Quote:
Originally Posted by rlauzon
That's not what I said. Please read what I write. Far fewer songs are downloaded from iTunes than you think.
|
Believe me, I do read what you write. My point is, the fact that iPods aren't filled with 100% iTunes music doesn't mean that the iPod and iTunes combination aren't a product that has been heartily endorsed and accepted by a significant part of the population, and has proven to be commercially successful, DRM, proprietary formats, and all.
In fact, the fact that iPods can also play non-DRM'd, non-proprietary MP3s as well as Apple's formats makes it that much more valuable to the consumer, as the Kindle's being able to play non-DRM'd Mobi files will similarly make it more valuable.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rlauzon
And where, exactly, can one purchase a text eBook of a current NY Times best seller?
|
Actually, I wasn't talking about bestsellers... I never read them, myself, so I've never searched for them on e-books. But I have found many of the books I do read in e-book formats, and not all with DRM.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rlauzon
That is correct. But none of those cheap eBooks are "mainstream". All "mainstream" books that are available as eBooks have DRM. If you are going to talk about the Kindle and eBooks, DRM is something that must be addressed.
|
As I said, I'll limit my further comments in this thread to Kindle. In that light, I can only say that Amazon and the publishers are doing what they see fit, whatever we think about it. All we can do at this point is try to find a model that will demonstrate to them (or whoever follows them) that DRM'd books and proprietary formats aren't the only way to go.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liviu_5
The problem with this analogy is that for music (e-mail, software, movies...) you need a device, for books you don't.
Leaving aside the fact that iTunes content is 1-5% of the average iPod content, that the iPod is very useful in a way a ebook reader is not since music is consumed a lot on the go and so on...
|
Actually, the printed book IS the device, delivering a work of literature (or other information) that could have been delivered in some other way, such as being recited to you, or presented on film. And paperbacks were primarily designed to give consumers cheaper, smaller editions of books for them to use
on the go (obviously, not while you're driving or anything, but when you're out and about, on vacation, etc).
In fact, if you think about it that way, sure, it's cheap... but it can only deliver to you that ONE book, you cannot alter the format or delivery in any way, you can't search, it takes up a lot of storage space, and it wastes a lot of paper for ONE piece of lit. In fact, it's considered so essentially worthless by the author/publisher that they couldn't care less if you keep it, resell it, burn it, or wipe your butt with it on a camping trip... especially after you've given them $10 for it.
("Defective" can be in the eye of the beholder.)