Comments on: Amazon’s E-Book Vision: “Kindle”

By: Higgins

Higgins — Tue, 20 Nov 2007 00:32:34 +0000

Karla – this device is slightly different in that it uses “E Ink” which is NOT backlit. It’s a high contrast display that looks more like an LCD display on an old wristwatch (though much higher rez…) and refreshes relatively slowly (about one sec to re-paint the whole display).

Supposedly the new screen is much easier on the eyes — but I haven’t seen one in person to test.

By: GTT

GTT — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 23:03:01 +0000

I agree with Katherine on the “feeling the book” thing. It´s part of the whole experience.

And while I travel a lot thanks to my job (and have been know to lug around 6 books in a single trip), I dont think I could read for 15 straight hours on a computer screen. My eyes just get incredible tired. Even if the gadget cost $10, I still would not buy it.

By: Karla

Karla — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 22:41:50 +0000

I remember the E-book, and it tanked. How is this different?

Is it the newer generation of readers that is different? All these interwebs-raised whippersnappers?

I for one have been working and reading on computers for about 20 years now, and my poor eyes can’t handle any more high contrasty, backlit reading material! Computer screens flicker. Brain not like!

I’ll stick with real books, thanks, and avoid more eye strain.

By: Elias

Elias — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 22:40:16 +0000

As Katherine pointed out, for some of us, there’s an “aesthetic component” to the reading experience that cannot be duplicated in an e-book. For me, reading on my desk, with the lamp on and coffee on the side cannot be duplicated with e-bookd. That said, though, there are some points to e-books – like Moon said – not to mention environmental advantages. For the moment though, I’ll stick to my favorite method of buying books – Amazon.com’s USED books section.

By: Aemi

Aemi — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 21:01:41 +0000

Ugh, *impractical. Typed too much today.

By: Aemi

Aemi — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 21:01:08 +0000

I thought this was a somewhat impracticle idea until I read Katherine’s comment. When I travel, I bring at least 4 books with me – and if it’s, say, a one-week or more trip, I’ve been known to bring a whole suitcase full. Now, if you’ve ever had to carry around a suitcase full of books, you’ll know it’s damn heavy. One of these e-book devices would be perfect for book addicts like me.

But I don’t have the cash. Ah well.

By: Janix

Janix — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 20:58:38 +0000

Considering how easy it is to download illegal copies of music, movies and tv programs, I do not think a lot of authors are going to sign up to allow their books to be distributed in this format. It is my understanding that an author’s percentage of sales is tiny anyway. Why make it easier to bypass the bookstore?

By: Moon

Moon — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 19:38:17 +0000

On the other hand!

I saw this and said “I’m saving my money to buy one”

1) The books are cheaper! $10 for the NY Times best sellers.

2) I don’t need any more books! I’m moving in JUNE and I’ve already started packing books. Sheesh. And for the last two years, I’ve purchased very few books.

3) Download a book when you think about it, rather than either going to the library or bookstore.

On the downside, this could get expensive! Not counting the reader, being able to buy books whenever you think of it could lead to binge-buying!

4) Holding a book while reading in bed is awkward, particularly those Neal Stephenson books, which are 800 pages and 3 lbs!!!!

5) Dictionary at a touch. Search function. Annotation. All the other gadgetry you can’t use on a book.

I listen to a lot of books on CD or MP3, so I don’t have the “I have to feel the pages of the book” disease, so the fact that I’m not holding an actual won’t bother me.

They need to lower the price, though. $400 is ridiculous. This is a $200 item, tops. You’ll be making all your money through book sales. Don’t be a BetaMax, Amazon.

By: Katherine

Katherine — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 19:27:17 +0000

I think I still prefer a physical book to read over any electronic version. It may be that I’m strange, but reading isn’t simply looking at the typeset and interpreting it. It is a mixture of the smell of paper and ink – especially with newspapers, we all know that scent. It’s the sound of a turned page, the difference between a crisp new book, a wobbly and heavy coffee table edition, or the clothlike flutter of an old favorite. It’s the physical sensation of holding the book in your hand. Again, call me a bit of a nutjob, but I can’t see an e-reader as effectively replacing a physical book.

A second point – how many books does one need to take on travel? Even two or three novels seems like a lot, especially if one is actually doing something else, be it business or pleasure, once the destination has been reached. Is an e-book really that convenient?

A third point, and then I’ll shut up. I worry about computer memory as a general rule, and I think I’d worry about losing an entire book collection due to some errant malfunction. At least I know the pages of the novels on my bookshelf won’t randomly turn blank – barring some obvious catastropic events. But then again if that happened, the e-reader probably wouldn’t fare much better.

By: Roger

Roger — Mon, 19 Nov 2007 17:57:10 +0000

Oh, yeah – one other thing. ‘Kindle?’ What’s with the weird, slightly Farenheit 451-ish product name?