Bye-bye kindle
pcworld.com
pcworld.com
Up to now, ebook readers held an a huge advantage with the e-ink screen and ergonomics. Ebook readers still have an advantage when it comes to ergonomics, but I think they'll have a hard time appealing to the average consumer based on ergonomics alone.
The ergonomics advantage isn't even one that ebook reader manufacturers can expect to keep. It will be reduced to just about nothing as soon as someone makes a netbook with a screen that can rotate around and fold down so it can be used like a tablet.
There must be price cuts. I can't imagine enough people will prefer the simplicity and ergonomics of a dedicated ebook reader over an equally priced- and now equally functioning- netbook to sustain a business.
They also need to focus on what they're good at and figure out what inherent advantages there are in having a dedicated device. Ebook readers need to be as simple as books, they shouldn't have to boot up, they should be extremely light, you shouldn't have to worry that some email worm is going to keep you from reading your books, etc.
In any case, this is only a good thing for consumers. We're likely going to see cheaper and better ebook readers as well as better netbooks.
They already have an iPhone app... So I don't think it's too big of a leap to think they may extend to other markets as demand rises.
I would never do the same with my netbook especially considering how much larger it is. The kindle 2 is the perfect size for reading and a 10" netbook is the perfect size for a netbook.
This sounds almost too good to be true.
The article clearly states that the product is the screen, not a complete netbook.
Stuff and nonsense. If anything, Amazon might license the screens.
Better interactivity will also give a better online shopping experience on the device. It will open up lots of other uses.
Damn straight Amazon will license the screens. How about an Amazon branded netbook that had the Kindle functionality, but also could boot as a netbook?
The screen refresh on the K2 is waay, waaaaay better. Much less painful to type and use UI elements.
But I have learned not to use ref books on them not because of the slow UI/search (it's not so bad), but because I require a physical book for memory "wayfinding," to flip back and forth, to rescan, and remind myself, "hmm it was about in the last quarter of the book..." or "Where did I read about that study? I'm thinking... yellow book about yea big... aha, that one", etc. With a digital reader that always looks the same, and feels the same, you lose something.
That is where the Kindles (et al) fall down - nothing to do with the screens, just that the natural UI of books is very good for these things.
That's exactly what I'm talking about! If the Kindle 2 had better interactivity, there could be a highly responsive interface that could give you the same "wayfinding" feel. (Think of the flick-scroll contacts on the iPhone.)
Such is impossible on the Kindle.
What is your point?
My point is not a Kindle replacement being a netbook. It's about being interactive. 1 second screen refreshes cripple interactivity.
When I use text search to find things in electronic references, I find myself doing one find, quickly perusing the results, then often doing another refined search and perusing those results. Adding 1 second to each input is going to add something like a half-minute to each search session. That's death.
They're not using it for anything other than reading books, and most of them don't want to. You know what demographic represents a large portion of kindle users?
The elderly.
While we geeks might enjoy envisioning kindle users as the sort of technical elite that salivate over the kindle's wireless distribution model, or its e-ink screen, the people actually using the device don't care.
It is a book reader, not a mobile computing platform, I'm not sure how hard I can drive this point home.
The people who really are geeks (people that use websites like HN), carry things like netbooks around because they have real keyboards on them. Putting a real keyboard on the kindle would ruin it.
The refresh time on the kindle's screen (kindle 2) is almost perfect. It is almost exactly the ammount of time that it takes my eyes to transition to the top of the page and continue reading.
For me, the experience with the kindle is better than experiences I've had with dead-tree books.
I (and I suspect the overwhelming majority of kindle users) hope that amazon never changes it.
I'm advocating a reader-type device for other uses like reference. I'm not talking about a Kindle replacement. I'm not advocating putting a real keyboard on such a device. A very flat pad with no hinges would be the best, actually.
You're only talking about the narrow use-case of the Kindle. There are other use-cases for print media, and these represent additional markets.
Kindle refresh time is good for linear reading of entire books. But this is not the only use case that print media satisfies!
That's about a half-dozen things you misunderstood.
(However, a device with the enhanced interactivity I am talking about would also be just as usable as a plain old eBook reader.)
You are saying that a device other than the kindle, would service a market other than the one that the kindle does?
The market could well be a hardware market. (As opposed to the Kindle which is a driver of demand for content.) I'm interested in being able to display full-page daylight-readable content that I collate and generate, and manipulate it quickly and interactively. I'm certain that many others have similar needs, or will discover such uses once these are available.
When I've been working on my book, that I'm writing, I can tell you that there's no UI which could replace printing the sucker out and spreading it over the living room floor.
Perhaps this is not going to be as good as a real, physical book. But if you can find a workable analogue, this is a practical way of carrying a whole reference library with you at all times. That your interface is not as good is a workable trade-off for availability. You can always return to your desk or your library for intensive work sessions.
Having wireless or mobile broadband to do searches is often not an adequate substitute for this. Often, the references one needs are not available for free because they are too esoteric or specific. I these cases, it's much better to be able to collect together specific references to carry with you. (Or otherwise make easily available.)
An improved interface would still give you no physical memories, relative locational memory, "what size was the book" memories, or the kind of 1000ft view skimming can give you.
Flick-scroll and cover-flow are attractive precisely because they tweak the our sense of manipulating the physical. I can imagine an interface that can utilize relative locational memory and the book's size. In fact, I think I've seen writeups of people's research on alternative desktop interfaces that are like this.
It's still not the same. You can't get AWAY from the content and get a higher/further view. It's different. Maybe I'm failing at explaining - but while flick scroll is BETTER, it still falls short. By a lot.
I am most interested in KM and information science, and a book addict, and a crazy user interface designer. I have paid much attention to these things. :)
BTW, there was that study a few days ago that said that physically taking a step back improved puzzle scores. How bout that?
I am most interested in KM and information science, and a book addict, and a crazy user interface designer. I have paid much attention to these things. :)
Then can you imagine interfaces that do the same exploitation of our brain's affinity to physics to do the same thing, but even better? One that also uses a sense of locality?
It's still not the same.
Heck, little black and white Palms were must-have devices for med students years ago or so because you could have a reference for the entire pharmacopia, and it fit into their pocket. Not the same and not as good doesn't matter if there is a time/place/weight tradeoff. So long as you can have enough interactivity, even a clinku interface with a tiny bit of screen real estate is good enough for reference.
Now, imagine Apple finally delivering a 10" iPad with dual e-ink and full color, with their characteristic award winning industrial design we all love.
Just imagine that.
First, that Kindle killer isn't even close to existing.
Second, if you think $400 is steep for a device that has a 1 second refresh rate and a gray-scale screen, just wait until you see the price tag on 10" of full-color, touchscreen, iInk.
Third, and the real barrier to entry, Amazon has the bookstore to back it up. You can make the finest e-book reader in the world, but until you have "magic" wireless delivery and a limitless library to back it up, it's considerably more inconvenient to use than the Kindle.
Apple will not crack this space. It will have to be Google or Microsoft.
The Kindle is not an end in itself. The store's the thing. Kind of opposite from the iPhone ecosystem, where the store exists to sell the phone.
Done right, a device like this could rule the living room!
PS: Amazon does not think of it's self as a book store as much as a large tech company. It's trying to create large margine markets like the kindel not just sell more books. And they have great brand recognision to build off of.
The people using the kindle just want it to work (this is why Bezos worked out the deal with Sprint).
Have you ever tried walking grandma (Who is a memeber of one of the major groups the kindle is aimed at: The elderly) through setting up her ipod? Then transferring songs to it?
Can you imagine walking the same person through the steps required to convert whatever file it is she wants to view on her reader, how to plug the USB cable in, what hole it goes in, what buttons to press, when to press them, what it all means, where the books are, how to find them on her harddisk etc. etc. etc.
The kindle is good because it is simple. If you don't want that, get an old palm pilot or a nokia 770 (which is what I used before I got my kindle...palm back in early 2000 and nokia up until about a year ago).
That kind of thing in consumer-level devices will lead to cheap, very high-res, nearly page-quality devices you can fit in a pocket.
Also, if you don't limit yourself to the primary use-case of the Kindle, you don't need the resources of the Amazon bookstore to back it up. A better form-factor for people to take information that they collate will have a lot of users. I can think of a variety of such uses for myself. I would be able to carry my entire library of sheet music with me for reference. I would be able to have an entire library of programming language manuals with me, whether or not I was online.
There are lots of kinds of books other than paperbacks. Kindle is oriented towards one specific use case.
--the whole point of these screens, is that they can be made using existing LCD screen manufacturing technology, with some number of tweaks. There have been billions upon billions already spent on LCD screen manufacturing facilities.
The e-ink process on the other hand, does not have that kind of scale and ability to spread costs over a very high number of units.