MobileRead Forums - View Single Post

davidspitzer · 09-29-2009, 03:11 AM

I was participating quite vigorously in a thread about the review Princeton gave the Kindle DX trial (bad) - and I was absolutely floored at how many people on a site, geared towards mobile reading platforms, really did not seem to have much heart when it came to supporting and promoting the Ebook platform and in a lot of cases downright hated it

please read the whole thread to get the flavor

https://www.mobileread.com/forums/showthread.php?t=57763

but this was my last exchange and to me it was disappointing -

I posted this in a new thread because I am curious - do the majority of you really feel this way?

=========================
Originally Posted by LDBoblo
I'd actually prefer if paper producers would stop using their own benign, sustainable forests of bamboo-like trees designed for rapid renewal and would start cutting down some real growth again to improve some of the paper quality. Displace all those silly slash/burners in Africa and South America who are just putting all that good wood to waste. Of course, it'd be nice to make paper out of some other materials too, since some varieties are quite superior to wood-based in terms of durability.

As far as ebooks...the devices suck. They are not good enough for anything outside of a very narrow window of usage. The technology needs to fundamentally improve before feasibility for mass adoption comes into play. There is no need, except when desperate, to adapt to the inferior nature of these devices unless their only 2 advantages are absolutely essential (space conservation, keyword search). I will take a widescreen high-resolution notebook with PDFs long long before I will even consider using any of the e-ink garbage for anything remotely resembling scholarly research. Having to find a power outlet and deal with a backlit LCD (Heaven forbid! A superior screen technology for small text!) are worthwhile for the incredibly massive step up in usability.

Adaptation is necessary, but adaptation to superior methodology and superior technology. The current crop of E-ink readers qualifies as neither. Most of us here are already early adopters in some way; that does not mean we should be in any way contented to reduce our standards and shrug it off with "well we have to adapt!" That's nothing more than a cop-out.

I will use just about anything OTHER than an ebook reader for research. I've had to do research working from bamboo slat scrolls, and I find those to be a superior technology to ebook readers at the moment. In another few generations of device, some of the technological kinks should be ironed out (hopefully not "adapted to" by apologists)...but I'm not going to waste my money on it now.

My. Response
===========
but who is to drive improvements other than us? The manufacturers and publishers are not going to expend any effort unless they see commitment. Sitting back and complaining will not achieve this goal.

Adopting and using is not settling - the first men and woman who flew biplanes did it with zeal and excitement because they knew that the only way to drive improvement was with skin in the game. They did not sit on the sidelines and complain that the airframe was to weak and that that planes sucked because they were laden with flaws; no they jumped in and drove the improvements literally by sheer will and commitment

Those people did not compromise their standards and neither do we by trying to leverage this technology, even if it does have flaws. If you truly believe in its potential then you are either a bystander or flyer - I wish to be a flyer and I think the only way we are going to see quantum changes for the better is if we are willing to take some pain, work through the issues and show the hardware producers that it can work and that we want them to put more time, energy and money into this field.

Yes it's easier to read a paperbound academic book, yes its easier to print out a paper and read it rather then copy it to my ebook reader, but I do it because thats what we should be doing and like the early aviators, the fact that the technology is lacking in many ways will not detract me from doing it

I must admit I am a little shocked and disappointed at the attitude displayed here and I'll be honest I hope you are in the minority, because if we, as early adopters and supposed pundents of this this technology can not rally support among our own ranks how do we expect others to do so. It should come as no surprise when we hear negative reports like the one from Princeton.

Is this the best enthusiasm we can muster? Has our attention span so waned nowadays that we are unwilling to work through any adversity? Have we degenerated to only gravitating towards instant gratification pursuing only the path of least resistance?

Where have all the barnstormers gone?

09-29-2009, 03:11 AM	#1
davidspitzer So Many Words to Read! Posts: 411 Karma: 125665 Join Date: Aug 2006 Device: Kindle	Where Have All the Barnstormers Gone I was participating quite vigorously in a thread about the review Princeton gave the Kindle DX trial (bad) - and I was absolutely floored at how many people on a site, geared towards mobile reading platforms, really did not seem to have much heart when it came to supporting and promoting the Ebook platform and in a lot of cases downright hated it please read the whole thread to get the flavor https://www.mobileread.com/forums/showthread.php?t=57763 but this was my last exchange and to me it was disappointing - I posted this in a new thread because I am curious - do the majority of you really feel this way? ========================= Originally Posted by LDBoblo I'd actually prefer if paper producers would stop using their own benign, sustainable forests of bamboo-like trees designed for rapid renewal and would start cutting down some real growth again to improve some of the paper quality. Displace all those silly slash/burners in Africa and South America who are just putting all that good wood to waste. Of course, it'd be nice to make paper out of some other materials too, since some varieties are quite superior to wood-based in terms of durability. As far as ebooks...the devices suck. They are not good enough for anything outside of a very narrow window of usage. The technology needs to fundamentally improve before feasibility for mass adoption comes into play. There is no need, except when desperate, to adapt to the inferior nature of these devices unless their only 2 advantages are absolutely essential (space conservation, keyword search). I will take a widescreen high-resolution notebook with PDFs long long before I will even consider using any of the e-ink garbage for anything remotely resembling scholarly research. Having to find a power outlet and deal with a backlit LCD (Heaven forbid! A superior screen technology for small text!) are worthwhile for the incredibly massive step up in usability. Adaptation is necessary, but adaptation to superior methodology and superior technology. The current crop of E-ink readers qualifies as neither. Most of us here are already early adopters in some way; that does not mean we should be in any way contented to reduce our standards and shrug it off with "well we have to adapt!" That's nothing more than a cop-out. I will use just about anything OTHER than an ebook reader for research. I've had to do research working from bamboo slat scrolls, and I find those to be a superior technology to ebook readers at the moment. In another few generations of device, some of the technological kinks should be ironed out (hopefully not "adapted to" by apologists)...but I'm not going to waste my money on it now. My. Response =========== but who is to drive improvements other than us? The manufacturers and publishers are not going to expend any effort unless they see commitment. Sitting back and complaining will not achieve this goal. Adopting and using is not settling - the first men and woman who flew biplanes did it with zeal and excitement because they knew that the only way to drive improvement was with skin in the game. They did not sit on the sidelines and complain that the airframe was to weak and that that planes sucked because they were laden with flaws; no they jumped in and drove the improvements literally by sheer will and commitment Those people did not compromise their standards and neither do we by trying to leverage this technology, even if it does have flaws. If you truly believe in its potential then you are either a bystander or flyer - I wish to be a flyer and I think the only way we are going to see quantum changes for the better is if we are willing to take some pain, work through the issues and show the hardware producers that it can work and that we want them to put more time, energy and money into this field. Yes it's easier to read a paperbound academic book, yes its easier to print out a paper and read it rather then copy it to my ebook reader, but I do it because thats what we should be doing and like the early aviators, the fact that the technology is lacking in many ways will not detract me from doing it I must admit I am a little shocked and disappointed at the attitude displayed here and I'll be honest I hope you are in the minority, because if we, as early adopters and supposed pundents of this this technology can not rally support among our own ranks how do we expect others to do so. It should come as no surprise when we hear negative reports like the one from Princeton. Is this the best enthusiasm we can muster? Has our attention span so waned nowadays that we are unwilling to work through any adversity? Have we degenerated to only gravitating towards instant gratification pursuing only the path of least resistance? Where have all the barnstormers gone? Last edited by davidspitzer; 09-29-2009 at 01:23 PM.