Quote:
Originally Posted by MR. Pockets
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_e-book_readers
While the terms "ereader", "ebook reader" etc, are still not clearly defined, that definition (the complete wikipedia definition is a little narrow) is what I consider an ereader to be. The iPad clearly does not fit that definition. I'm not trying to be in your face/argumentative. I just have a problem with people calling the iPad (or other tablets) an ereader.
|
That's by your definition. Wikipedia is by no means an authoritative source for
any data set, but when defining ambiguous terms like "ereader", the truth is in the eye of the user. To me, an ereader is an "electronic reader", or anything that uses electricity to power a dynamic display which can be reasonably used to read text. Any PC is a potential ereader. An iPhone is an ereader. An iPad is an ereader. If you don't want to call it that, knock yourself out. But it's electronic, and it displays a hardback-sized and -proportioned block of text just fine. If you want to narrow your definition down to electronic devices that are
only used for reading books, then you've just knocked the Kindle right out of your ereader definition, since it provides basic web browsing in addition to reading. Virtually all readers on the market today can do other things in addition to reading, such as calendar functions, to-do lists, playing games, playing music, browsing photos, browsing the web, etc.
So really, even by your definition, practically nothing on the market today is an "ereader." The marching progress of technology is going to further blur those lines in the coming years, especially as eInk turns color and gets response times fast enough for video. Quite shortly you're going to have to re-think your term definitions.