Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Amazon Unveils Kindle 2, eBooks for the iPhone?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I think this is a technical trade-off they've made, though. A lot of comments in this thread are along the lines of "I don't want such a basic one-trick pony device, I want to have a color touch screen, with wifi, and while we're at it how about more than just read books, how about games, surfing the web, ..." -- in other words, people want a full-featured tablet PC.
But then you wouldn't have days of battery life, you'd have hours.
They probably picked the black and white screen for its readability in a variety of lighting conditions, without the need for battery-consuming backlights. Add a color screen and you're right back to battery life and glare and poor visibility in bright conditions. Not what you want in a device primarily for reading.
Adding more features will make the device bigger, thicker, heavier, ...
My old Handspring Visor (Palm OS) was a great e-book reader, despite its primitive tech specs. Those old black and white screens were VERY readable, and battery life lasted for weeks on a 2 AA's.
Only someone completely ignorant of e-ink technology would make such statements. Have you actually read for 20 minutes on an e-ink display and compared the experience to reading on a back lit display? The e-ink display is passive and non-reflective. It looks like a printed page and is very easy on the eyes. This device is clearly aimed at people who read books which means sitting and reading for an hour or more at a stretch, something that is completely uncomfortable to do on a laptop, PDA or iPhone type device.
I fear for our future with the increasingly unruly mob of the under educated thinking that storing away thousands of tidbits read online make them authorities on every subject.
All it does is make you look like you have the attention span of a fruit fly.
The Wrong Debate
"I'm sure plenty of people swore they would never ride in or operate a "horseless carriage"—and they never did! And then they died." -- from a great article on the future of the eBook by John Siracusa/Ars technica, "The once and future e-book: on reading in the digital age".
Coming up with a pros & cons list isn't hard. I could have 12 points on the merits of a device like the Kindle 2, but I won't. This isn't a debate about Books vs. eBooks. This is talking about the Kindle 2 and how it might work in our lives. Many people here DON'T have an eBook. Some do. The eBook is here and as simple Apple folk, many are going to try and figure out if Apple is going to somehow take a good idea and make it great. Kind of how they changed the landscape of music.
Sure the Kindle isn't the answer or it would be in a lot more hands. And I agree, the iPhone is definitely not the answer either (IMO, too small) But what is? Many people have seen how movies, television, video games and music have been changed because of the digital world and we're just wondering about books. The debate is no longer Books vs. eBooks but rather the current leader in eBooks, The Kindle vs. A Better One. What's wrong with this model and how could it be better.
Convergence
I think the answer is for Apple to build a tablet computer. Part Netbook, part Kindle, part iPhone -- the Netbook is becoming a very real market and by creating a device about the same size as the Kindle but all display on front, Apple could enter the Netbook Market and the eBook Market all at once.
"The idea is flawed from the top. Nobody reads anymore." -- Steve Jobs
Yeah, and he also said he'd never do movies on iTunes; rent movies; make a phone, etc. Oh... let's not forget the Apple and their 5 year secret of writing a version of OS X for intel -- Jobs says what he says -- call it lying, playing his cards at the right time, whatever. People do read and he knows it. The iPhone has too much momentum right now to throw another $700 product into the mix. But it will happen.
The problem with the Kindle (1 & 2) is that it is a one-trick pony. That's its main problem. What people love about the iPhone is that it can be whatever you need it to be and generally 99¢ or Free. It just doesn't make a great book reader because of its size.
Another problem with Kindle is also a strength. The non-backlit makes it impossible to read in the dark, if you want to -- and people do. I pull out my iPhone, surf the net, read, play games -- all while my wife sleeps. But by having a screen like it does, the batteries rarely need to charging. However, I think that having a device that you have to plug in when you get home is no big deal. The flipside problem with 2 weeks of reading without charging is that you get so used to having it, you probably don't watch how much juice you have and then it fails on you while you're out and about.
Again -- if Apple makes a tablet computer -- it'll do everthing a Netbook would do, it would have multi-touch for doing things quickly and it would have a big enough screen for easy reading -- maybe even work a deal with AT&T or other carriers for 3G access for anytime surfing and media buying.
I see where you're coming from and which side of the fence you're on, however, remember this:
"I'm sure plenty of people swore they would never ride in or operate a "horseless carriage"—and they never did! And then they died." -- from a great article on the future of the eBook by John Siracusa/Ars technica, "The once and future e-book: on reading in the digital age".
Coming up with a pros & cons list isn't hard. I could have 12 points on the merits of a device like the Kindle 2, but I won't. This isn't a debate about Books vs. eBooks. This is talking about the Kindle 2 and how it might work in our lives. Many people here DON'T have an eBook. Some do. The eBook is here and as simple Apple folk, many are going to try and figure out if Apple is going to somehow take a good idea and make it great. Kind of how they changed the landscape of music.
Sure the Kindle isn't the answer or it would be in a lot more hands. And I agree, the iPhone is definitely not the answer either (IMO, too small) But what is? Many people have seen how movies, television, video games and music have been changed because of the digital world and we're just wondering about books. The debate is no longer Books vs. eBooks but rather the current leader in eBooks, The Kindle vs. A Better One. What's wrong with this model and how could it be better.
Convergence
I think the answer is for Apple to build a tablet computer. Part Netbook, part Kindle, part iPhone -- the Netbook is becoming a very real market and by creating a device about the same size as the Kindle but all display on front, Apple could enter the Netbook Market and the eBook Market all at once.
"The idea is flawed from the top. Nobody reads anymore." -- Steve Jobs
Yeah, and he also said he'd never do movies on iTunes; rent movies; make a phone, etc. Oh... let's not forget the Apple and their 5 year secret of writing a version of OS X for intel -- Jobs says what he says -- call it lying, playing his cards at the right time, whatever. People do read and he knows it. The iPhone has too much momentum right now to throw another $700 product into the mix. But it will happen.
The problem with the Kindle (1 & 2) is that it is a one-trick pony. That's its main problem. What people love about the iPhone is that it can be whatever you need it to be and generally 99¢ or Free. It just doesn't make a great book reader because of its size.
Another problem with Kindle is also a strength. The non-backlit makes it impossible to read in the dark, if you want to -- and people do. I pull out my iPhone, surf the net, read, play games -- all while my wife sleeps. But by having a screen like it does, the batteries rarely need to charging. However, I think that having a device that you have to plug in when you get home is no big deal. The flipside problem with 2 weeks of reading without charging is that you get so used to having it, you probably don't watch how much juice you have and then it fails on you while you're out and about.
Again -- if Apple makes a tablet computer -- it'll do everthing a Netbook would do, it would have multi-touch for doing things quickly and it would have a big enough screen for easy reading -- maybe even work a deal with AT&T or other carriers for 3G access for anytime surfing and media buying.
Except its true....
http://www.nea.gov/news/news07/TRNR.html
Don't forget, that Jobs said those words in an American context...
I have over 2000 books and I've run out places to put new bookshelves. The kindle is looking pretty good...
It's an electronic book reader. It doesn't need color. It's probably cost-prohibitive right now to offer color anyway. The web-browser in Kindle is considered "experimental" and data access is limited, so color is simply irrelevant for this product - at this point.
I think they are doing the right thing by perfecting the device around it's main function. Once perfected, then worry about converging other tech into it. The iPod was black & white for the first few models. That didn't seem to hurt sales any. If they follow the iPod model, this will be successful. The fact that they are releasing a 2nd version seems to indicate that Amazon considers v1 to be a success.
My guess is that you've then never read any Terry Pratchett, and in particular, one of his characters: THE DAY THAT I DON'T KNOW IF THE CAT INSIDE THE BOX IS DEAD OR NOT....
The above meant that one can quickly cross-refer to different sections within a single book. For example, the book's left page could be page 9 and the right side is on page 22, with pages 10-21 held vertically (not blocking one's sight) between. This allows for a rapid cross-compare of the two selections.
And while an e-device allows more total media per pound, its sreen size is always the same finite size, whereas if one has 2-3-4 books, one can have 2-3-4 books laying open next to each other (more "screen" real estate). This is a trade-off and it depends on what you're trying to accomplish with the reading material as to which is 'better/worse'.
I read it in the bathroom. Never read a book in the shower though.
Try while on a boat underway (sea spray). FWIW, I have some friends who read books underwater, while on scuba decompression stops. The books are generally 'disposed' of after a single read, but its far cheaper than buying a waterproof housing.
-hh
As for paper size, this is primarily an electronic book, so A4 size makes no sense - unless you are talking about keeping the existing keyboard space and extension the screen to fill it up. It would still be a bit short, but better.
1. Easy to read, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E-inkbecause it actually is printed. Check.
2. About size of a small book. Beats iPhone easily.
3. How many books do you have? Doesn't require a hundreds of feet of shelf space to store a reasonable book collection.
4. How's your back, student? Carry one book instead of that mess of texts.
5. Ecological. How many forests died so that best seller could live?
6. Search-- beats indexes. And whacks "heuristic page flipping" out of the park (really-- what a weak point that was above. You have to think out of the box, my friend).
7. Type in stickies vs. pencil in notes. Personally, a little bit of me dies when I deface a book.
8. At a few $ less per book, pays for itself over time.
9. Yes, you can read it in the bathroom. OK, maybe not the bath. I take showers. I have not figured out how to read in the shower.
10. Unlike paper, doesn't yellow with age.
Things that could be done in the future--
a. Amazon could keep a record of my purchases, and if I ever lose my Kindle I could download everything on my new Kindle ($399) for free. Compare to replacing physical library if house burns down.
Summary
-------------
Advantages book:
- Reading in bath
- If your friends are losers, you don't worry so much if you lend to them
- Look prettier and maybe feel nicer
Advantage Kindle:
- Saves forests, and therefore mankind
- Cheaper if you have any quantity of books
- Does not take over your house with shelves
- Reduces back problems in students and therefore improves longterm health
Bottom line:
If you are the kind of person who values sitting in a hot tub with a glass of wine and a good book over any practical considerations, or even the health and well-being of the earth and humanity, books win easily.
Jobs has already made it clear that in his opinion "print is dead" and that e-books are a waste of time, so explain how Apple will take a great idea, the e-book and make it better when the CEO thinks it's a dead product?
Apparently you don't understand that the Kindle has been sold out consistently since release. The Kindle 2 will in all likelihood also be sold out for most of the year even with a down economy.
What you and many other convergence advocates fail to appreciate is the difference between an LCD display and an E-Ink display. Until an LCD can do what an e-ink display does, or vice versa there is no overlap in these product areas that is going to broadly succeed.
Not the perfect solution but it was at the back of a cupboard. My old iBook G4 serves as my e-book now. Not full height of page but half and it scrolls. It is reasonably light and I take it with me everywhere to read except outside where it is not useable. BTW it runs Leopard 10.5.6 just fine.
No idea can be said to exist unless it can be expressed. If the physical page does not influence how you read, why do so many books share similar features of typesetting? Why aren't the books full of irregular colour and type, and irregular arrangements of letters?
I mean that a book, being three dimensional, allows me to look at, say, 3 pages at once without having to resize any of the pages.
Many of the books I read for leisure are an extension of those from my university days - am I the only person to find a technical, scientific or mathematical book (for the layman or for the expert) as worthwhile a casual read as fiction? Anyway, I write in soft pencil partly not to harm my book.
This isn't the same as the fuzzy searching you do when flipping through a book.
If you hadn't read it before but just wanted to find the speech out of the blue then, yes, an electronic search engine is your best weapon. Would also be good if you hadn't read it for a while and had completely forgotten the context.
By flipping through a book you're looking at information again, reinforcing it in your mind. If we're just talking about casual fiction reading, perhaps irrelevant. If your idea of a fun read is something more technical, then it can help reinforce your learning. If I pick up a book for the first time (again, this won't apply necessarily to fiction), then I'll do lots of random flipping and allowing my brain to take in section headers, figures, perhaps any results/theorems that are highlighted, which I can do more easily with fingers and thumbs than a scrollbar.
Your son is not a stranger and probably already knows how to use the e-book software. The average non-technical friend might not appreciate having to be tutored on using your hardware just to share a few pages from a book.
On the contrary, probably my main reason for preferring physical books is that I recall better from something I've read on printed paper than from a display.
We're definitely at cross purposes
I could do that on a hypothetical e-book reader on my digital watch, but the screen is still smaller and offers a different lighting. No amount of typeface changing/light beaming into my eyes is going to make it easier to read.
I prefer a stand, and holding with zero hands.
The fact that it was possible to get books centuries ago pretty much confirms that the infrastructure, and corresponding energy consumption, required to build and power your e-book reader and deliver you an electronic book... I'll stick with walking to my local library
Clearly this device is not for you. Why are you spending so much time marketing against it? You seem to have a deep emotional connection to reading that most people simply do not have. The way you describe your interaction with books is atypical, so it is not surprising that you would find the use of an electronic reader to be somewhat blasphemous. You do offer valid points, but I don't believe Kindle is intended to replace books. It's a simple convenience device.
The "horse and carriage" argument is often brought up by writers who want to convince you of a great new fix to something that isn't broken. But cars did not suddenly replace animals everywhere because someone shouted "this is the future!" repeatedly - instead they've replaced animals where the price, speed and efficiency of the car and the infrastructure of some country have made it a better investment than taking a horse. The e-book does not enjoy analogous advantages over the book, neither in individual utility or in global infrastructure (most places in the third world, and anywhere in the first world if disaster resilience for a civilisation's knowledge is important) terms.
To quote the article:
It's page after page (another case of confusing media - why do web articles need to be split into pages like that?) of, "The paperless world is so much better, people are putting up with aspects of it already, sure it seems hard at first but there are all sorts of little advantages, it just needs to all come together, you guys just don't understand!"
Back to the favourite car analogy: "Of course there are problems with cars but these are minor and people already put up with them - as cars get better people will surely choose cars!"
No. It doesn't matter how much better cars get per se. People will choose cars only when cars suit their needs more than horses, or the infrastructure around them makes it impossible to keep a horse.
Xerox panicked about the horseless office in the '70s and did a great deal of research into cars to prevent becoming obsolete. It appears the author also got involved in a project selling cars and, sounding bitter that his dealership failed, predicts the eventual death of horses.
Changed how? Ignore delivery for a moment and concentrate on how the product is enjoyed. We have always watched films and TV on a screen: screen sizes have got larger and smaller, aspect ratios have changed, and resolution has gone up. But you're basically sitting back and passively watching a two dimensional rectangular depiction of *stuff going on*. It's like the successful iPod supplanting the portable CD player supplanting the walkman: the end experience is the same - music going into your ears. Reading a book, especially non-fiction, often involves complex manipulations with the pages, so a change to e-books would be much more than just a delivery change.
Given how many people don't read e-books and how frequent and repeated the arguments are in opposition to reading on some flat screen, I'd definitely say the debate is books vs e-books. Of course my 1993 Psion 3a is easier on the eyes than an iPhone for reading a book - indeed, by 1995 I was putting texts from the young Interweb on it for high school - and the Kindle beats my 3a, but they're all doing pretty much the same thing, which is to take a read-only-but-annotatable three dimensional physical object comprising hundreds of bendy leaves and try to mutate it into a single two dimensional page. That is not very interesting, and it's certainly nothing as new as the article author seems to be suggesting.
(Unless we consider an e-book that's exactly as a regular book but with magic mutable pages. But then we're back to hypothesising that e-books will supplant books because e-books could get infinitely better so must eventually be better than real books.)
E-ink is much nicer to read than a regular LCD surface, agreed, but it's still not as nice to read as print on good quality paper.
Gasu, a book is three dimensional, so no single sheet of real or e-paper is the "size" of a book. I have tried many times to illustrate why this is advantageous, and a respondent above gave a helpful specific example.
But there's no need to own your own physical copy of every book you want to read - that's what a good library system is for - and I am quite content with electronic copies of only occasionally referenced books. I'm arguing against the hypothesis that e-books are good enough to replace real books, not indicating that e-books are useless.
Oh man, thousands of years of carrying manuscripts and the printed word in far harsher environments, and suddenly the mollycoddled student's body is too weak to carry books. My back is fine but my wrists are RSI-addled so I can't hold a book up for too long, but that's easily adjusted for. However, you do raise a point I made previously that modern textbooks are horribly oversized.
This argument is so horribly, horribly wrong. The modern infrastructure required to support an electronic book delivery and reading system (that's the manufacture and servicing of the power grid, the whole Internet, and, of course, that complex electronic device that weighs so lightly on your conscience) makes the printing of a book using sustainable forestry seem as energy-intensive as a yawn.
Uh, what box? Search is delegating a dumb operation to the computer that either will or won't find what you want, depending on the luck of choosing a few specific words. Page flipping allows me to at speed take in information from a series of pages, reinforce ideas I have come across, maybe spot things I haven't noticed, perhaps point me in the direction of something I didn't know about before, etc.
Go on, walk into your university library and pick up a stack of journals in your discipline - some that you have read, some that you haven't - and start page-flipping with a few topics in mind. If you have learnt less after 3 hours than from just searching phrases in the electronic equivalent, then you obviously know a lot more than I do - because for me, scanning around a subject allows me to learn a lot more than if I just make dumb, specific searches. Although maybe it's the fashion today to only want to find specifically what you're looking for precisely when you need it, and to shun your brain's ability to collect information by osmosis.
Completely worthless to me. I have a simple annotation system involving shorthand and symbols in the margins and around words. I want to be able to annotate long proofs precisely where I feel clarification is needed and draw arrows everywhere to summarise trains of thought and related ideas. Always in soft pencil so I can end up with a completely clean page if necessary.
I must have missed the marketplace for second hand DRM-free e-books, all a few dollars less than the used physical book market.
My books from early last century are still readable. I look forward to seeing how successful people will have been in 100 years time at preserving today's digital data.
They could. Do they? Do you insure your property?
E-ink was never intended for video or animated purposes. It is intended as, gasp, an electronic version of INK. It displays words and still images decently.
Until you discover how damn brittle it is and you need a solid boron shell cover to keep from any reasonable amount of static load [books in a bag] from creating permanent stress fractures and later irreparable damage to the screen and logic board.
Without quoting everything you wrote, I think you make some good points. However, e-books are not going to "replace" books anytime in the near future. What is happening is that increasing numbers of voracious readers are adopting e-book displays as it makes it easier to carry a larger number of works with them in a portable format, in addition to making it easy to get new material.
I personally detest buying books. Hours spent at a book store or online, hauling the heavy books home, and then storing them after I've read them.
Mind you I love the thrill of reading a good novel, but I abhor the distribution system.
As more and more "heavy readers" switch to an e-book reader like the Kindle it will result in lower and lower priced e-ink display devices being available.
The book will never be replaced. But it's entirely possible that within a couple of generations they are a quaint collectible in countries like The US, Europe, etc, with most reading of newspapers, magazines and novels being done on some sort of e-ink equipped display.
I've only skim-read this thread so apologies in advance if I raise anything that's been discussed before, but I think the Kindle is a great concept and it's good to see that Amazon are evolving it.
Good stuff:
Store lots of books
Download new books wherever you can get signal
Excellent display (for the purpose)
Lots of content.
Wireless delivery system
Not too rigidly managed and locked down that you can't put your own content on there.
It's a bit like the iPod and MP3 players - it is a successful device because it's paired with good content, i.e. books, newpapers etc.
A lot of people have mentioned about e-books being cheaper than regular books (or that is the aspiration) and I agree. I imagine if you asked the publishing companies the reason then they would say that you're paying for the content (i.e. words) not the delivery mechanism (book or digital file) which is exactly the same tack that the record companies are still taking and the movie companies are taking and it's wrong to not pass on savings in media, distribution and shipping to the customer, and I think it will happen but it's an evolving process.
I would never read a book on my iPhone - it would suck the battery dry and my eyes wouldn't thank me. But I would seriously consider a Kindle.
My one last dig is the DRM thing. With a book, all I need is light and my eyes to read. I know Amazon is a big established company but we all know what's been happening to them lately and there's a tiny nervous piece of me inside that thinks that even though I've paid for this e-book, I might not be able to access it for the rest of my life (should I want to - because I can with a regular book).
Of course we have the same issue with downloads purchased with FairPlay from iTunes and think there may be a real need for legislation to protect the rights of the consumer here.
But back on topic - Kindle - good concept - good implementation - nice features - price a bit too high - need to make it available in Europe!
Good stuff:
Store lots of books
Download new books wherever you can get signal
Excellent display (for the purpose)
Lots of content.
Wireless delivery system
Not too rigidly managed and locked down that you can't put your own content on there.
It's a bit like the iPod and MP3 players - it is a successful device because it's paired with good content, i.e. books, newpapers etc.
A lot of people have mentioned about e-books being cheaper than regular books (or that is the aspiration) and I agree. I imagine if you asked the publishing companies the reason then they would say that you're paying for the content (i.e. words) not the delivery mechanism (book or digital file) which is exactly the same tack that the record companies are still taking and the movie companies are taking and it's wrong to not pass on savings in media, distribution and shipping to the customer, and I think it will happen but it's an evolving process.
I would never read a book on my iPhone - it would suck the battery dry and my eyes wouldn't thank me. But I would seriously consider a Kindle.
My one last dig is the DRM thing. With a book, all I need is light and my eyes to read. I know Amazon is a big established company but we all know what's been happening to them lately and there's a tiny nervous piece of me inside that thinks that even though I've paid for this e-book, I might not be able to access it for the rest of my life (should I want to - because I can with a regular book).
Of course we have the same issue with downloads purchased with FairPlay from iTunes and think there may be a real need for legislation to protect the rights of the consumer here.
But back on topic - Kindle - good concept - good implementation - nice features - price a bit too high - need to make it available in Europe!
That's quite ridiculous and akin to arguments made that a portable phone could never handle the rigors of being placed in a pocket or hand bag and "banged about".
Amazon is selling DRM's e-books. When you buy one the license to read it can go away at any time. You can only read the e-book you paid for on this one reader. You can't re-sell or even loan your e-book. e-books sell for about the same price as the hard back edition even if there is already a paper back available. One would think the e-book should sell for even less than the paperback because the cost to make an e-book is even less.
Also why pay $359 just so you can shop in Amazon's e-book store?
Same can be said for Apples' ATV. If the ATV sells for $300 and moves sell for $15 then your fist move's real price is $315. If you watch 10 movies the price is $45 each. Even if you watch 100 the price is $18 each.
Same reasoning here. Kindle adds to the price of the books. How many people read 100 books a year? If you don't it would be cheaper to buy the hard back ed. of each book
The other thing about e-books is their life time. Will you be able to read it in 10 years? Who knows? Amazon may decide they are not making enough money and drop the whole scheme.
Buying an e-book with the idea of keeping it is not good. What's needed is a non-DRM's book format that has readers built by many different companies. Like MP3 is for sound. Well we have it already PDF is just that.
Also why pay $359 just so you can shop in Amazon's e-book store?
Same can be said for Apples' ATV. If the ATV sells for $300 and moves sell for $15 then your fist move's real price is $315. If you watch 10 movies the price is $45 each. Even if you watch 100 the price is $18 each.
Same reasoning here. Kindle adds to the price of the books. How many people read 100 books a year? If you don't it would be cheaper to buy the hard back ed. of each book
The other thing about e-books is their life time. Will you be able to read it in 10 years? Who knows? Amazon may decide they are not making enough money and drop the whole scheme.
Buying an e-book with the idea of keeping it is not good. What's needed is a non-DRM's book format that has readers built by many different companies. Like MP3 is for sound. Well we have it already PDF is just that.
First car released to baseline meet 100mpg, leverage bio-algae, bio-diesel, diesel, gasoline [leaded/unleaded] will be the first car that sells itself.
I agree as a mechanical engineer that car manufacturers have spent the past 100 years refining around a flawed thermocycle because it's a mass market money making machine. They make more by making sure it's not that good but has x, y or z amenity to keep you from realizing that you really should have a much better designed engine in that overpriced, overglitzed POS.