David,
So you prefer Microsoft over Adobe because the former's application "displays better" on your PC than the latter's, disregarding the fact that the former uses a proprietary book format? I don't understand you. All the time you've been screaming for a common e-book standard based on open-specs; now we have a big company who does the attempt, and you disqualify them based on the quality of an initial early beta release?
The Times Reader uses Microsoft .NET. Do you have any idea how many people do not have .NET installed? Either because they don't like the additional bloat, or simply because they are not using the Windows system. So how is Times Reader any less "eBabel territory" - using your famed words - than Digital Editions?
It doesn't matter what Digital Editions is written in. The point is that it supports an e-book format that is aimed at becoming the standard, which implies that other software application would support the same format in some future, making it easy for the user to switch to another reader if Digital Editions doesn't fit him well.
Last edited by TadW; 10-25-2006 at 03:24 AM.
|