably think it's a scam--there are a lot of "fly-by-nighters". Those who have cleaning done, are often taken by the mis-information by major pushers, e.g. "'steam' (which is misleading) is the only way to go", "our hot carbonation doo-dad won't get things wet, and will make your rugs tze awsomz!--it's the only way to go": truth is, various methods exist for different circumstances and applications, but the average consumer doesn't want to sit-down and consider those things, they just want to have someone else think for them, and those someones then tend to get the business only by being less informative, more mis-informative, simply whoever has the best pretense and smooth look. The consumer also wants "cheap" by the way: despite the warnings that practically every local news station had made throughout the U.S., with investigative journalism that reports (a big duh) that cleaners at least have to pay for chemicals, gas, and labor, people still call small outfits promising whole house cleanings for between $9 and $99, and bigger ones that can mysteriously do 5-7 jobs/day even when dedicated pros (who will stop and hand-scrub some spot that needs careful chemical and application attention, and who use the same equipment and methods) can maybe do [well] two large houses.

As long as the masses are dupes and lazy--and observers have been writing about hoi polloi being idiots (and in love with their simplicity) sin

Re:Expect more of the same

[ranpel]

eh? Not once have I ever seen any ad on slashdot. Ever. I even get confused by the little box located top right asking if I'd like to disable advertising. Whatever I did I think I did it right and this is spanning multiple platforms over multiple years.

Shouldn't one be able to do it that way on any (*any*) purchased electronic platform? In other words your ads are not my business unless I choose to make them my business. And when I purchase an electronic piece of equipment I have every right to decide what exists on it and when. If I don't then I won't until I do then I might.

The same goes for this that or any other web site. Their business plan is not my problem. Advertising is not my problem. Being asked to take part in something I'd rather not take part in can be a problem. These are ebook readers right? I would tolerate a cover jacket type add as I would with a book and I would damn sure hope it was an add for another book then, at least, relevancy is assured.

Who the fuck would pay more than free to be force-fed ads? More importantly: Why?

So, yes, when I can get a free car that senses when I'm hungry and throws options up on the screen for the best lobster roll in Texas two miles on the left then I'll bite.

So, if you were trying to instill some weird sense of guilt about consumption of ads and bandwidth.. the fuck?

If anything (*anything*) disappears because they couldn't make enough money through ads then the problem is not mine to care about for more than minute. Ads are not all evil, granted. What is evil is the assumption that ads are an absolute necessity and must be imposed at all times and at almost any cost. We must ensure that this product designed for people to read includes every opportunity for us to sell ads. There's no good in that mate. Not for you, the reader, at any rate.

Re:Expect more of the same

[ranpel]

Gosh, I'm not sure if you just buy way too much shit or if I should go out and look for a bunch of shit whilst signing up for this that or the other doohickey wack-ass website to throw targeted ads at me so I can ... buy more shit. If I need something I look for it - the very last thing I need is it looking for me.

I am glad it works out for you though. That's cool. But I will, indeed, block ANYTHING, repeat ANYTHING, that I want up to and including refusing to consider anything offering something that I can't block. Capice? Don't aim a diss at people for not benefiting from what you seem to benefit from. Especially if it concerns ads. That makes your two cents a waste of two pennies, but, I do sense that you seem to part easily with your pennies and then when you happen to save a couple on your purchased goods you can waste them here, with that, like this.

Re:Expect more of the same

[ranpel]

Again with the 'ads are just' and you should feel guilty for touching yourself angle.

If it fails and disappears because ads didn't make enough money to "run the site" then what? We die? No more content? It's not the "right" kind of website as NeutronCowboy above you alludes to with the likes of : 'If you can afford to run it without ads it sucks' approach? Tools. What? Seriously.

Modern Internet. I don't understand that pair of words in the way that you've used them. Are you alluding to content consumption like it's the only fucking thing that matters on the Internet? This may come off as a slight shocker but them "Interweb sites" do not, in and of themselves, make anything modern and especially not the Internet. Simply because your primary Internet activities include consumption of professional content does not make it a justifiable argument for anything save some random "successful" (in your eyes) WEB site.

A website does not exist solely to become or be popular. And it definitely doesn't exist just for you and your masses in the way that you seem to think it should. What you meant to say was nobody cares but you about you. "Cheap because it's bad" that's kind of a short-sighted, dickhead thing to think much less write. Some people don't care what *you* want and in the case of ads it's what *they* want - your money. That is not the be all end all of everything Internet. Shocker, I know.

Re:Expect more of the same

[Anonymous Coward]

To add to that: ads are mostly targeted at the demographic that gives the most "bang for the buck", in practice that translates to people who have some disposable income, yet aren't "established". It's just a lot easier to influence the purchasing of a average 15 year old with ads than an average 45 year old. The result is that ads, and ad-supported media, assign the highest value to the user the advertisers most want. Advertisers "most wanted" customer in my jurisdiction is aged 21, from upper-middle class but with a low IQ, no skepticism and only limited education.

To be blunt, advertising works best on people who are immature, stupid and easily influenced.

Advertising-financed media will thus tend to gravitate in that direction.

Re:Expect more of the same

[Pausanias]

Except is pretty damn hard to get rid of ads after jailbreaking (the iDevices at least). It would appear the jailbreak developers also make money off ads and they really try hard to stop you from blocking them. One iOS app for jailbroken phones (SBSettings) refuses to have its settings changed if you have messed with your hosts file. Bastards. At least they don't rm -rf the device like some android developers have threatened to do.

Re:Expect more of the same

[thegarbz]

Yes, no. The new Kindle (not the tablet but rather the e-ink reader) has a backlight which will under daily use reduce the battery life from 8months to 3months. Mind you these numbers are brought to you by marketing, so I'll believe them when I see them.

Re:Expect more of the same

[thegarbz]

Thanks, didn't know that. I've never tuned one off before.

Re:Expect more of the same

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, 250 euro will get you a 10" laptop with up-to-date software and hardware, no advertising, the option to install a different OS, and a keyboard.

I'm not sure what the dollar/euro exchange rate is, but I'm guessing that's about 300$.

Re:Expect more of the same

[shutdown -p now]

Actually, 250 euro will get you a 10" laptop with up-to-date software and hardware, no advertising, the option to install a different OS, and a keyboard.

You forgot to mention that it'll also be about four times as thick (at that price level), and three times heavier.

Re:Expect more of the same

[L4t3r4lu5]

I find the opposite is true. I have a Kindle Touch, and the only books I have advertised to me are the very same books I have bought. I also recently purchased a flash drive, as you did, and guess what! Amazon advertises to me more flash drives! I already have a USB flash drive! By all means advertise something to me which I might have an interest, but not the very same item I have just purchased from you. I already have one of those, dufus.

Re:Expect more of the same

[admdrew]

Yeah, and you don't have to do it much at all. My first Kindle developed some crashing issues early on, forcing me to do hard resets to it with that method (but obviously that wasn't normal, and I was able to get it immediately replaced).

Re:Expect more of the same

[Anonymous Coward]

Dude. I'm sure scaling is askew and whatnot, but I get several thousand hits a day on my site (a webcomic for what it's worth), and I pay $6 a year. And I have zero ads.

Now obviously a ton of sites will use far more bandwidth, but that doesn't change the fact that some people make content because they like making content, not because they want a paycheque.

Re:Expect more of the same

[hairyfeet]

Well I'm looking at the basic eReader model, as I said my mom has no use for all the extra crap, she has just about picked clean the local library and this way she can get those serial horror books she loves just by pushing a button.

Meh I'll probably get the thing and if its any hassle at all I can always get her one of those basic tablets and just bypass the BS. I wonder how those are for eBooks? They have Android 4.0 tablets for $99, 1.2GHz CPUs and 512Mb of DDR3 RAM, but it looks kinda overkill for what mom wants to use the thing for and I've heard good things about the eInk.

Battery life really don't matter as she'll be doing most of her reading from the house so she can always plug the thing in at the end of the day, she just needs a simple and easy way to read her cheesy horror books

Re:Expect more of the same

[hairyfeet]

I run a little PC shop so yeah...I have to buy a LOT of shit, from RAM to replacement HDDs to new laptops to replace the one the secretary at the bank poured her Diet Coke down, so why pay full price?

And I get a grand total of THREE, count 'em three, emails, one from Tiger, one from newEgg, and one from Amazon. I get maybe 10 emails a week so it isn't like its this big pile of shit i have to go through and just one or two a month can save me a TON of money and thus are worth it.

You should really try those three if you have ANY interest in tech, you'd be surprised how much cash you can save. EG 3 weeks ago they had quad core PC kits at Tiger, know how much? $129 and NO rebates, simply add a HDD and the OS and you were ready to go. I slapped in some 400Gb drives I had sitting in a drawer and made nearly $200 a piece while giving people seriously bad ass quads, they're happy, I'm happy, win/win.

I've bought 100 packs of DVDs for $10, bought 16Gb flash drives for $5, you never know when one of those places will have too much of something and dump below cost, and if its something you can use why not take advantage? It takes less than 3 minutes out of my day to glance through the things, one killer deal a month more than makes up for that. Block the ads if you want but if you don't get the emails you're nuts, most have offers that are ONLY for those that get the emails.

Re:Expect more of the same

[cpu6502]

>>> you are being forced to take the adds on something that you payed for in entirety

You sir are a lazy person. Why? Because you couldn't take 2 minutes to visit amazon.com and verify your statement. FACT:

When I bought my kindle last spring, the ones that were "payed for in entirety" were priced about $50 more than the ad-supported kindles. In other words the ad-supported kindles ARE being subsidized by the ads, and the no-ad kindles are much more expensive.

Re:Expect more of the same

[cpu6502]

Stop listening to the other people who apparently DON'T have eink kindles and have no idea what they are talking about (like the stupid fuck who said it cycles ads). Yes the kindle has an off switch.

No the screen doesn't go blank because epaper almost-never goes blank. It just shows a static image and will continue showing that static image for months w/o burning energy. (Think of an etch-a-sketch. You draw it and then it stays. No battery needed to keep that drawing.) If you fall asleep while reading, the kindle will turn off the G3 or Wifi modem, turn-off the led lighting, and then stop using energy from the battery.

Re:Expect more of the same

[cpu6502]

>>>>>I wonder why ads bother people so much.
>>
>>Ads lower the signal-to-noise ratio by saturating the environment with irrelevant misinformation.

Yeah but you can tune-out the ads. With TV when an ad comes-on, I redirect my attention to the web and watch youtube (or if it's taped: fastforward past the ad). With the web you can ignore the pictures at the top or side of the screen. Right now there's an ad on /. and I have no idea what it's about. And on Kindle the ads are merely screen savers. They do not intrude into whatever book you might be reading.

Seriously: You people make a big deal about nothing.

Re:Expect more of the same

[cpu6502]

>>>It's on the lock screen, which means that like the eInk model, your battery life will be crippled because these ads will be displayed and cycled when in theory your device should be idle

You're a stupid fuck.
That's NOT how the eink kindles work at all. My kindle has been displaying the same ad since Friday. It is NOT cycling. It IS sitting idle and NOT burning-up the battery.
Stupid stupid fuck.

BTW kindles come with tons of free books as well, which basically pays for your initial outlay. I've downloaded hundreds of classics, and also a few just-released books that were priced at $0.00. And also magazine samplers for free.

Re:Expect more of the same

[Anonymous Coward]

That's nice. Too bad for you it is irrelevant to the thread.

FACT: This thread isn't about your Kindle. It's about the new Fires that do not have a no-ad version.

Please try to READ and UNDERSTAND the posts that you are responding to.

Re:Expect more of the same

[Anonymous Coward]

>>>It's on the lock screen, which means that like the eInk model, your battery life will be crippled because these ads will be displayed and cycled when in theory your device should be idle

You're a stupid fuck.
That's NOT how the eink kindles work at all. My kindle has been displaying the same ad since Friday. It is NOT cycling. It IS sitting idle and NOT burning-up the battery.
Stupid stupid fuck.

BTW kindles come with tons of free books as well, which basically pays for your initial outlay. I've downloaded hundreds of classics, and also a few just-released books that were priced at $0.00. And also magazine samplers for free.

Aww, how adorable, the 12 year old discovered the word "Fuck."

Re:Expect more of the same

[Anonymous Coward]

>>>It's on the lock screen, which means that like the eInk model, your battery life will be crippled because these ads will be displayed and cycled when in theory your device should be idle

You're a stupid fuck.

Now what did _KiTA_ do that could possibly justify such a childish response? They may have been misinformed, but they still seemed polite in their post. That means you correct them politely. Calling them a "stupid fuck" is just going to make someone think you are a filthy liar.

Re:Expect more of the same

[ranpel]

Yeah man, good deals all but I really think you're referring to more of an electronic flyer than any sort of pushed advertising campaign onto any device possible. What you're describing is "opt in" and not a "we'll decide for you and your device" - targeted or not. Again, for clarity, receiving an email is not being subjected to push advertisements. It's email, spam or not you get to decide.

Re:Expect more of the same

[Macgrrl]

Check out Max Barry's Jennifer Government for an example of a book set in a world where product placement is king.

Re:Expect more of the same

[Macgrrl]

Not that I really post to it much anymore, but I pay over double your annual hosting charges for my 'crappy LiveJournal blog'. Does that make it a real, live, actual website? We also have our own domain name, but don't have a webpage up, just use it for email. In my self awareness I know that I don't really have that much to say of value beyond making the odd post on a social network, and most of that is behind some kind of pseudonym.

Re:Expect more of the same

[Macgrrl]

I don't want your website - I want YouTube, I want Slashdot, I want quality journalism, I want music.

I'm glad there's a comma between I want Slashdot and I want quality journalism. :)

Re:Expect more of the same

[thegarbz]

I suggest not to under-estimate the screen. If your mother is like my girl she'll read the books for hours at a time. The e-ink screens are an absolute godsend compared to eye-strain inducing backlit LCDs.

Re:Expect more of the same

[Baki]

Matter of principle: Advertisement is, by definition, subjective. I want objective information and decide upon pros and cons of products myself, or otherwise listen to recommendations of trusted sources.

Therefore, advertisement is a waste of resources. Time and money spent creating and consuming advertisements has a low value for society, it is almost wasted.

The worst thing is that the consumers are the ones paying for this misleading "information" themselves: you may think you get things for free (apps, television) paid by advertisement. But the cost of advertisement is part of the product prices, i.e. paid by yourself.

I think it is perverse to pay for misinformation (through higher product prices); a part of this money is then used to give away things for free or at a discount (every medium that contains ads).

Even if you are not using the stuff you get "for free", you still pay the advertisement tax in all product prices. Which is pretty awful if you think about it.

Re:Expect more of the same

[UnknownSoldier]

> how do you manage to drive or walk anywhere without seeing an ad?

First, when you grow up you will realize we have this little thing called: Choice. As in, I choose NOT to view ads of any kinds by *gasp* choosing to look away! I am not interested in companies that have zero respect for potential customers that they feel the need to visually pollute the environment with propaganda for things I don't want nor need in my life. If *you* want to waste your time buying into the lie that your life has no meaning without the things or services they are trying to sell you, go right ahead.

Second, when I am paying for the bandwidth *I* get to decide what network traffic is sent through my pipe not some ignorant developer who has no respect for my bandwidth costs. Likewise on *my* devices I don't want other people's visual crap; I avoid developers that feel the need to spew whatever they can onto my device because they have zero respect for my hardware. If I "buy" a "free" app then that is perfectly understandable that those developers will try to augment their income with 'ads', but AGAIN it is MY choice whether or not to run THOSE apps. I can always "upgrade" to the full version which damn well better not have any ads.

Third, one day when you move out of mommy's basement you will realize that not everyone has the same preferences that you do. Only an idiot or fool naively believes everyone should have the same opinion.

Lastly, are you actually able to comprehend the fact that not everyone places their priorities on capitalism and manipulation that they call marketing/advertising?

The fact that companies need to advertise in the first place demonstrates that all they care about is manipulation and greed. I am not interested in supporting those types of companies in any manner until they grow up.

Re:Expect more of the same

[hairyfeet]

But you're missing the point dude, what I'm saying here is if they use the same algorithm that they use for their emails? then not only will they not suck but they'll actually be nice.

As an example I do NOT get any emails from Amazon about car parts, or adult diapers, or BBQ grills, or any of the thousands of things they sell OTHER than tech and PC games, that's it, why? Because I have actually bought those things in the past so by showing me when there is a sale on the kind of things I have bought in the past, blank DVDs, flash sticks, RAM, laptops and netbooks etc they make it much more likely I will buy something and in return they don't bug the shit out of me by showing crap i don't want...see how that works?

Getting back to the Kindle if they show my mom ads for cookbooks and self help books and crap like that then THAT would piss her off, but if they do like they do in the emails and go "Hmmm...she buys Patrica Briggs books, and the people that like Patricia Briggs ALSO seem to buy a lot more of books by similar authors...well we should show her similar authors in the same genre as Patricia Briggs and books bought by the same people that buy Patricia Briggs like the Odd Thomas books" then THAT is just fine, in fact they would probably be welcomed as mom likes a bunch of authors that frankly crank out books almost constantly and since they are serials you really need to read them in order to keep up with the story.

So its not about the ads, its the approach. There is a right way to show ads and a wrong way. Show me ads for Geritol and "you can make a mint in real estate" and you'll piss me off but show me ads where you have an SSD at 60% off? Then I'll not only not be pissed I'm likely to be grabbing for my CC and heading for your site to buy.

Re:Expect more of the same

[hawguy]

Then what is your problem with Amazon's Kindle? You and other consumers have the choice whether or not to purchase it and if you do buy it and are surprised and dismayed by the ads, you can return it for a refund.

There are lots of Chinese manufacturers making pure Android tablets without even Google's marketplace, so you can enjoy a pure Android experience without any advertising at all.

Third, one day when you move out of mommy's basement you will realize that not everyone has the same preferences that you do. Only an idiot or fool naively believes everyone should have the same opinion.

I never said the Kindle was the right tablet for everyone, but I did say that it's target market isn't going to care about some lock-screen ads and I stand behind that - Amazon has been selling ad supported devices for some time now, and they know exactly what consumers think about them. Their Kindle Fire target market is consumers that are happy to have their tablet locked to the Amazon ecosystem, and don't mind some Amazon ads to go along the rest of the Amazon ads that they see when they are browsing the Amazon marketplace.

But I think you'll find that it's the kids that never leave Mom's basement that are the idealists that think we should live in a pure advertising-free society. The rest of us live in the real world realize that advertising is a part of our economy and culture, why would over a 100 years of a corporate culture that relies on ads change now? If you lived 100 years ago, would you be complaining that your mom hung the Sears Catalog in the outhouse for use as toilet paper because you don't want to wipe your ass with an ad?

Why would you use Android in the first place since it's an advertising supported product? Where do you think Google (a company that earns almost all of its revenue from Advertising) got the money to develop Android? Maybe you'd be better off with an IOS or WebOS tablet since that's a little closer to your ideals?

Re:Expect more of the same

[Jafafa Hots]

Not if you actually look at the cost of the electronics. The profit margin is healthy.

It's not about price, it's about "price point." Big difference.

Re:Expect more of the same

[UnknownSoldier]

> Then what is your problem with Amazon's Kindle?
Since apparently you have problems with your reading skills and/or comprehension, let me quote what I wrote:
    >> Likewise on *my* devices I don't want other people's visual crap;

> The rest of us live in the real world realize that advertising is a part of our economy and culture, why would over a 100 years of a corporate culture that relies on ads change now?
They said the same thing about slavery, women not voting, etc. at one point too.
It is only part of the culture because idiots like you don't see the problem with greed, manipulation, and marketing.

> If you lived 100 years ago, would you be complaining that your mom hung the Sears Catalog in the outhouse for use as toilet paper because you don't want to wipe your ass with an ad?
Some people would obviously see the value in an ad finally being useful for once.
But just because we killed trees then (and now) to justify marketing's greed doesn't make it right.

That will make the choice simpler

[Gonoff]

I think this will help Google Nexus sales. I am not aware they come with built in adware.

Re:That will make the choice simpler

[Anonymous Coward]

Over the course of the last few days, Amazon has raised the price of the Nexus 7 in their store by up to $50 (it's only marked up $40 today) and stopped offering Prime shipping on it. Last week, I could pick one up for $199.99 and get free 2-day shipping on it. They now clearly want me to buy a Kindle Fire HD. Assholes.

I guess I'm going to my local Walmart and picking up a Nexus 7 now. Walmart, of all places!

Re:That will make the choice simpler

[Anonymous Coward]

out of the frying pan, into the fire.

Re:That will make the choice simpler

[Cinder6]

Looks like Amazon itself isn't carrying it anymore. If you click on the products pages, you see that they're being sold by Marketplace sellers, such as "STL Pro" and "greentree9". The latter, at least, is fulfilled by Amazon, and thus has Prime available. It's still $56 over MSRP, though.

Re:That will make the choice simpler

[teg]

I think this will help Google Nexus sales. I am not aware they come with built in adware.

From a 30000 ft view, Android is just an ad delivery mechanism. If you zoom in, it's a mobile OS, but it's sole job is to enable delivery of Google's ad service to users from it's customers. And as always, you are Google's product, not their customer.

Now, I use google mail, google docs, google talk and chrome... but I know they're doing this to sell me.

Re:That will make the choice simpler

[caballew]

I was actually thinking about getting one of the new Kindle Fires but this changes my mind.

Re:That will make the choice simpler

[iluvcapra]

but it's sole job is to enable delivery of Google's ad service to users from it's customers.

Sure there's the ads, but there's also the web usage metrics, app usage metrics, location data stream, QR code metrics, and the friction-free interface with the Google web properties, force-multiplying all of the various data modeling and extraction those use, what with the text-to-speech, the corpus for natural language comprehension, email and spam-guided machine learning, calendar stats aggregation, Google+ relationship maps and content. Let alone guaranteeing integrated and most-favored-nation status for their content services, YouTube, Google Play...

"You will pay for your lack of imagination!" :)

Re:That will make the choice simpler

[teg]

but it's sole job is to enable delivery of Google's ad service to users from it's customers.

Sure there's the ads, but there's also the web usage metrics, app usage metrics, location data stream, QR code metrics, and the friction-free interface with the Google web properties, force-multiplying all of the various data modeling and extraction those use, what with the text-to-speech, the corpus for natural language comprehension, email and spam-guided machine learning, calendar stats aggregation, Google+ relationship maps and content. Let alone guaranteeing integrated and most-favored-nation status for their content services, YouTube, Google Play...

"You will pay for your lack of imagination!" :)

You're just describing way of delivering more ads, improving the targeting of the ads (and thus being able to charge more) and measuring how effective they are so you can target them even more. Plus some auxiliary services ("Google Play") which has to be there, or noone will use the platform.

Re:That will make the choice simpler

[swillden]

I guess I'm going to my local Walmart and picking up a Nexus 7 now. Walmart, of all places!

Or just buy it directly from Google. https://play.google.com/store/devices

Re:That will make the choice simpler

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, all that data has absolutely no use anywhere outside ads. Why would anyone think otherwise?

Re:That will make the choice simpler

[Havenwar]

If their ways of doing that improves my user experience above the base level of not having ads, then the ads and their mechanisms are a net win for me as a customer. So your argument really falls down on an objective level, while I suppose certain individuals might be so hostile to ads that the frustration they feel on seeing even a single one is greater than all the benefits they get from the network put in place to as you say cater for its delivery.

Personally I've had an android phone for a few years now, and I've seen maybe a handful of ads. I don't use a lot of free apps, and there is to my knowledge no ads built into the system. So your argument falls there as well.

And if ads are a major concern to you, there are very competent and well working adblockers for the android system, so you have absolutely no reason to worry about it.

For the kindle fire on the other hand your argument works better, since that's a locked in proprietary system without outside intervention.

Re:That will make the choice simpler

[teg]

If their ways of doing that improves my user experience above the base level of not having ads, then the ads and their mechanisms are a net win for me as a customer. So your argument really falls down on an objective level, []

I didn't argue that ads were bad or detrimental to your user experience. I just noted that Android is a delivery mechanism for Google's ads, so that speaking of Google Nexus not having adware is rather... weird. Thus my argument stands, you just seem to set up something else to argue against.

And just FTR: Kindle Tablets are, for the time being, completely and utterly irrelevant to me: They don't ship them to Norway. I could get around it, but with no Amazon Prime this would be rather pointless.

Re:That will make the choice simpler

[Havenwar]

I'd like you to expand on your claim that android is a delivery mechanism for googles ads. In what context exactly is google delivering these ads that I'm apparently not seeing?

And I have absolutely zero interest in the kindle tablet either - I wasn't even aware they don't ship them here. Or I presume they don't given your statement, Sweden being rather close to Norway. I'm just picking at your argument, because I believe it to be fallacious.

its no confirmed.

[matt007]

"Amazon has no confirmed there is no way to opt out of the ads on the new Kindle Fire tablets."

They no confirmed so its no sure there is no way out.

Re:its no confirmed.

[Isaac-1]

I can't help wonder if the reason is that no one buys the regular model anymore. My wife has a special offers Kindle Keyboard (e-paper reader) with special offers and it seems to be done tastefully, and unobtrusively, even less distracting than the banner ad at the top of the page here. I can see why most people would chose the cheaper price if the downside is unobtrusive ad on the screen saver, etc.

Re:its no confirmed.

[Anonymous Coward]

the banner ad at the top of the page here

What in the world are you babbling about?

Re:its no confirmed.

[Cinder6]

When I first got the Kindle Touch, I intended on eventually opting out of the ads. As you say, though, they're surprisingly unobtrusive, and I even wound up taking advantage of some of the offers. I can understand other people not sharing my opinion, though.

Re:its no confirmed.

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, I buy the regular model: I have both an original Kindle Keyboard (from before they called it that), and the original Kindle Fire. No ads -- and if it had ads I wouldn't have bought them.

If models available when those wear out are not available without ads, I won't buy replacement Kindles for them. Amazon, I love your Kindle products, and I buy ebooks from you and I even subscribe to your video streaming -- but if you try to make me swallow ads too, then fuck you.

Re:its no confirmed.

[fermion]

They have not confirmed how much it will cost to opt out of ads. We don't know if the cheap LTE is going to be ad supported. In the end, as I argued beofre, we don;t know what the true cost of this device is going to be. Justy like an iPad is going to cost at least 680 for the first year, we don't really know that the kindle fire with lte is going to cost only $550 for the same period. Amazon wants us to believe that the Fire is $400 less than a comparaple iPad, but we really don't know. Not until the full details of pricing is released

BTW, one oif the most annoying features of the Fire is no obvious way to cusotmize the home screen. This is celarly a feature contemplated for a while now.

Re:its no confirmed.

[martin-boundary]

Aye, there secrets oot, no!

Well, then.

[Anonymous Coward]

I can opt out of ads simply by buying another tablet. The Nexus 7 looks nice, and the Kobo Arc surprised me by running off-the-shelf ICS.

Re:Well, then.

[cob666]

Couldn't you just put the device in the Airplane mode? No internet access, no ads (unless the ads are cached).

Re:Well, then.

[turkeyfeathers]

The ads are cached.

Re:Well, then.

[Cinder6]

No internet access, no ads (unless the ads are cached).

They are--at least, they are on the eInk Kindles. It shows the ads, and asks you to connect to a WiFi network if you click on them.

Re:Well, then.

[fa2k]

It shows the ads, and asks you to connect to a WiFi network if you click on them.

Made me chuckle a little.. I suppose they work on the theory that any exposure is good for advertisement

Bing search too

[symbolset]

Sad to see an otherwise nifty product Binged like that. I guess that's a paid ad too. An ad for Bing.

Re:Bing search too

[Anonymous Coward]

As if there's much difference between Google search and Bing these days. Bing has caught up and the results are nearly identical. Bing actually has an advantage that it has less DMCA-removed pages. I always find stuff I want on Bing even when Google has removed certain pages.

Re:Bing search too

[Anonymous Coward]

And best of all, Bing Is Not Google!

Re:Bing search too

[the eric conspiracy]

Poppycock.

http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/381945/20120907/bing-google-microsoft-pepsi-challenge.htm

Re:Bing search too

[Anonymous Coward]

Gnu's Not Unix.

Partimage Is Not Ghost.

Re:Bing search too

[Anonymous Coward]

As if there's much difference between Google search and Bing these days.

HAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA....when can I buy your DVD?

Re:Bing search too

[Anonymous Coward]

And best of all, Bing Is Not Google!

Oh God, don't remind me. I had an HD7 windows phone for a few months and it was stuck on Bing search. Fucking horrible. It never seemed to find what I was looking for and the interface was slow. I traded that piece of trash for a Galaxy S Android phone. Best decision I ever made. Bing is trash.

Re:Bing search too

[Anonymous Coward]

The bing challenge is a fraud just like the "smoked by windows phone" shit was. Take the challenge and open Google up in another window to do the same search. You'll find the real Google shows different and more relevant results. Microsoft should be sued for this.

Re:Bing search too

[fermion]

I still use google but that is just because I udepend on google docs. Otherwise I would use bing. Too many of google results are link farms and the like. Due to Google dependence on ads, and it's focus on fighting 'poiracy' basically most useful thigs are gone.

Re:Bing search too

[symbolset]

Once you root it the HD7 makes a good gPod with Android. A shame about the software.

Re:Bing search too

[symbolset]

Bing Challenge is turning into a self-parody that defeats its purpose more than a Google ad would. I wouldn't worry about it. It's an example of how poorly Microsoft can buy advertising - and they're already a spectacle in the field in that regard. How they manage to defeat their own purposes in their advertising is a wonder to behold. If it's not deliberate it takes a special realm of incompetence to achieve this level of dissonance. It has long been my opinion that the executive team responsible for marketing so abuses their creatives that they deliberately deliver the worst possible product the executive team will accept for spite, and this metric survives across multiple generations of creatives. They give us these wonders for spite. Bill Gates wiggling his butt, really? That is proof of the premise.

Obligatory Neal Stephenson Reference

[fm6]

Recall the guy in Diamond Age who made a name for himself by putting animated ads on chopsticks? As always, SF is way ahead of reality.

Re:Obligatory Neal Stephenson Reference

[Anonymous Coward]

Was there also a guy who had optical implants (N.k.n?), I remember they also showed ads. 24/7 awake or asleep there were the ads, straight into the optic nerve!

Re:Obligatory Neal Stephenson Reference

[Anonymous Coward]

That would be the main character.

Re:Obligatory Neal Stephenson Reference

[MacGyver2210]

That would be some awesome technology. Shit, I'd PAY for those chopsticks, even if they had lousy ads.

Re:Obligatory Neal Stephenson Reference

[fm6]

The coolness factor wears off quickly. There's a bit in the story about how people have problems with being constantly distracted by all the embedded media that's everywhere.

Mostly meh, but some Grr

[Anonymous Coward]

So long as it's only on the lock screen, I don't care that much about the ads themselves. They just show up when I'm not using the device, which is precisely the time when I don't care about ads.

What I do care about is that the ads have to be downloaded from somewhere, and the data plans on, say, the 3G devices are limited - with fairly steep overage costs. I'm not excited about paying for the delivery of ads.

Re:Mostly meh, but some Grr

[Kergan]

Ads also drain the battery (download + display).

Re:Mostly meh, but some Grr

[Snaller]

Now what if there was a way for the device to download ads without charging it to you?

That could be made.
(And would quickly be hacked, oh dear :)

Re:Mostly meh, but some Grr

[nurb432]

Give them an inch, they will take a mile. This is similar to the trial balloon where they were optional, and if no one protests they are mandatory, expect more intrusive ones the next round.

Re:Mostly meh, but some Grr

[Isaac-1]

Perhaps, but it may also be that the special offers kindles out sell the ad free ones 10 or 20 to 1. Eeveryone I have talked to about their Kindles (various relatives, friends, etc.) have opted for the Special Offers model since they were introduced. Since Amazon does not release detailed sales numbers it is hard to tell for sure though.

Re:Mostly meh, but some Grr

[mrmeval]

I've had android app angry birds call up flash and play a full screen ad. I was going to buy it and their halloween edition but decided to delete it. I'm at the point I test apps in the andriod emulator and look at what it's network traffic is over a week before I'll load it on my phone. As you may guess I do not bother with many android apps from google as it's a sewer not an ecosystem.

Re:Mostly meh, but some Grr

[Anonymous Coward]

Not much due to the E-Ink display...

Re:Mostly meh, but some Grr

[EGSonikku]

Kindle Fire HD is not e-ink.

Re:Mostly meh, but some Grr

[admdrew]

Downloading and whatever system process has to be running, sure, but I wouldn't think that displaying them would increase battery usage much at all, given it doesn't turn the backlight on/off. Turning on other lock-screen display options (calendar/shortcuts) do not affect battery life.

Re:Mostly meh, but some Grr

[Anonymous Coward]

Ads also drain the battery (download + display).

On an e-ink display, there is no additional cost to displaying an ad versus displaying any of the other lock-screen images.

On a 3G Kindle, you don't pay for the download - Amazon offers free connection.

So your argument is BS

Well that just means:

[Anonymous Coward]

Rooted and ROM'd within 45 seconds. No more advertisements, ftw.

Re:Well that just means:

[nurb432]

Which is not for everyone, nor should you have to do this.

Re:Well that just means:

[Raistlin77]

Which is not for everyone, nor should you have to do this.

So don't buy it. You're simply stupid if you buy something that does what you don't want it to do. Until the majority stops opening their wallets, this crap isn't going to stop.

and so it goes when trade control for convenience

[Anonymous Coward]

When we buy devices that we do not control, it will be ever more like this. They are there to track all our behavior for better targeting of advertisements, and as a byproduct, for building databases for three letter agencies in whatever government you live under.

You want to give up your general purpose PC, and buy a nice locked down tablet? Go right ahead. This is the cost, and you haven't even seen the merest beginning of it yet...

Sure you can!

[Snaller]

Don't buy it

Re:Sure you can!

[Anonymous Coward]

Exactly, the ultimate opt-out is just don't buy the ad infested product

Re:Sure you can!

[Anonymous Coward]

This and parent...
I don't get why people complain and then still buy the product. If you don't like it, don't buy it...
With the chance of being called pedantic: there's a large section of humanity that is doing just fine without a tablet or eReader. Heck, even without a computer... I'm sure you'll do fine without your 'gotta-have-my-device-or-I-am-not-a-complete-human-being'...

Re:Sure you can!

[Bill Dimm]

Bingo! I was planning to buy a Nexus 7 as a gift and thought I might have a tough decision between that and the Fire, but the ads made the choice easy.

Re:Sure you can!

[Kielistic]

Or maybe they can voice their opinion about why they're not buying a device that they otherwise would. Therein informing the company that they might want to change things.

Re:Sure you can!

[Anonymous Coward]

Why would I want to bother with that?

1. Company tries to ram ads down my throat.
2. I help company see the errors of their ways.
3. ???
4. Company profits! I feel warm and fuzzy all over?

Re:Sure you can!

[penix1]

Well let's tear this whole thing down...

You say if you don't like a product then don't buy it. Let's apply that to cell phones... Ever try to use a pay phone these days? They are very far and few between. If you travel without a cell phone you are fucked if you have an emergency. There is no other option but to have a cell these days.

eBooks are intended to replace traditional books. There are already books that you can't get in print and are only available in electronic format. Worse, because of exclusive deals authors make with companies like Amazon, you can only get it from them.

So like the cell phones, an eBook reader will at some point become necessary if you intend to read books. And with the state of copyright these days, you will have fewer and fewer places to purchase those books.

Re:Sure you can!

[StripedCow]

So, ironically, you'll be buying your tablet from an advertisement company instead.

Re:Sure you can!

[Bill Dimm]

The real irony is that an "advertisement company" has enough sense to limit their ads to websites that I have the freedom to avoid if I choose, while Amazon thinks I should be obligated to tolerate ads wedged into the OS where they become unavoidable.

Re:Sure you can!

[MacGyver2210]

It's sort of dumb to say "Don't use this awesome new piece of technology because they bundled something I dislike with it". Just root it and install a ROM without the ads, problem solved at the cost of about an hour of time. The price is already exceedingly low for the product, just don't use it how they intended and all will be balanced and right in the world.

Re:Sure you can!

[Raenex]

The real irony is that an "advertisement company" has enough sense to limit their ads to websites that I have the freedom to avoid if I choose

Except when they are advertising their own products, like Chrome or the Nexus 7 you are planning to buy.

Re:Sure you can!

[Anonymous Coward]

Exactly !

I don't have one now. I'm not likely to have one this year. And if all it is, is another way for them to deliver adds to me and track my usage I won't ever purchase one.

Re:Sure you can!

[rally2xs]

True emergencies (someone bleeding) are still handled fairly well with CB and ham radios. Everything else is just convenient.

I've finally got a smart phone. Whoopie. But everything on it is simply convenient, not necessary. If the powers that be decide I can't use my phone in my car (where I mostly am when I need a phone that doesn't connect with wires) I can drop it in a heartbeat, and save myself $82 / month. Anything I want to know from the net I can stop into a McDonalds, stay in the car, have maybe an ice cream cone and a coke, and get off their free internet access.

Same thing with e-books. I don't use 'em, don't need 'em. If I want to buy a book, I buy a book. It won't cost me an expensive LCD screen if I drop it, and if I get it wet, it won't cost that much to buy another one.

Re:Sure you can!

[Bill Dimm]

The CNet article you linked to is about ads on Google.com. Does the Nexus 7 force you onto Google.com? That's a serious question -- I've been assuming that I could use whatever search engine (or other websites) I want on the Neus 7; am I wrong?

Re:Sure you can!

[Raenex]

The CNet article you linked to is about ads on Google.com. Does the Nexus 7 force you onto Google.com?

I don't know, and it misses the point. If you want to avoid the Google ads for their own products on their search page, you have to avoid their search page, which is analogous to the reason you didn't want to buy the competing product to the Nexus 7. As the article points out, such kind of advertising on Google's home page is very unusual except for a few self-serving cases.

Re:Sure you can!

[Bill Dimm]

which is analogous to the reason you didn't want to buy the competing product to the Nexus 7

Analogous at a rather different level, though, and that's the critical distinction. If a specific website is so heavily laden with ads that I find it to be annoying, I can simply avoid going to that website (assuming that they don't have a monopoly on information that is critical to me). In other words, I can boycott the website. It's my choice, on a website-by-website basis, whether it is worth tolerating the ads for access to the content. Assuming that the Nexus 7 allows me to go to whatever websites I want, I can choose to go to Google's sites, giving them ad dollars, or I can go elsewhere. If Google starts cluttering their homepage with so many ads that I find it annoying, I just point the Nexus 7 to DuckDuckGo.com, and the problem is solved (to Google's detriment -- that's what happens when you get too greedy with ads).

Amazon has moved the ads one level farther up, into the device itself, so the user cannot avoid them by using the device differently. The ads can only be avoided by avoiding the device itself. It is now the device itself, not a single website, that is the point where I must decide whether I am willing to tolerate the ads. As pointed out in the very first post in this thread, if you don't like the ads you have to boycott the device itself, which is what I've chosen to do. Also, since I am buying the device as a gift, Amazon is forcing me to make a decision about whether or not the ads are acceptable on behalf of someone else, which makes it a somewhat shitty gift.

Finally, the presence of ads on the Kindle is actually somewhat worse than ads on a website for the following reason: I pay for the device today, but I won't know how off-putting the ads are until some point in the future. Even if the ads Amazon is displaying today aren't too annoying to me, they might get worse at some point in the future. If Slashdot covers itself in rapidly blinking ads tomorrow, I can simply stop coming here. If the ads on the Kindle become crappy, I'm stuck with it as my $199 is already gone.

Amazon has changed their mind and is now allowing people to buy their way out of the ads. That's good, but the fact that they ever thought this was a good road to go down leaves me concerned.

Except that...

[Kupfernigk]

Google doesn't want you to opt out of ads on the Nexus, because a lot of their income comes from ads.

Re:Except that...

[DeeEff]

Google doesn't want you to opt out of ads on the Nexus, because a lot of their income comes from ads.

That would make more sense if Google actually had unblockable ads anywhere in their devices. I have both a Galaxy Nexus and Nexus 7, and neither has ads anywhere outside of individual apps.

And honestly, you don't sound as if you really know what you're talking about, since it's trivial to root Nexus devices and subsequently install ad-blockers across all applications. The same can't be said for all of Amazon's devices.

Re:Except that...

[Overzeetop]

You don't use search engines much do you. Those results are ad-driven, and include ad content, even if it's not a glitzy flash animation.

Re:Except that...

[MacGyver2210]

it's trivial to root Nexus devices and subsequently install ad-blockers across all applications. The same can't be said for all of Amazon's devices

Yes it can. Just to prove it, here goes: "It is trivial to root Amazon devices". I have rooted nearly every kindle since the first, and never once did it give me any significant trouble(onoes, folder access permissions, PH34R!). Most of them I could do with a clever file copied over to book storage, or using a specialized app/bin file combo on the newer ones(BurritoRoot/FireFireFire FTFW).

There is simply no reason to pay Amazon or complain about these ads, because an ad-free device with even more capabilities than it ships with is inevitably only a google search or two and about an hour of your time away. It may not be available the day the new product drops, but it always comes along.

Re:Except that...

[admdrew]

a lot of their income comes from ads.

The vast majority of their income comes from advertising.

No one will care

[hawguy]

None of the target audience for this device will care (or notice). Sure, there are plenty of geeks that will buy the device and root it and get rid of the ads, but nearly all of the people who buy an Amazon branded tablet are fine with Amazon ads and being locked to the Amazon ecosystem. Most people just want a device that works, they don't care how "open" it is, whether it's FOSS compliant, or whether or not it shows them an ad.

Re:No one will care

[nurb432]

I agree few will care ( or understand ) about being 'open', but you are mistaken about those that don't want an advertisement in their face every-time they turn the thing on. Many are also not thrilled about being locked into one of the 2 main ecosystems. "why cant i buy a book from B&N on my kindle"? ( yes i know you can with some effort but the average guy wants it to 'just work'.. )

Re:No one will care

[jedidiah]

> None of the target audience for this device will care

Plenty of people care about force fed ads.

Some people will even pay to avoid them or just buy someone else's product.

This isn't about Free Software religion. This is a hardware vendor blatantly abusing the customer. In an era where technology is allowing us to filter out or avoid ads entirely, it's a pretty stupid move.

Re:No one will care

[hawguy]

> None of the target audience for this device will care

Plenty of people care about force fed ads.

Some people will even pay to avoid them or just buy someone else's product.

This isn't about Free Software religion. This is a hardware vendor blatantly abusing the customer. In an era where technology is allowing us to filter out or avoid ads entirely, it's a pretty stupid move.

Amazon is selling the hardware below their cost, in part because of the ads. How is that abusing the consumer? It's not like it's the first product in the world that's subsidized by ads, but in this case it's a luxury product that's easy to opt out of. It's much harder to opt out of things like buses and bus shelters covered by ads

Oh, and they offer a 30 day return guarantee for the device - if you turn it on and feel abused by the ads, you can box it up and return it for a full refund.

I think you're misreading their target market - they aren't targeting the sophisticated user that's uses (or has even heard of) ad blocking software, they are targeting the rest of the market (the users that don't read Slashdot), where users aren't so offended by ads. The more sophisticated user probably isn't going to buy a Kindle, or if they do, they are just going to run CM on it (and will enjoy the ad subsidized price without actually having to view the ads, so everyone wins -- those that don't care about ads will see them, and those that care enough to block them can do so).

Why do you still keep coming to Slashdot since ads are prominently featured on the site (and not just a "lock screen" that's only active when you're not using the site)? You're forced to use blocking technology to block the ads if you don't want to see them. From your post, you sound like one of the many people that care about being force fed ads, yet you continue to patronize a website that force feeds ads to you (even more obtrusively than the Kindle).

Re:No one will care

[0111 1110]

I've never seen ads on Slashdot which is why I find that ad-free checkbox to be amusing.

Industrial espionage is against the law. Neither iSuppli nor the Christian Science Monitor have any idea what Amazon's cost is. There is no way that Amazon is selling them below cost. The actual cost is probably less than $100. No matter what tech product is released there are always some gullible people who feel the need to believe that their money is not going toward obscene corporate profits. That they are paying less than it cost to make the device.

Will?

[nurb432]

You must be both blind and deaf. Ads took over long ago both for visual and audio media. ( and theirs, even some of your clothing is most likely a walking ad.. )

Its disgusting too.

Re:Will?

[NixieBunny]

I don't watch TV, and I use AdBlock Plus on my computer. So in a sense I am blind.

Re:Will?

[fm6]

ven some of your clothing is most likely a walking ad..

You're referring to the logos on brand-name clothing? That's not an ad, that's part of the product. People want to display these logos, so people will know how cool they are.

In China, where logos used without authorization are the norm, you'll often see clothes displaying multiple logos from competing companies.

Re:Will?

[NixieBunny]

I cringe when I see those shirts that advertise themselves. I only advertise robot teams, bands I love and pirate radio stations on the shirts that I wear.

Re:Will?

[nurb432]

Not all people do. I wore 'name brand' for a while, and i removed the logo as i refuse to be a walking billboard.

My dad used to demand the dealer take his logo off the car when he would buy a new car. Same reason. ( and when we had a body shop and could repair the damage, sometimes even the manufactures logo came off.

Re:Will?

[nurb432]

Do you ever leave your mothers basement? Do you buy your own food? Do you buy clothes? Do you walk down the street all? Do you drive? I could go on and on... Unless you are independently wealthy and never leave your house, *everywhere* you turn, there is an ad in your face.

I agree many times its subtle like the logo on a car or a small 'on sale' sticker on the grocery shelf, but its still there and always chewing away at your subconscious

Re:Will?

[fm6]

I'll bet your dad got a lot of funny looks. I applaud his desire not to be a shill, but his efforts are futile on two grounds. First, his attitude is looked down upon by most people. Second, part of a car's branding is its distinctive outline, which can't be removed.

Re:Will?

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes but let's not pretend here: the vast majority of advertising the average person consumes is through TV and web pages. Sure there are billboards and logos, and no one can ever get away from all ads. However, removing the majority can have an... enlightening ...affect.

Re:Will?

[jedidiah]

As long as you are in control of the technology, you can skip or strip the ads.

Such devices have been available for TV for quite awhile now.

Re:Will?

[sconeu]

I think California doesn't let dealers do this. If I bought a car from a dealer who did this, I'd insist they remove it. If they say no, my next question would be, "OK, how much are you paying me to advertise your dealership?"

Re:Will?

[lightknight]

Indeed. The logos / emblems that some clothes manufacturers put on their products are borderline deal breakers.

Why? Here's an example: La Coste, the alligator shirt people, typically have a sewn on emblem. And the emblem's stitching irritates / rubs against my skin on a hot, sweaty day. I had a green polo from them a few years ago that, combined with a lack of fabric softener, made it an almost unbearable hell to wear. It's also the reason I avoid clothing these days from them.

Re:Will?

[NixieBunny]

The article is about ads on screens. I'm talking about ads on screens.

Re:Will?

[PhunkySchtuff]

It's not that uncommon to debadge a car. Modern cars make it even easier as most, if not all, of the badging is held on with double-sided tape, so with a bit of heat and some dental floss, you can remove the badges without leaving any marks, and there are no holes in the body where the badge was attached.

I also know many people who change, or cover up, the dealership's number plate holders that have their logo or web address on them.

Re:Will?

[fm6]

My dealer put on a cheap license plate frame. I simply left it off when I screwed on the license plates. Eventually I suppose a mechanic will put his frame on when I leave the car for repairs. I probably won't bother to remove it. I prefer to avoid carrying advertisements (I'll never wear a T shirt that advertises a product I didn't help create) but I'm not a fanatic about it.

Re:Will?

[PhunkySchtuff]

My dealer put on a good number plate frame, but it had the dealer's web address on the bottom of it. Some masking tape and black paint later, and I had a great number plate frame, with no advertising on it.

Re:Will?

[fm6]

Why do you need a frame at all? It's not like people stand around and say, "Ooh, that's a really nice license plate!"

Re:Will?

[DinDaddy]

It's interesting, these "metallic" dealer logos on cars thing seems to be common most places in the country, but it is virtually absent in southern California. The most they can get away with here is putting a dealer plate frame, and most people swap those out in short order. I always wondered at that as LA etc. are pretty far from being ad media free in any other way.

In fact they are hyper brand aware as near as I can tell.

Re:Will?

[Anonymous Coward]

Additionally I don't listen to the radio. I am deaf.

Re:Will?

[russotto]

( and theirs, even some of your clothing is most likely a walking ad.. )

You remind me of one crazy anachronistic hippie I once ran into in Atlanta. He confronts me over the T-shirt I was wearing, which had a company logo emblazoned upon it. He starts yelling about how they should pay ME to wear the shirt. Well, as it happens, they had; the shirt was provided by a company which sponsored the in-line skating team I was on, and I told him so. He didn't quite know how to answer that, so I left while he was stammering.

Re:Will?

[PhunkySchtuff]

Well, you don't. But, if you get a nice one for free, why not use it. After debadging it of course.

Re:Will?

[Anonymous Coward]

You're referring to the logos on brand-name clothing? That's not an ad, that's part of the product. People want to display these logos, so people will know how cool they are.

You are so incredibly naive. These things are not mutually exclusive.

Re:Will?

[fm6]

My mother had a picture of what looked to be some kind of Catholic saint. Don't know why it appealed to her, especially since the lady was wearing a crucifix, which offended my mother's Jewish sensibilities. So she put a bit of tape over the crucifix. Which, of course, only called attention to it.

Nook touch FTW

[Intrepid imaginaut]

All I want a tablet to do is read books on, which means e-ink. The winner in terms of form factor is the Nook touch, hands down. Its pretty hard to improve on perfection, although it could do with a little more contrast.

Re:Nook touch FTW

[Isaac-1]

Look at the new Kindle Paperwhite introduced with the new Fire, but not getting any press

Re:Nook touch FTW

[nurb432]

After they screwed with my firmware and removed features after purchase, screw them and their NT.

Re:Nook touch FTW

[SuperKendall]

I totally agree, the Kindle Paperwhite looks hands-down to be the best e-Ink reading solution at the moment. As long as you are OK using Kindle to buy books, it looks like a great device and not too expensive either (even without ads).

Re:Nook touch FTW

[nurb432]

It tells you what they are selling more of, and which has the bigger profit margin. I am sure they make more $ off movie rentals/purchases than an overpriced e-book.

I also prefer ink for *reading* but i am not confident we will have ink readers available from amazon or B&N in another 5 years and will have to stick with cheaper generic brands.

But hopefully the one i have now will last a while. Since there is no light or LCD to go out, it might.

Re:Nook touch FTW

[Cinder6]

And even if the light in your eInk reader does go out, you can still use it just fine. It's not necessary to use it.

Re:Nook touch FTW

[Cinder6]

Agreed. B&N has more attractive and better-made hardware, but the reading experience is lesser than Amazon's. The Paperwhite may dethrone B&N, though, as it has a significantly higher resolution (212 ppi vs 167 ppi).

Re:Nook touch FTW

[fm6]

If you only want to read ebooks, then yeah, a simple e-ink reader (especially one with such a dense dot matrix) is the way to go. Alas, there are issues with the name!

But we're talking about lock screen ads, and this thing doesn't even have a lock screen.

Re:Nook touch FTW

[cpu6502]

>>>The winner in terms of form factor is the Nook touch, hands down.

Too bad it doesn't come with my favorite magazine Fantasy & Science Fiction. That's only available in print format ($36) or on amazon kindle ($12).

Re:Nook touch FTW

[nurb432]

What light? There isn't one in a true e-ink device.

Re:Nook touch FTW

[rthille]

Yes there is. Do try to keep up.

Re:Nook touch FTW

[Cinder6]

What light? There isn't one in a true e-ink device.

Kindle Paperwhite with built-in light
Nook Simple Touch with GlowLight

Re:Nook touch FTW

[nurb432]

No, there isn't a *true* lighted e-ink. I realize that both amazon and B&N have added lights to theirs, but they are no longer true e-ink in my book and some bastardized 1/2 breed abomination.

Re:Nook touch FTW

[nurb432]

As i told the guy before you:

No, there isn't a *true* lighted e-ink. I realize that both amazon and B&N have added lights to theirs, but they are no longer true e-ink in my book and some bastardized 1/2 breed abomination.

Re:Nook touch FTW

[Intrepid imaginaut]

The Nook has a lock screen. I hacked mine to show the Cthulhu gateway symbol. :D

Re:Nook touch FTW

[Cinder6]

Do you have any justification for this viewpoint? Because--and I mean no offense--it's coming off as some kind of crazy and irrational resistance against progress. I assume you know it's not backlit, but rather side-lit, meaning the effect the light has on your eyes should be about the same as light reflecting off a real piece of paper (or a so-called "true" e-ink reader).

For myself, I can't stand to read an ereader without a light anymore. I bought the Nook when their lighted solution came out, and I preordered a Paperwhite because it looks far superior to B&N's offering.

Re:Nook touch FTW

[Overzeetop]

No, it's exactly lighted e-ink. It is not self-luminescent e-ink, but if it were that would defeat the purpose of e-ink being a reflective surface and easy-to-read. The light is even better than an external light because it has been engineered to provide even lighting, which is almost impossible to get with external lighting solutions.

Re:Nook touch FTW

[mark-t]

Eink is fine for books that you are reading for enjoyment. For reference works where you might need to flip pages quickly, perhaps searching visually for a diagram that you know is on one of the pages near the middle, for example, but not recalling exactly which one, and where you could probably find the necessary page in about 5 seconds with a physical book, eink screen update times are simply *TOO SLOW* to replace either having a physical book in its stead, or else an electronic device that has video-capable refresh speeds.

Re:Nook touch FTW

[nurb432]

The fact its side lit via a 'light pipe' is exactly why I'm apposed to it. It should be lit from above from a real light source, and i don't want yet another layer between my eyes and the 'ink'.

While i do fully admit i haven't seen a new kindle yet ( who has? ) and im going off the drawings of their solution, i can see a difference in the nook touch with and without and i'm not pleased with the glow worm version.

Re:Nook touch FTW

[shutdown -p now]

eInk is a reflective screen technology that operates tiny physical black and white particles to produce image. Both Nook GlowLight and Kindle Paperwhite do just that, so yes, they are true eInk devices.

And the way those things are lit is actually superior to an external light source, because it's much better at providing even lighting. The only thing better than that is reading in scattered light outdoors.

Re:Nook touch FTW

[Anonymous Coward]

Sorry we don't know your bastardized 1/2 breed definitions.

Re:Nook touch FTW

[nurb432]

They stopped being "true" in my book when they were degraded with the internal light source mechanics.

But then again, i'm repeating myself, for a bunch of idiots on Slashdot.. I think ill quit.

Re:Nook touch FTW

[Anonymous Coward]

You quitting Slashdot would be quite welcome, yes.

Re:Nook touch FTW

[Anonymous Coward]

that's why I bought the Onyx Boox M92 ebook reader.
http://www.onyx-boox.com/onyx-boox-m92

Re:Nook touch FTW

[Cinder6]

There's definitely a hit on contrast with the Nook. For what it's worth, I believe the Engadget hands-on says that, despite there being another layer, contrast does look a bit improved over the previous-generation Kindles. It looks real nice in the videos I've seen, but obviously that's not a great benchmark.

Re:Nook touch FTW

[Havenwar]

I'm sure it will work with calibre just as well as previous incarnations - I've had a kindle for a long time and haven't "bought" a single book for it.

Re:Nook touch FTW

[Havenwar]

I understand what you mean, and in part I agree. The problem here is that you're using the wrong term. An e-ink device by definition is ANY device with an e-ink screen, regardless of use, form factor, lighting. The pebble watch is an e-ink device, for instance, and nobody is saying that's for reading books on.

There isn't really a word for the kind of "pure" device you're talking about, but maybe "ebook reader" would be the closest.

Don't be surprised when people disagree when you're not using the same terminology as the rest of the world.

Re:Nook touch FTW

[Havenwar]

Sure it does - they just call it a "screen saver" on the kindle e-ink devices.

Re:Nook touch FTW

[nurb432]

Thanks for understanding, seems few others have been able to.

Seems for the most part around here just because its 'new' makes it better, regardless if its truly improved or not.

Re:Nook touch FTW

[Havenwar]

Yeah, I'm skeptical myself against the built in light, I'd rather have the extra battery time, since I frequently stay away from electrical outlets for a long time, and a small camping light no doubt is more efficient than most built in solutions... and if the battery runs out in the external light, I can still read as long as its light out, or by an open flame.

That being said, I'm still curious to try the paperwhite some day, see how it measures up. Even if I never use the backlight the increased resolution might be nice.

Re:Nook touch FTW

[Disfnord]

Wow, talk about your moving goal-posts. No true Scotsman would disagree with me, right?

Re:Nook touch FTW

[Anonymous Coward]

You know you can turn the light off, and it becomes just like the older ones with no light, right? You really seem like an asperger desperately trying to avoid admitting you were wrong.

Re:Nook touch FTW

[Anonymous Coward]

Turn sidelight off. Is it an e-ink reader now?

Re:Nook touch FTW

[admdrew]

( who has? )

Engadget has. This specific method of lighting is new to e-readers, so I'm pretty excited to check one out in person.

Re:Nook touch FTW

[admdrew]

Well, he said "no longer ... in my book". He's just opposed to device-lighting; the Paperwhite is still a *true* e-ink device, because it uses e-ink.

Re:Nook touch FTW

[admdrew]

Sorry, *you* said.

Re:Nook touch FTW

[admdrew]

This. I do all of my personal reading on Kindle, but even the gargantuan Kindle DX just doesn't feel right when using technical manuals and other documents like that.

Re:Nook touch FTW

[nurb432]

*IF* it pans out as usable ill change my opinion ( i am reasonable after all when shown actual evidence ) but i wont hold my breath on it. But, i guess since it is different than the Nook tech, it might be ok this time.

I agree on the 'reviews' looking fine, but you can never really know until you see it live in the store. Too bad they cant turn out the lights in the store for you too :)

If it does turn out to be ok, i wonder if they are 'hackable' enough to get ePubs native on there.

Re:Nook touch FTW

[Anonymous Coward]

That's been one thing that's stopped me from getting an e-reader (well, one of many things). Of the handful of times I've messed with a friend's e-reader, the page turning is godawful and annoying. Slow as absolute hell, and it flashes the entire screen black in loading the next page. Just... annoying.

I don't know if there's brands of e-readers that don't invert the screen colours while loading the next page, but of the 3 different brands I've messed with, they've all done that, and all had annoying page turn times.

And the loading in general. With a book, I pick up a book, flip it open at the bookmark, and in under 2 seconds I'm reading. With an e-reader, I turn it on... wait... select the option to read (the ones I've seen open up a side-menu when you turn it on, instead of just going to the damn page)... wait... then finally read. I know it's only like... 10 seconds, but it's still irritating.

So until I have no other option, as it stands I'll stick with paper books. At least those I'm not scared to read while in the bathtub, or care if I drop on the ground or something. They tend to be pretty durable to humidity or abuse.

Re:Nook touch FTW

[anethema]

Why don't you look at the pictures? Due to the increased contrast and much higher res, even with the 'layer' (which looks to be invisible btw) the screen is about 10x nicer than the kindle before it. Very white, nice even lighting, and the light IS coming from above the e-ink, bouncing off it, and hitting your eyes, just as if you'd used a book light or sat in the sun.

I'm sure you may be able to tell the difference but even the close up pics of it off, it looks better.

Here is a side by side comparison with all lighting off in not great lighting.

http://cdn1.sbnation.com/entry_photo_images/5336415/kindle-paperwhite-vs-79-kindle-XSC_1991-rm-verge-1020_gallery_post.jpg

Much sharper, blacker blacks, whiter whites (a bit) and no blurryness from the layer above it.

I would certainly not hesitate to call it 'e-ink'.

significant nuisance

[bcrowell]

I picked up a low-end kindle at a discounted price (~$40) that I'm sure represented a loss for Amazon, and I don't buy any DRM'd books for it, so they're not recouping that loss from me. This gives me a gratifying feeling that I've successfully fought back against "the Man." I can read Jane Austen novels while traveling and not run out of reading material.

But the ads really are creepy and a nuisance. Every time you stop reading for a while, an ad comes up. To get past the ad, you have to click a button. Then it talks to your wifi network and pops up the details of the ad. Then you can finally click again to get back to reading Pride and Prejudice.

I accepted the ads as a conscious part of my plot to screw Amazon financially and get a useful toy for myself, which I use only while traveling. But would I pay hundreds of dollars for a device that pulled this kind of crap, if I was going to use the device a lot? No. Way. In. Hell.

We're really headed for a nasty, dystopian future with ebooks.

Re:significant nuisance

[Cinder6]

But the ads really are creepy and a nuisance. Every time you stop reading for a while, an ad comes up. To get past the ad, you have to click a button. Then it talks to your wifi network and pops up the details of the ad. Then you can finally click again to get back to reading Pride and Prejudice.

I have a Kindle Touch, and have never experienced this. When you put it to sleep, it shows an ad, yes, but I've never had to click through it or read the ad. All I have to do is wake it and go back to reading. Maybe there's been a new (and obnoxious) update that changes this behavior--or maybe it's an issue with the cheapest Kindle (which I did briefly own, but don't remember having this problem).

Re:significant nuisance

[houghi]

So you get ads to see. Seems that you have not really successfully fought back against "the Man".

Re:significant nuisance

[Raistlin77]

I picked up a low-end kindle at a discounted price (~$40) that I'm sure represented a loss for Amazon, and I don't buy any DRM'd books for it, so they're not recouping that loss from me. This gives me a gratifying feeling that I've successfully fought back against "the Man."

You lost as soon as you bought the Kindle. You helped them recover some of the cost of manufacture instead of letting them lose it all on an unsold device.

The only way to fight "the Man" is to not buy the man's garbage and get other people to do the same.

Re:significant nuisance

[bazorg]

Then it talks to your wifi network and pops up the details of the ad.

what if you don't have internet access or some sort of proxy has restricted access to their ad server?

Re:significant nuisance

[Havenwar]

Dystopian future? Doesn't sound like one to me - there's no mention of ads on the paperwhite, which is the better option for e-books anyway. The fire is not primarily an ebook device, it's a media device, so ads seem quite fitting.

Re:significant nuisance

[excelsior_gr]

We're really headed for a nasty, dystopian future with ebooks.

So why do you buy them? Or their stupid readers? Are you allergic to paper or something?

Re:significant nuisance

[bcrowell]

what if you don't have internet access or some sort of proxy has restricted access to their ad server?

Then it fails to fetch the details (second page of the ad), but you still have to go through the annoying process.

It does show the first page of the ad even when you're out of wifi contact, from which I infer that it caches them in memory.

Re:significant nuisance

[Anonymous Coward]

This OP is simply mistaken. The ads serve as a screen saver in the ad-supported Kindles, and are replaced by Amazon-chosen pretty photographs and images in the non ad-supported Kindles if you "buy-out" of them. One never has to read the ad, or click a button to go through the details of the ad.

When the screen times out and goes to sleep, one simply has to wake up the Kindle, and you're back where you were, an identical experience to the non ad-supported Kindle when it goes to sleep. The ads are all pretty lame, mostly for Amazon promotions, soaps, clothings, things like that. But notably, if you don't connect to a WiFi network for a few days, it can tell the ads are out of date, and will replace them all with an image of a bookshelf, saying "Please connect to the internet". Not very pushy, if you ask me. And at this point, the only difference between the two types of Kindles are what image shows up as a screensaver. I've been happily using my Kindle like this for a year or so, and have never read an ad. (Though I've probably been subconsciously influenced. I love Amazon prime.)

Re:significant nuisance

[bcrowell]

So why do you buy them? Or their stupid readers? Are you allergic to paper or something?

Please read my post more carefully.

Re:significant nuisance

[tgibbs]

I've never experienced this, either.

Re:significant nuisance

[excelsior_gr]

I read your post well enough the first time, and I think it is overrated. You did buy the device, even if you assume that Amazon was at a loss, thus giving the whole business model credit. So don't complain about any dystopian futures when you are part of the mob that leads us there.

Re:significant nuisance

[Anonymous Coward]

Your not really screwing Amazon. You paid for the device, they probably write it off as advertising expense. You paid them $40.00 to put ads in your face. Plain and simple. The fact that you notice the ads and explicitly know how to go though the motions to get back to reading means your paying attention to the ads. To me, Amazon is getting their money's worth. The ironic part about your post is that you said you don't buy DRM'd books. So you really just paid 40$ to look at ads basically. ROFL.

I think it's genius.

That explains "Kindle Fire Sold Out Forever"

[Anonymous Coward]

A headline that was reminiscent of the hand-scrawled sign "The Red-Headed League is Dissolved" in the Sherlock Holmes story.

Interesting, similar with iPad

[SuperKendall]

While they are still offering Prime on iPads, the price as you say with the Nexus is somewhat above retail. I don't recall it being like that before.

DOA`

[onyxruby]

Dead on arrival, I'm sorry, but no amount of technical wizardy, integration, cloud storage or other such thing can get past thing single issue. This is a deal breaker that simply can't be overcome. Sorry Amazon, I like you for so many other things.

Re:DOA`

[admdrew]

Did you receive a DOA device or something? My first Kindle (the 2nd gen one, I believe) started dying/crashing and stopped working entirely within a few weeks of getting it. I called Amazon to ask what was going on, and without asking any questions the rep immediately suggested a replacement, overnighted a new Kindle to me, which included a return shipping label for the bad one, and no charge for anything. I was seriously without a Kindle for maybe 22 hours.

That's also not unique; I've had two situations where I purchased the "wrong" music from Amazon (wrong versions), and after simple explanation emails, they gave me credit to buy the songs I originally intended on getting. Independent of this whole forced-advertising thing, I can say I've been exceptionally happy with Amazon's customer service.

My opinion of e-books are reinforced

[kheldan]

I'll continue to stick to printed books, thank you very much. They can't edit them, delete them, or plaster ads all over them once I own them, can they?

Re:My opinion of e-books are reinforced

[nurb432]

No, but they can plaster ads in them before you buy them. Ever read a magazine?

Re:My opinion of e-books are reinforced

[kheldan]

I'm not talking about periodicals.

Re:My opinion of e-books are reinforced

[nurb432]

since we are talking fires, you want to. That is one of their main selling points, color for magazines and comix.

For "regular" books, e-ink is more than fine and for me, preferred. On ink currently you can still easily opt out of ads ( either by ponying up the extra $ or choosing a different vendor )

Re:My opinion of e-books are reinforced

[Anonymous Coward]

Or you could just buy one of many e-readers that don't have cell radios and thus cannot be used against your interests.

Re:My opinion of e-books are reinforced

[mrmeval]

No but I have a few with the thick cardboard cigarette and other ads still in them. Surprisingly that increases their value now. There are also the pulp novellas that have the trashy ads in the back. I'm not sure if it was cost or advertisers felt it was worthless which stopped those.

Tobacciana
http://wellmedicated.com/lists/40-gorgeous-vintage-tobacco-advertisements/

Nah, it's not as pretty as it looks. Take a smokers shirt and soak it in a sink and watch the water change color. I quit smoking and am glad of it.

Re:My opinion of e-books are reinforced

[Clsid]

eReaders are very convenient when you have to either travel or move to another place. I have made a point of replacing my whole library with digital stuff. I had to move from the US to South America and by far the most annoying thing to move were all the books. After becoming a B&N Nook junkie, I can honestly say that books in printed form are a waste of space and resources in every sense. And you can skip the whole ads debacle by using an Apple or a Barnes and Noble device.

Re:My opinion of e-books are reinforced

[jedidiah]

Or you could just buy any number of other mobile devices that don't subject you to this nonsense involuntarily.

Re:My opinion of e-books are reinforced

[Zerth]

I have some scifi books from the 50s that have cardboard inserts with cigarette ads. I wonder why books stopped having advertisements for other products in them.

And, of course, most books still have advertisements for other books on the inside and back cover.

Re:My opinion of e-books are reinforced

[kheldan]

Yes, but they're easily ignored and relatively unobtrusive, and I can't remember ever buying a hardcover that had the sorts of ads you're referring to, only paperbacks.

Re:My opinion of e-books are reinforced

[kheldan]

Or I could skip the whole thing and continue to buy books printed on paper. :-)

Re:My opinion of e-books are reinforced

[kheldan]

..waste of space and resources

I suppose that's true if you're one of those people who get rid of books once they're done reading them, as opposed to people like me who keep them and re-read them at later dates. I consider the books I own to be a form of wealth, and they're more valuable to me the more often I read them. If someone offered to replace all of them with e-books for free and give me a reader for free to boot I'd say no.

Re:My opinion of e-books are reinforced

[Provocateur]

You run the risk of them coming to you in person. Excuse me, but would you be interested in blah-blah-blah? They will come knocking on your door, swinging under your garage door before it shuts completely, heck even while you're singing in the shower. Then be careful of the little guys that follow them, that speak a lot in a drone, these are the fine print mouthpieces that speak legalese. Are you sure you want to *opt out*?

Re:My opinion of e-books are reinforced

[russotto]

I suppose that's true if you're one of those people who get rid of books once they're done reading them, as opposed to people like me who keep them and re-read them at later dates. I consider the books I own to be a form of wealth, and they're more valuable to me the more often I read them. If someone offered to replace all of them with e-books for free and give me a reader for free to boot I'd say no.

Why does it matter that you have the physical books? I have so many that space for storing them is a problem, so I try to stick to ebooks nowadays.

DRM free only, of course.

Re:My opinion of e-books are reinforced

[afgam28]

No, but they can plaster ads in them before you buy them. Ever read a magazine?

I can imagine it now. A horde of basement-dwelling Slashdotters find their way out into the real world. Blinded by the sunlight, they stumble upon a newsstand, selling magazines and newspapers. Then they find out that the magazines contain ads - the very magazines that they paid for! Moral panic ensues. That is, until the confused newsstand owner collects another $15 from each of the Slashdotters. Then everyone is happy again.

Let's hope that when they find their way back to their basements, they don't switch on their mom's cable TV!

Re:My opinion of e-books are reinforced

[Anonymous Coward]

I can honestly say that books in printed form are a waste of space and resources in every sense.

...other than the 90% of books that only exist in printed form.

Of the last ten books I have read, only one has a digital edition.

Re:My opinion of e-books are reinforced

[kheldan]

Why does it matter to you that I like and prefer them? Who are you trying to convince here? Or are you trying to justify your own actions?

Re:My opinion of e-books are reinforced

[Havenwar]

Actually it's true regardless. Even if I re-read a book, it's a waste of space compared to the space the same information occupied on my kindle. I've got a library in my pocket. If I had a house to put those real world books in, that would be an excessive amount of resources needed to store information, not to mention the excessive amount of resources needed to make all those PAPER books in the first place. I don't know if you're familiar with the concept of sustainability, but in books versus ebooks, ebooks win as the more environmentally friendly, whether you read them once or a million times.

Oh, and if you ever buy new books, or if you move, you have to take into account how much more resources that wastes with regular books compared to e-books.

I mean, I'm a reader, have been all my life. I love real books, the smell of them, the feel of them... But let's not be idiots about it - it's an emotional attachment, not a rational one. I gave my library up in favour of one that's better for the environment, more convenient, and still contains exactly the same information and pretty much the same experience once you get over that emotional "newness". Some people can't deal with that. Some people still can't handle computers, even, or cell phones - they are too emotionally invested in how things used to be... but rationally, this is a step forward in every way.

So please, don't make yourself look silly by trying to argue that it is anything but emotional.

Re:My opinion of e-books are reinforced

[assertation]

+1

I feel 100% the same. I wish I could mod your post up even more.

Re:My opinion of e-books are reinforced

[kheldan]

So please, don't make yourself look silly by trying to argue that it is anything but emotional.

Really? Seriously? That's where you decide to go with this? Straight to being insulting?
Tell you what: Let's try a little experiment. Take your e-book reader, and take a printed book. Hold them both by the corner, three feet above a hard surface. Drop them both. How's your e-book reader now? Damaged? Broken? Unusable? How's the book? Maybe you dented the corner a little.
Now how about this: Oops! You forgot to plug your e-book reader in to recharge it. Now you can't read anything! The book, on the other hand? All you need is light. You could read by candlelight if necessary.
Oh no, your e-book reader won't boot! No reading for you until it's repaired. The book? Even damaged, you can still read it. Oh no, your e-book reader is out of warranty, and repairing it costs more than replacing it, so you have to replace it. There goes $100. The book? Somehow it got destroyed, you have to replace it. We'll assume it's still in print, or a used bookstore has a copy to sell, and it's a paperback. Maybe you spend $20.
You may argue that e-books are more durable because they're digital. There isn't a single form of digital storage media that can't fail, and when they do you're usually faced with 100% unrecoverability: Flash memory can fail. Hard disks can fail. Floppy disks (which of course nobody uses anymore) failed all the time. CDROMs and DVDs have a limited lifespan, can be scratched so bad they're unusable, can be cracked and broken, or eventually just degrade to the point of being unreadable (even pressed CDs/DVDs). I suppose if you keep everything on a RAID-5 array of hard disks you'll have a better chance, but how many people do that? Paper tape? Magnetic tape? I'll include those just to be thorough, but I don't think I need to comment on them. Storage in "the cloud"? The company gets hacked, the company fucks up, the company goes out of business, or (my favorite) someone decides there's a copyright issue and your e-books get yanked, and you have no e-books anymore. Printed books are the original write-once-read-many device.

You speak of sustainability. I have books I've owned my entire life, and they're still usable, and occasionally I still read them. They use no more resources and still deliver content to me. I don't live in Scandanavia and I don't need to worry about living in a space the size of a closet, so storage space is my problem and it's a problem I'll gladly handle, and I have the space for my meager collection of books.

Now, finally: Fuck you and your insulting attitude. You speak to me as if I'm some doddering old fool struggling along with my walker, yelling at neighborhood kids to "get off my lawn", and scoffing at all the "newfangled technology you kids use these days", then proceeding to tell stories to unwilling ears about the "good old days", and how I walked uphill both directions back and forth to school everyday in the snow or somesuch. You make assumptions that I don't like and can't handle technology and that I reject it. Bullshit, sir, bullshit. I live and have always lived a technological lifestyle; I work in electronics, I've written software in multiple programming languages over the years, and have owned most of the tech that you imply I can't handle the "newness" of. To all this, again, I say "fuck you", and furthermore "sideways with a rusty chainsaw, you fuckin' fuck, you".

Just because something is new doesn't make it better. E-books and their associated readers may be wonderful for newpapers and magazines, and personally I think they're ideally suited for things like textbooks, especially considering that wirelessly connected e-book readers could have updates to textbooks pushed to them at will. You speak of sustainability? How about how exhorbitantly expensive textbooks are, and how that expense becomes wasted money because someone changed one paragraph? I do not, however, hold the opini

Re:My opinion of e-books are reinforced

[rally2xs]

No matter what electronic gizmo decides to turn on for the last time, the physical books I have on my bookshelves will still be available to me..

Re:My opinion of e-books are reinforced

[Havenwar]

A lot of people have called me silly over the years, over various things. I don't think I've ever taken it as an insult. I'm sorry you did, really. I should have phrased that differently.

I am however highly amused that you took it personally when I said that "some people" can't handle change. I didn't say YOU, I said some people have issues with that. I know I did, grumbled quite a bit when I first had to give up my library for practical reasons and switch to ebooks. But you clearly have an axe to grind here, and want to assume malice, so I'll take full blame for it - I'm very sorry that I insulted you and your technological acumen. My apologies.

As for the rest - bullcrap.
No really, your books might have lasted x number of years, but they still came with a sustainability cost to print. The ebooks are at a near-zero to zero such cost, and thus win hands down whether you count over 50 years or 5000. Few people have their library only on their kindle or ebook reader, as far as I know you can even download purchased books again from amazon, but I might be mistaken because I sideload all my books and thus have it on two different storage medium, plus a backup, which makes them about as safe as can be. And if they were to disappear, that's okay, because digital books don't really go out of print. Ever. So I can get them back. And hey, even if I decide to re-format my kindle and buy every book again every week, the environmental impact of that would be far less than your library.

Heating your large house, on the other hand, is a sustainability impact, regardless of where you live and whether you have to be space-conscious. So you can't argue that. Or I guess you can, but if you want to argue against simple facts then I really don't have the time for that. Let's see, what other arguments did you have... Ah yes, my kindle might break! True. It might. I'm quite comfortable with spending another hundred bucks every four-five years or however long it'll hold out. As many books as I read and as much cheaper as they are in e-book format, I'm still saving money.

Electricity? Well, I spent a few months living on a small sailboat last year, and had no problems with my kindle. This isn't the dark ages, solar panels and mobile internet and so on means I was even surfing the web and wasting time on online forums while a few nautical miles off the coast. I love simple living, but with a battery time of a month or so, there are few situations in which I ever come close to running out of battery, even when I'm out camping or other such things. I suppose if I was planning to live for more than a month in a situation where I absolutely couldn't get my hands on any electricity.... I'd have to bring an external batterypack. It would still end up cheaper and lighter than the amount of books I'd carry to read in that time.

So, electricity, breakage, data loss, sustainability covered and your points refuted.

Now, if you still disagree with this, fine, then there's no arguing with you, and we'll have to agree to disagree. But I still argue that you just proved my point - this is entirely emotional for you. You got in a big huff over very little reason. Consider that for a while.

Re:My opinion of e-books are reinforced

[kheldan]

I get in a "big huff" because this is the internet, and expressing any opinion contrary to the mainstream on the internet these days gets you flamed to the point of being utterly charred (because there's no accountability and people will say shit they'd never say in person), so I've come to expect to have to defend myself at every turn. It's not personal.

We can agree to disagree, so long as it's not personal. You can call my reasons bullshit all you want, but they're just as valid are your reasons for not having printed books anymore, and I could sit here and refute your counterpoints, but it would be pointless; as you say, we can agree to disagree -- so long as it doesn't degenerate into some sort of 4chan-esque dominance game.

Re:My opinion of e-books are reinforced

[Havenwar]

You know, I'm quite surprised. Having had the same experience it's quite the refreshing thing when someone can calm down and drop things.

It's definitely not personal, it's more the concept of the thing I'm arguing. I'm taking a class on sustainability right now, so that angle in particular is interesting to me right now, but having gone through the same transition myself before, it's all very familiar. I didn't want to give up my books either, they've been a huge part of my life... but when you move onto a dinky little sailboat that weighs less than a tonne in itself, you don't want to bring several tonnes of books onboard. So I was pushed into it, and having made the transition I realized that while the emotional tie to books is still there... I now read more due to the portability of the device, have more use of my books because I can bring my entire library with me everywhere, and I'm paying about half as much in rent and heating and so on as I would have if I had brought my entire library in physical form, since I've cut down my living requirements with an entire room.

Your points are definitely valid in a small subsection of the userbase. Mainly those that have no electricity, or frequently spend time far away from electricity, or who are historians who gather information in the most durable form for long term storage - as in several lifetimes, not just for their own.

Outside of that there is data much more vital to most of our lives on electronics far more fragile, such as laptops of cellphones, and we manage to deal with that risk quite well, so the no-electricity/breakable argument really isn't very valid. If you follow proper backup procedures even accidentally (by having your library on your PC and copying it to you ebook reader), then I'd say the odds that you'll lose your books is pretty close to the odds that a hardcopy book gets lost, stolen, or that your house burns down with all of them, none of which are life-ending experiences for an ebook.

So I do argue that your only truly valid argument is emotional, unless you happen to fall into one of those minority usecases. For the average end user there is really no non-emotional reason to cling to books on paper, and it would be a huge relief for the environment if we stopped doing so.

Re:My opinion of e-books are reinforced

[Anonymous Coward]

If I were in the market for an e-reader, I wouldn't think twice about paying the extra for ad-free.

However, I don't believe for a second it will remain ad-free. It will for now, but I have no doubts that it won't go the direction of cable tv. Give it a few years, it will be ads always. If there's a price difference, the more expensive version will just have less ads, or ads you can click a button to skip instead of the lower priced version making it stay on the screen for 10 seconds or something. But mark my words, it will become as ad-laden as TV or any other medium capable of receiving transmissions. At least to put ads in a paper book, they'd have to break into my place and physically stamp the books.

Then

[M0j0_j0j0]

Who is going to buy that shit!!

Re:Then

[shutdown -p now]

Anyone who wants a full-sized tablet with a Full HD screen for $300?

LittleSnitch like App for tablets?

[BoRegardless]

Incoming connections we can deal with in one way or another by not responding/cancelling. I tend to be concerned with other things that leave my devices.

I'm wondering if there are equivalents to LittleSnitch to zap outgoing connections?

Re:LittleSnitch like App for tablets?

[mrmeval]

Do not buy hardware you cannot hack. If you're abused by your hardware you don't own it the people who control it own you.. I'll never touch their excrement.

Re:LittleSnitch like App for tablets?

[admdrew]

I assume that Cyanogen or something will eventually be possible to install on one of these. I would strongly consider purchasing one if that happens.

I was wondering how that data plan was so cheap

[SuperKendall]

I was wondering how Amazon could offer a data plan with the same price for a year's worth of service, that other tablet users have to pay in a month.

Well now we know. That data plan is subsidized with these ads...

I wonder if this will affect battery life at all. Ads on eInk I could see making a lot of sense because at rest they can just switch to an ad and there's no drop in battery life. But if you are going to have ads on a lockscreen, does that also mean a minimum time the lockscreen must be displayed on sleep? Will it just randomly turn on? Will it play audio too?

Re:I was wondering how that data plan was so cheap

[Clsid]

Yeah but the data plan is kind of useless really. I mean, most people have a smartphone already and you can use internet teethering and wifi on your ereader/tablet and be done with it. This reminds me of cable tv sometimes, where with some channels you are actually paying a monthly fee to watch commercials. The Google Nexus 7 is a much better tablet and I'm pretty sure they are not selling that at a loss, so I don't buy the whole Amazon's subsidize argument.

Filter or modify the ads on your wi-fi network

[crow]

Has anyone analyzed the protocol that they use for advertising? How hard would it be to use a bogus DNS and serve your own ads, or to simply block them? Could a business with free public wi-fi set it up to serve ads for their business? Can I serve up ads for rooting your Kindle on my home network for any friends that visit?

Business Opportunity.

[jcr]

I have no intention of buying a device that won't let me remove the ads, but for those who do, I think there might be a brisk business for a router that can block ad servers, along with a nice user-friendly UI to control it.

-jcr

Expect more of the same..cushy soft.

[Ostracus]

And ad-block sites like...Slashdot.

Anyway ads on toilet paper just might be worth it.

Have?

[Anonymous Coward]

Really? Hmm. I consider my life to be nearly ad-free.

OK, I take that back - it's probably not quite true, but it's certainly close to true. If by "see" you count "drove past a billboard" and the like, then yes I've probably seen ads. But I paid them no attention and couldn't even tell you what they were for, because I didn't look at them, I was watching the road. At best, I was aware "a billboard exists". I've seen those annoying dancing-people by streets holding signs for businesses, but again I've never bothered to even look at what the signs are for, so there's not even subconscious level of influence there. I've simply never looked or read them, so for all I know they were holding up a blank slate. The internet is entirely free from overt advertisements - I can't remember seeing one in many, many years. I don't own any "walking ad" clothing, and my friends and co-workers don't seem to wear that sort of thing either.

There are plenty of books, music, games, and so on that have no advertisements. Living an ad-filled life is a choice. I make the opposite choice because ads annoy me and I resent the attempts at manipulation.

Re:Have?

[Samantha Wright]

It's almost a tragedy of the commons—companies are so hell-bent on forcing advertising on consumers that an increasingly large portion of the population will go to extreme lengths to make sure that no advertising of any sort has any effect on them. If only we could take the colossal intelligence that went into developing Google's advertising infrastructure and actually grant some of it to marketers...

i hate ads

[Anonymous Coward]

this is one of the reasons i'll pay more for macs because they dont come loaded with shovelware bullshit

Readers will hate this.

[Animats]

Every time you stop reading for a while, an ad comes up. To get past the ad, you have to click a button. Then it talks to your wifi network and pops up the details of the ad. Then you can finally click again to get back to reading Pride and Prejudice.

That's totally unacceptable. It may well bomb, like binding ad cards into paperback books did in the 1970s and the 2000s.

Where does Amazon get off doing this? They're not the publisher. The device is paid for. The books are paid for.

Re:Readers will hate this.

[rsmith-mac]

Where does Amazon get off doing this? They're not the publisher. The device is paid for. The books are paid for.

The device and the books are being sold at a loss; or to put this another way, you're not the one paying for them. Amazon has discovered that consumers don't care what the catches are - in this case ads and the formation of an Amazon monopoly respectively - so long as things are cheap. In fact it will probably be the most successful Kindle yet.

Re:Readers will hate this.

[shutdown -p now]

Except it's bullshit. I've had an ad-ridden Kindle Touch, and the only two places where it shows ads is the lock screen and the book selection screen. It never shows ads when you actually read the book. If you leave it around for long enough that the device goes to sleep, then you see a lock screen with an ad. But it goes away as soon as you unlock (which you do with a physical button), and returns you straight to the book.

Re:Readers will hate this.

[martin-boundary]

What do you mean, he's not the one paying for the devices? He paid his money, and took delivery. That's all that matters in a court of law.

Your fantasy about making losses is irrelevant. If Amazon is making a loss, that's not the customers fault, it's the Amazon CEO's. And all they have to do is sell at a reasonable price. In fact, selling at a loss is dodgy, and is quite close to dumping and other monopolistic practices. And that harms customers in the long run.

There's no reason at all that people should be changing their own behaviour and expectations, just so that some multinational CEO's marketing brainfarts can be successful.

Re:Readers will hate this.

[Mitreya]

and the only two places where it shows ads is the lock screen and the book selection screen. It never shows ads when you actually read the book.

And it would never, ever, ever occur to Amazon to start showing ads IN the book once you get used to having ads on the device!

Just like the paid cable television started as ad-free (but paid) medium. Then they showed 3 minutes of ads per half hour. Now you are lucky to get 23 minutes of content per half hour (advertisement length more than doubled in the 30 years since the 70s).

Re:Readers will hate this.

[shutdown -p now]

If that happens, then we can discuss that.

So far, Amazon doesn't seem stupid to me. They retain me as a customer precisely because they provide me great value and little associated annoyance for my buck.

Suuuuuuure.

[Anonymous Coward]

"Our copyprotection is save for at least ten years". -- Some SONY-Exec without pants mooning the hackers....

I will avoid that like the plague

[Anonymous Coward]

Thought I was getting one.

Shit sandwich.

[RyuuzakiTetsuya]

That's a shit sandwich on two levels. First, they don't even give you the option of going ad free. Second, the 4g LTE HD kindle fire has that sweet deal, but it's only 250 megs a month! Every kb counts. :/

Re:Shit sandwich.

[Anonymous Coward]

*cough*sonyreader*cough*
no ads
no dataplan
no cloud crapola
no bluetooth/wifi battery drainage
it stores books in lots of formats and lets me read them.

while the kindle users will probably own a brick during an add server outage, it won't take long before they combine always on DRM with adds (if it's not already the case)

Because NO ONE has a custom rom for the kindle....

[Anonymous Coward]

I mean really........doing that will practically PUSH most users...even the technologically inept ones...into finding and using custom roms which will COMPLETELY remove ANY advertising potential in their devices.

I expect some marketing guy will be viciously fired within a year.....

You're not so blind.

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't watch TV, and I use AdBlock Plus on my computer. So in a sense I am blind.

Ah, not as blind as you think. Ever read a review of a product or buying guide? Isn't amazing how inaccurate many are? Or ever wonder why they chose those particular products, reviewed them in that particular order, reviewed only certain feature (maybe NOT the ones you're intrested in) and came to the conclusions they did?

Open a magazine or newspaper? Ads galore. Sure you may not pay attention, you think, but it's getting to your brain.

But then there's the drive - billboards, signs, shop store windows, other cars with ads all over them, trucks, and radio - if you listen to that.

I bought a book recently and the back pages were just ads for other books - O'Reilly is KING of this!

But wait! There's more!

Go to a website to buy something - even with AdBlock on - and what happens when you're shopping? "Other items you might be interested in" or "Other who bought this also bought ...." pops up.

And then there's watching movies. Product placement all over the place. At least Mike Meyers in his movies pokes fun at it - all the while still making the placement.

But if you read more now, you'll also see that there are word of mouth "ads". Even right here on Slashdot. Pick a subject, any subject like Linux distros for one and everyone will have their favorites in effect advertising it. Sure, it's not costing you money, but the thing is it's getting the name out their. I would never have heard or even considered Ubuntu if it weren't for Slashdot.

Re:You're not so blind.

[Anonymous Coward]

Nope, don't do those things , I can review my own... everything, by my own criteria, don't allow cookies, use ghostery, manually allow javascript and have a large number of greasemonkey scripts turning off all the shit and in mmany cases returning functionality the was removed at in others adding functionality thats intentionally missing.

"I would never have heard or even considered Ubuntu if it weren't for Slashdot." Now thats just crewl, I'm sure they didn't mean to push that steaming pile.

Re:You're not so blind.

[NixieBunny]

I'm highly aware of when I'm being lied to by shills for products, as they tend to use the same wording as the professional marketers.
The other, more subtle stuff, is harder to turn off. But it can be done to some extent. I just took the radio out of my car and replaced it with a bare amplifier for my music player.
Google is the biggest problem - it used to provide information, but now it offers up all sorts of web pages that are selling something (or just want me to click to improve their income).

Re:You're not so blind.

[lightknight]

Indeed. Shills tend to use vague wording that plays up the awesomeness of the product while not answering any of the important deal or no deal questions that determine whether it's worth buying the product. Why? Because they don't use the product, so they aren't aware of its faults.

I guess since I'm a tech, I tend to weigh the negative reviews more highly than the positive ones. Reviewers are more likely to express product defects in a customer review, which normally are suppressed by the manufacturer / marketing. As such, 10 positive reviews roughly weigh one negative review, and I don't count the 'fail-negative' reviews that some shills put up to try and steer things ("It is an okay product, I wish it could slice bread, but it's still worth buying!").

Screwing themselves

[Charliemopps]

I paid for the version without ads. In the kindle hacking community, there was a definite aversion to helping people circumvent the ads. If you don't want the ads, but a kindle without ads they'd say. Now however, I'm willing to bet that very same hacking community will consider it their duty to help people remove the ads. Amazons screwing themselves with this move.

Re:Screwing themselves

[Waccoon]

OtherOS, anyone?

Re:Screwing themselves

[couchslug]

Are any existing firewall apps suitable to the task?

I don't have a Kindle so I can't personally experiment.

Old fires too?

[nurb432]

Will they be getting a firmware update that includes the ads?

Advertisers agree to honor DNT

[Elwood P Dowd]

Advertisers agree to honor DNT only from browsers that display the setting behind a door labelled "beware leopard".

It's bullshit anyway - any standard based on advertisers behaving ethically is a nonstarter. Apple's default no-third-party cookies seems worthwhile, if circumventable. Why not do more of that? If there are Moz people working on the DNT standard, I feel like they are being suckered.

If it's google's display advertising business you're concerned with, I don't really understand your concerns. If it's any of the many less scrupulous parties that you are concerned with, they're just going to ignore DNT.

Reminds Me Of The Free PC Era

[rsmith-mac]

For better or worse this reminds me of the "free" PC era.

For you youngins that weren't around at the time, in the late 90s at the tail-end of the dot-com boom, companies would offer PCs for free in exchange for the ability to track your usage of the PC, track your buying habits, and to run ads. This happened to come late enough in the dot-com boom that "free" PCs were only around for a short period of time before the PC suppliers (and really, the crazy dot-coms that funded them) vanished in a puff of red smoke.

Anyhow, even though no one is getting a free device this time around the similarities are very strong. Amazon gets to track your usage and buying habits (via Silk), and they get to run ads. In fact the only thing that seems different is that instead of being exploited for free, people are expected to pay to be exploited this time around. Financially this is an improvement - this stupid concept may get off the ground for once - but I'm not sure this is any better for consumers than it was the first time around.

Re:Reminds Me Of The Free PC Era

[martin-boundary]

The precedent with cable television is clear. Once ad-spammers gain a foothold, they will never leave. The only solutions are technical.

It's opt-in

[Fuzzums]

"there is no way to opt out of the ads on the new Kindle Fire tablets"

Actually, you opt-in by buying that tablet.
Your opt-out option is not buying that tablet.

Easy.

Re:Car Dealers

[TaoPhoenix]

You know, you found a really good example there.

Some ads are so slick that even the most rabid frothing anti-ad person will let them slide by. Car dealers is one - On the back of a ton of cars is "Joe's Ford" etc. The other one is mobile phone ads "Sent from my ___".

Don't want ads? use Free (as in freedom) Software

[Anonymous Coward]

Its simple really.

Buy Open hardware that can use Free Software because otherwise you will be taken advantage of.

Free Software will ALWAYS put power in the hands of the user; nothing else comes close.

Opt out still possible

[Anonymous Coward]

I have a "no ads" Kindle Fire now. When it comes time to upgrade, if they force ads at me, I'll opt out by buying someone else's product or no product at all.

"But Amazon has NO confirmed"

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't any of you Slashdotters READ the summaries properly? How come none of you noticed that?

Troll?

[Ecuador]

Eh??? BS much?
I have both the low-end Kindle and the Kindle Keyboard (for me and my wife), both with "Special Offers" and have been extremely happy with them (which is why I bought the second) and would never even consider paying more for skipping the ads.
How it works is, if you stop reading and leave your Kindle for a while, it will go to "sleep" mode. Instead of showing a blank screen, it will show an ad. I am noting here that since an e-ink display will only use power to change a page, this ad will do nothing to your battery usage. Anyway, the next time you pick up the Kindle you will see the add instead of a blank screen etc. You just have to press the power button and in a second you are back to where you were last reading.
Now, if you like the ad (sometimes it can be something good, like a discounted book, or a $-off coupon etc - another reason to get the special-offers section), you can get more info on it by holding the center button, and at that point you will need a wifi/3g connection.
Also, if you don't connect to the internet for a while, you will actually stop seeing ads and you will get instead a "connect to the internet if you want to get new ads" screen instead.
There is also a banner in the home screen - I don't spend any time in that screen (too busy reading books), and it is a rather small banner.
So, overall the special offers version is great. Cheaper to buy the device, also has saved me some $ when books I wanted came up as a special offer in an ad and it does not cripple the device in any way.
The parent poster is either a troll, or mildly retarded and actually follows the on-screen instructions on how to read more about the ad instead of just skipping it.

Re:Troll?

[bcrowell]

Nope, that isn't how it works on my device. No need to be rude just because your device behaves differently than mine.

Re:Troll?

[Ecuador]

Well, the reason I bought the "special offer" version in the first place were the reviews of people, with the consensus being that it is unobtrusive: the ads are gone and you are returned to your book with the touch of a button. Never read a complaint about that not working out.
Also, you talked about the "low end" device, I assume the one that retails for $69? Well, I have that exact device and it works the same as any other Kindle (and basically the same as most other devices): the Power button wakes the device so the ad screen goes away. And this is the main thing, there is a Power button on the device. Are you telling me that your Power button (the one at the bottom of the device) does absolutely nothing? Maybe your button is broken? I don't have a Kindle Touch in case you are referring to that, however the first youtube video that comes up: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UCY0nibZ70A clearly shows that even that Kindle works the same way - and how could it possibly be any different, perhaps a power button only for turning off??
It is simple really:
A. The ads are shown when the device is off (sleeping).
B. There is a power button.
Therefore I should allow for another option so that I am not rude. You are either a troll, or you can't use a simple device, or your power button is broken.

Re:Troll?

[Anonymous Coward]

+1 retarded, following instructions to see more about as instead of turning the device on.

Re:Troll?

[shutdown -p now]

Go through the replies for your post, and notice how there are already quite a few who don't share your experience, and not a single post that supports it. Nor has this behavior been described anywhere else so far, including numerous reviews of those Kindles by the customers.

Besides, your previous explanation of how it actually works on your device was somewhat nonsensical:

"Every time you stop reading for a while, an ad comes up. To get past the ad, you have to click a button."

I suspect that your problem is that you were tapping the screen (and hence the ad) to unlock, instead of using the unlock button.

Re:Troll?

[Anonymous Coward]

I sometimes read slowly and my ereader times out. Other times I fall asleep reading and start reading again. (not narcoleptic, just a student)

If I had to click past an ad every time I'd lose my mind.

Re:Troll?

[Anonymous Coward]

It's somehow better to click past the other screensaver? I have an ad-free Kindle. It still locks periodically, showing something other than the current text. To get off the lock screen, I have to press a button.

Re:Troll?

[Anonymous Coward]

Wait a minute, if keeping the picture on, doesn't use any electricity, what's the point of having a "sleep mode" in the first place? Just show the damn page.

Blessed are the blind, for they will not see ads.

[Fantasio]

Blessed are the blind, for they will not see ads.

It's a storefront, not an e-reader

[confuscan]

Amazon's Kindle Fire is first and foremost a storefront for the rest of Amazon. The e-reader functionality is the tease to bring you into the store, or online to be more specific. This doesn't mean Amazon is evil but does explain their behaviour. To quote Bezos "We want to make money when people use our devices, not when they buy our devices," As a consumer, you always have a choice.

No.

[publiclurker]

common sense says that they are trying to do this because corporate whores will always bend over when their owners tell them to.

Re:No.

[somersault]

No, common sense says that a device with these specs would cost more without the ads. It also says who gives a crap if there are ads on the lockscreen, as long as they aren't there while you're actually using the damn thing.

Re:No.

[digitig]

No, common sense says that a device with these specs would cost more without the ads.

You're not an economist, are you? The price isn't set by the cost of production/distribution etc, it's set at the point expected to maximise revenue, and it's well established that increasing the price of a product can in some circumstances increase sales. Yes, no doubt Amazon expects its profits to be higher with the ads, but that probably has almost nothing at all to do with the price to the consumer.

Re:No.

[Z34107]

You aren't one either, are you? Why on earth would you conclude that Kindles are a Giffen good?

The tablet market is very competitive, and Amazon prices their products aggressively--the $200 Fire had anywhere from $150-$201 worth of parts. Absent some extraordinary evidence to the contrary, it's quite reasonable to assume that the purchase price of a Kindle would trend towards its marginal cost, minus whatever per-device ad and sales revenue Amazon expects.

Re:No.

[1u3hr]

No, common sense says that a device with these specs would cost more without the ads.

Because companies always simply price their goods at cost plus a small profit and not what the market will bear, or trying to undercut the competition. The Free Market is perfect in every way. We all love the Free Market.

Re:No.

[0111 1110]

Considering that fully assembled 10" Chinese tablets with IPS screens sell for considerably less than $200 I think you will have a tough time arguing the parts cost the same. Good luck with that though.

Re:No.

[Anonymous Coward]

It's set at the point expected to provide revenue long term, which if you're Amazon currently means driving the price for tablet like devices down and away from the iPad. The money long term is in making your devices as cheap as possible to the end user, becoming the defacto media reader and making a % of the majority of media sales for the next x years.

I wouldn't be surprised if the unit end cost is advertising subsidised either. Higher price excludes more people than advertising.

Re:No.

[macs4all]

No, common sense says that a device with these specs would cost more without the ads. It also says who gives a crap if there are ads on the lockscreen, as long as they aren't there while you're actually using the damn thing.

I submit that this is Jeff Bezos' method of having his cake and eating it, too.

By having all these ad "impressions" appear on the lock screen, he can charge the adverti$sers for the ad impression, and still leave ads off of the screens that users see "all the time".

Kind of a smart marketing strategy, actually. Almost worthy of Steve Jobs.

Almost.

Re:No.

[macs4all]

Considering that fully assembled 10" Chinese tablets with IPS screens sell for considerably less than $200 I think you will have a tough time arguing the parts cost the same. Good luck with that though.

Oh, you mean the ones that are assembled with the IPS and touchscreen panels that fell out of QA screening?

Re:No.

[Meski]

I don't give a crap about ads, if the people pushing the ads to my device will pay for the bandwidth of pushing it (not everyone has unlimited)

Not at all useless

[SuperKendall]

Yeah but the data plan is kind of useless really. I mean, most people have a smartphone already and you can use internet teethering and wifi on your ereader/tablet and be done with it.

Not if you are overseas, or don't have a smartphone with tethering. Remember this is a nearly $100 device, MANY people could have these that would not have more expensive devices around.

The Google Nexus 7 is a much better tablet

If you are a parent I disagree. Amazon put some great work into making the Fire family friendly.

If you are also getting a tablet mostly for media consumption, the Fire has some pretty compelling features too.

In the tablet world, hardware does not matter nearly so much as the software and how people really use the devices.

That sucks...

[plungermonkey]

Just lost me as a customer.

who's who?

[PopeRatzo]

I'm curious, with the ad-supported Kindle Fire, who is the customer?

Is it the end user or the advertiser?

We understand that for network TV for example, the customer is not the viewer. Same with radio. So who is Amazon's customer for the Kindle Fire?

Re:who's who?

[shutdown -p now]

I'm curious, with the ad-supported Kindle Fire, who is the customer? Is it the end user or the advertiser?

Both. The customer gets a fairly useful device for a fraction of the price that the most popular competitor asks, while the advertiser gets a new channel.

Re:who's who?

[0111 1110]

Both. The customer gets a fairly useful device for a fraction of the price that the most popular competitor asks

Nice weasel phrasing there. Are you a professional? What about all the other competitors that are not "the most popular"? I will consider purchasing an ad supported ebook reader when the device itself is given away for free. Until then I'll let someone else suck their corporate dick and bend over to get fucked in the ass.

Re:who's who?

[shutdown -p now]

We were talking about tablets here, not readers (Kindle readers allow you to pay a little bit more, one-time, to get rid of ads - that's your "fully paid for the device" option).

I'm not aware of any competitor that offers a tablet in this category for that price. The closest one is Asus, which sells the original Transformer for less than $400 now, but it's still not $300 - and its hardware is, what, two generations behind Fire's? I picked on iPad specifically because that's the one most people are familiar with, and know the prices.

Re:who's who?

[PopeRatzo]

Both.

That is a conflict of interest.

One of the things that has so damaged our current economy is the proliferation of these new relationships.

If I go to a cabinet maker to have a cabinet built, he has two responsibilities: One to me the customer and one to himself to make a profit.

When you add a third person into the equation, you create instability. Health Care: when I go to the doctor, am I the customer or is my insurance carrier the customer? When I go to the hospital, same question. When I go to a dealership to buy a car, am I buying a car or am I buying a loan?

When my doctor orders medical tests for me, is he still acting as my doctor when he owns the lab that's doing the tests?

Who's the customer when I watch TV or buy a magazine or...

It's corrosive when the most basic transactions that you perform in an economy are not what you think they are.

And no, I do not believe that there can ever be an answer "both" to the question: "Am I Amazon's customer or are the advertisers?" The new equation is based on people not being able to use the device the way they want.

What is the value of those advertisements for the Kindle? For each device, is it $20, $50? If a new Kindle Fire is $150, how much more would it cost to buy a new Android device that is NOT ad-supported? $50 more? $100 more? Because I guarantee that Amazon is looking for a whole lot more than $100 per device in the ongoing revenue stream created by advertisements and purchases of media content through the Amazon store.

The only reason to build this kind of third-party transaction is to obfuscate the true cost of the product to the consumer. And that, in the end, is what more and more companies depend on to increase profits: obfuscation.

Whether it's credit card companies, or insurance companies, or pay-day loan outfits or your employer, more and more capitalism is becoming not built on transactions between two free agents, but one very powerful entity endeavoring to obfuscate the other for the purpose of exploiting and finally ripping them off.

Depends upon how it is done

[tgibbs]

I have a Kindle with ads. Basically, you get a display ad on the sleep page, and a discrete little ad on the menu page, but aside from that, the ads pretty much stay out of your way. On the other hand, the worst case is represented by Microsoft's XBox 360 interface, where you feel like you are wading through ads whenever you try to do anything at all.

Kindle is NOT successful - Amazon won't provide #s

[rsborg]

Where does Amazon get off doing this? They're not the publisher. The device is paid for. The books are paid for.

The device and the books are being sold at a loss; or to put this another way, you're not the one paying for them. Amazon has discovered that consumers don't care what the catches are - in this case ads and the formation of an Amazon monopoly respectively - so long as things are cheap. In fact it will probably be the most successful Kindle yet.

How can you say this for sure? Amazon has, to this day, refused to provide any sales numbers on their Kindles - any of them (except maybe the original Fire, of which 5M were made, and apparently 5M were sold - though the last ones were at a steep discount).

Until they do, you can't say for sure whether their idea that "customers don't care" is valid - because you don't know if their product is popular or they're just dumping them until they win the market.

Ads and Kids don't mix for me.

[rsborg]

If you are a parent I disagree. Amazon put some great work into making the Fire family friendly.

They made a great presentation. I'll be interested to see what the feature implementation is like.

However, the entire idea that my kid is presented with Ads during lockscreens pretty much makes the idea of the Fire HDs pretty abhorrent to me. Perhaps other parents will respond differently, but I don't let my kids watch Ads - my bigger one is trained to fast forward on the DVR when she gets TV time and chooses, and the little tykes (when they're big enough) will be watching stored video or things like Nick Jr.

FUD.

[Anonymous Coward]

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B007OZNUCE/ref=amb_link_1?pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_s=gateway-center-column&pf_rd_r=06YPJ3MK4BE7V3HFWKPX&pf_rd_t=101&pf_rd_p=1396078802&pf_rd_i=507846

Looks to me like you can pick with or without special offers. FUD.

Custom ROM

[ewolfr]

Just like my current Kindle Fire I will likely be flashing a custom ROM onto it as soon as there is one available. I strongly suspect there will be at least a couple of devs at XDA that will likely strip out whatever code Amazon is using to server the ads when they cook up their ROMS.

Not surprising coming from scAmazon

[Anonymous Coward]

ScAmazon doesn't give a fuck about their customers. If they did they wouldn't use digital restrictions management, tracking, or ads.

Television

[Fuzzums]

That's why I think you should GET money for watching television.
But why I don't watch television...
I'll tell you after the break.

Explains why no custom wallpaper on Kindle Fire?

[dpbsmith]

Well, that sort of explains something that had been puzzling me. My wife and I just recently bought the (original) Kindle Fires, and one minor detail that puzzled and bugged me is that there is no easy way to change the wallpaper on the screens it displays. Mind you, I rather like the pictures Amazon provides... a tasteful rotation of pictures of nostalgic old technology like pens and pencils.

But I'd rather have a picture of my grandson. And for about a quarter of a century, every high-tech device with a screen has invited me to set the default background wallpaper to anything I like.

There is apparently no way to set custom wallpaper on a Kindle Fire jailbreaking or hacking it.

Obviously, even on the Kindle Fire, Amazon feels that they, not the purchaser, "own" the screen.

Re:Kindle is NOT successful - Amazon won't provide

[shutdown -p now]

The fact that they've just released a fifth generation of Kindles might provide some clues...

No thanks

[Anonymous Coward]

IMO this is one of the reasons for the push to convince us that the PC is dead. These portable lock downed devices force us to be good consumers. It reminds me of the ubiquitous posters in "They Live" (1988).

No thanks. I'll pick up the $.01 used paper backs.

That's okay...

[Anonymous Coward]

As long as I can opt out of owning a Kindle, I really don't care. My nook has no annoying ads, AND it has a backlight.

Update: Amazon backs down, supports opt-out

[Zadaz]

http://reviews.cnet.com/8301-3126_7-57508986/amazon-backtracks-will-offer-$15-opt-out-for-ads-on-kindle-fire-tablets/

"I just received this email from an Amazon spokesperson:
'I wanted to let you know that with Kindle Fire HD there will be a special offers opt-out option for $15. We know from our Kindle reader line that customers love our special offers and very few people choose to opt out. We're happy to offer customers the choice.'"

well that sucks

[the_Bionic_lemming]

A coworker brought in a kindle fire for me to help load a book. I thought to myself that I could probably use one of these.

But ads? Nope. Not going to buy one. Ads are to pay for delivery, ads are not to be forced on me when i've bought something. I cut the cord to cable and satellite, and I censor the heck out of the web with add ons.

They lost a sale. Not going to even bother looking up specs to buy the right one now.

Amazon flinched

[Tony Isaac]

The linked article now has an update: Amazon will offer an opt-out option after all, for $15.

Remember only criminals dont have ads.

[Anonymous Coward]

Dont jailbreak that device; It's like stealing.

Re:Car Dealers

[Raenex]

Some ads are so slick that even the most rabid frothing anti-ad person will let them slide by. Car dealers is one - On the back of a ton of cars is "Joe's Ford" etc. The other one is mobile phone ads "Sent from my ___".

There's nothing slick about those examples, and as an anti-ad person I've always found them obnoxious, particularly because they are on items that are being paid for by the consumer.

That will teach you

[johanw]

That will teach you NOT to buy such hardware, or pay for ebooks. Ebooks are much cheaper on your favorite p2p network anyway, and they come without DRM infections.

Because they're distracting

[CuteSteveJobs]

Because ads break your concentration. That is after all what they are designed to do. In this case every time you reach for your damned Kindle. Letting people pay an 'unlocking fee' to get rid of them is a much better idea.

Re:Car Dealers

[johanw]

The other one is mobile phone ads "Sent from my ___".

I accept those for their information value. If I get a short mail telling me "sent from a phone" (almost always from business-used iPhones) I know that the person in question has read my mail but I know I don't have to expect long replies. I'll get a better reply when he/she's back in office.

Hardware adware, cool!

[Anonymous Coward]

Here's even more reasons to stay away from kindles http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/the-danger-of-ebooks.html

I think that an ebook reader is a very cool gadget as long as it doesn't come with these caveats. And will do much more than just read ebooks. Certainly not going buy one of these.

Re:Hardware adware, cool!

[johanw]

All of the disdvantages there don't apply to the books I download from various p2p networks. Rather, I can make backup copies easily, can copy them to anyone who likes then (no need for complicated lending constructions), my USB sticks pobably outlive the paper of the cheaper pockets (some paper books I bought in my youth are already seriously degrading). And, of course, I can carry an entire library on a small device.

Giffen Good

[CuteSteveJobs]

> Absent some extraordinary evidence to the contrary, it's quite reasonable to assume that the purchase price of a Kindle would trend towards its marginal cost, minus whatever per-device ad and sales revenue Amazon expects.

Perhaps they could make revenue some other way. The Kindle could even be an ideal format for selling eBooks. Oh wait...

Re:Giffen Good

[Z34107]

You're illiterate. Go read what you quoted again, especially the part about "ad and sales revenue" at the end.

Re:Giffen Good

[somersault]

Your English isn't that great either you know - your use of "illiterate" is clearly invalid.

$15 for a companies' reputation?

[Anonymous Coward]

I won't buy a kindle, though. Who knows what comes next...

30000 ft view

[Any Web Loco]

Every time you use the phrase "30000 ft view", God kills a kitten. Take your kitten-killing MBA wank-speak elsewhere sir.

I bought the device. THEY owe ME $15

[kd4zqe]

I was considering the purchase of a Fire. No longer. Instead of me paying $15 to opt out, how about Amazon pays ME a $15 credit in the store to PERMIT them to display ads on MY device? DAMN! Sorry. My common sense keeps getting in the way of progress.

Nope. Never buying one now.

Re:I bought the device. THEY owe ME $15

[kd4zqe]

P.S. A Nook Color + Cyanogen + Aldiko beats this, hands down.

Good Thing They Changed Their Minds

[assertation]

If I buy something, I consider it to be mine. I don't want ads on it and I don't expect to have to pay to get rid of the ads. This isn't an ideal situation, but at least Amazon had enough intelligence to change their mind to at least offer to let people pay to get rid of the ads instead of forcing it on them while asking a customer to buy a product at the same time.

Amazon changed its mind, but...

[assertation]

Amazon changed its mind, offering to let people pay the $15 price difference to make the ads go away.

Like the way many people just don't care what FB does to them, many people will not care that Amazon spies on them and then throws ads in their face. There will be people happy with that and the reduced price of their kindle.

Other people will want the reduced price, but without the spying and with the ads. Eventually someone will make something to remove those things like they do for iPhone, Android and Chrome.

When people use a recompiled, de-loused version of Chrome, cyminogod (sp?, de-loused version of the Android OS ), etc they aren't costing Google money, the way they will with Amazon subsibidizing the lower cost of the ad based kindle.

So, maybe, at some point Amazon will decide that ads on the kindle will not make financial sense.

Trivial to you, maybe

[Kupfernigk]

Whenever I see an IT person writing "it's trivial to..." I see someone who doesn't get out of the basement much. Google doesn't care if you root your Nexus device. Why? Because you represent a tiny fraction of the market. So long as more than 90% of users don't do it - because they aren't interested in IT, don't care, or are worried about the consequences - the threat to their revenue is nonexistent.

On a more general point, you are making a very typical mistake of IT people. You think the world revolves around you, your desires, and what you can do. It doesn't. Understanding this and seeing the bigger picture is what keeps people like me still earning far more than the median late in our careers. Thinking that someone doesn't know what he's talking about because you can only see a tiny part of the picture and imagine the whole picture revolves around you is what will ensure that you, Mr. 2 million plus UID, don't progress very far.

mandatory ads eh?

[Anonymous Coward]

last time i checked you can block it at the router.

And that's why

[Anonymous Coward]

I won't own an E-reader of any sort. I like my books ad free and not subject to being deleted.

Nope. They changed their minds.

[garyoa1]

Actually, they retracted that...

http://gizmodo.com/5941653/amazon-decides-to-let-users-opt+out-of-ads-on-the-kindle-fires-after-all

For a $15 fee.

Advertising in the good old days

[Anonymous Coward]

I find it interesting that most of us are anti-ad these days. I remember that back in the 70's and early/mid 80's most of us techies bought 73 Amateur Radio magazine and then later Byte magazine more for the ads than the articles! That was how you learned about new stuff... When the issue came onto the newstand at my local computer dealer, I would read it first for the ads, then the articles. Now, I find 99% of all advertising I see just pisses me off.