Kobo future firmware feature request thread

[speakingtohe]

Originally Posted by DNSB

Why would it need to be more than 50%? As long as the percentage is significant enough to add to the bottom line, it would make business sense. I'd also suggest one point to remember is that Kobo in the USA is not a major player compared to Amazon while elsewhere in the world, Kobo is a major player in the ereader market. Unfortunately, hard numbers seem hard to obtain but statements that Kobo has passed Amazon in the Japanese ereader market and is #1 in several European countries and Australia/New Zealand suggest that Kobo is best served by concentrating outside the USA while still attempting to grow their market share in the USA.

Regards,
David

I said it would have to be more than 50% based on this quote from the message I was replying to.

My opinion is that if Kobo had to choose one renderer, at this point in time, Kobo would have to go with ACCESS

I could be very wrong, but going strictly access and kepub would eliminate customers with non Kobo devices/apps.

Going strictly access on Kobo devices while continuing to sell epub, would possibly annoy many as well. They advertise Kobo as being able to read epubs and library books so it is probably an important selling point.

Adding even a small percentage to the bottom line is good, but not if it takes away a larger percentage.

Business is business after all.

Helen

[Rev. Bob]

Originally Posted by speakingtohe

My understanding is that Kobo makes the majority of money from selling books. Correct me if I am wrong. This is what I fail to understand about the big push for the access renderer.

At present, Kobo has the choice of either not selling Japanese books or using the ACCESS renderer to display them. As you note, they make money by selling books...

Originally Posted by speakingtohe

If they decide to go exclusively access than they cut off customers with non Kobo devices.

Then I suppose it's a good thing that nobody at Kobo is discussing that, eh?

[speakingtohe]

Originally Posted by Rev. Bob

Then I suppose it's a good thing that nobody at Kobo is discussing that, eh?

I wouldn't bet on it

Helen

[Rev. Bob]

Originally Posted by speakingtohe

I wouldn't bet on it

I would. They have no incentive to do that, and every incentive not to.

I don't expect to see Kobo even consider the possibility of removing either renderer until they have a single rendering platform that can support both Adobe's DRM and EPUB 3.0's typography. At present, that probably translates to "wait for Adobe/Datalogics to implement solid EPUB 3.0 support."

You've already admitted to not knowing much about Kobo's platform. Why would you even consider speculating about their business model based on such dubious information?

[speakingtohe]

Originally Posted by Rev. Bob

I would. They have no incentive to do that, and every incentive not to.

I don't expect to see Kobo even consider the possibility of removing either renderer until they have a single rendering platform that can support both Adobe's DRM and EPUB 3.0's typography. At present, that probably translates to "wait for Adobe/Datalogics to implement solid EPUB 3.0 support."

You've already admitted to not knowing much about Kobo's platform. Why would you even consider speculating about their business model based on such dubious information?

I think speculation is only speculation if you have no actual proof. One can therefore only speculate if they do not know for certain.

And I was not speculating, just saying that I did not understand the advantage of choosing the Access renderer if a choice must be made. Or even the marketing strategy behind kepubs. I am sure they have a plan that makes sense to them, but I do not see the benefit.

I actually was not he one who raised the point of Kobo using only one renderer to start out with and saying that I wouldn't bet on that is actually a statement of fact as I wouldn't.

DNSB gave me his opinion which I value but still don't see it as strong enough. My opinion, not speculation.

Saying I don't understand something is hardly speculative although saying that some people might not like only the Access renderer being used might possibly be. Pretty sure at least one or two wouldn't but perhaps it is speculative in your view.

Not being angry here but certainly feeling you are taking my words out of context, and of course any offense you have taken was not intended and I apologize profusely for upsetting you whether intentional or not.

Helen

[DNSB]

Originally Posted by speakingtohe

My understanding is that Kobo makes the majority of money from selling books. Correct me if I am wrong. This is what I fail to understand about the big push for the access renderer. If they decide to go exclusively access than they cut off customers with non Kobo devices. Sure we can convert but even then some might resent the necessity and many people can't or won't. And it is not in a bookseller's interest to encourage conversion.

No skin off my nose, just do not understand the big picture I guess

Helen

Very likely, they are making more selling books than selling ereaders. The ACCESS renderer allows them to make money selling books in markets where the Adobe RMDSK renderer is not a viable product.

No one has suggested they would go exclusively ACCESS other than my comment which I've quoted in full below. As far as I know, no one is attempting to force Kobo to use only one renderer. And even if Kobo went with ACCESS exclusively, why do you assume that precludes their bookstore from continuing to sell both epub and kepub versions? It would cause issues for their ereader customers either downloading library books or purchasing books from other vendors, making them less desireable to own.

Originally Posted by DNSB

My opinion is that if Kobo had to choose one renderer, at this point in time, Kobo would have to go with ACCESS -- one look at how an epub2 renderer handles Japanese typography gives you all the information you need to make that decision.

Regards,
David

[speakingtohe]

Originally Posted by DNSB

And even if Kobo went with ACCESS exclusively, why do you assume that precludes their bookstore from continuing to sell both epub and kepub versions? It would cause issues for their ereader customers either downloading library books or purchasing books from other vendors, making them less desireable to own.



Regards,
David

I don't assume that. In fact I implied what you are saying I think.

Going strictly access on Kobo devices while continuing to sell epub, would possibly annoy many as well. They advertise Kobo as being able to read epubs and library books so it is probably an important selling point.

Anyway it seems I am derailing the topic and am no further in my understanding etc. so I will try and cease and desist.

Thanks for your reply.

Helen

[sidnei]

I think the following features would be nice:

- Multi-touch zooming(or change font size) support;
- A back button functionality(no need for a mechanic button) like Kindle and a bunch of Tablets and Smartphones;
- A flexile collection support to group books;
- In case of Kobo Mini, put a selectbox for language on the quick view.
- Improvements to reading news.

[Ech1965]

+1 for

- sub collections ( author/series/books )
- or at least sort by serie number

[davidfor]

Unfortunately, the Mini is not getting its firmware updated. Some of these things are already in the firmware for the other devices.

Originally Posted by sidnei

I think the following features would be nice:

- Multi-touch zooming(or change font size) support;

This is there for the Aura, but the other devices can get it using a different kernel.

- A back button functionality(no need for a mechanic button) like Kindle and a bunch of Tablets and Smartphones;

This was brought back for the front-lit readers in recent firmwarm.

- A flexile collection support to group books;

I assume you mean "flexible". I find the collections very flexible. How do you want to change it?

- In case of Kobo Mini, put a selectbox for language on the quick view.

I don't know what you mean by this.

- Improvements to reading news.

Again, I'm not sure what you want. Kobo has had newspaper support, but seem to be dropping it. Pocket might give some of this to you, but I am not sure,

[Caramon77]

We really need

- Hyerarchical Indexes
- Better detection of note links
- Choice to display/not display fixed title on top in ACCESS
- Automatic detection of "main text CSS classes" and more aggressivity on 'em, mainly for line-height property.

[DNSB]

Originally Posted by Caramon77

We really need

- Hyerarchical Indexes
- Better detection of note links
- Choice to display/not display fixed title on top in ACCESS
- Automatic detection of "main text CSS classes" and more aggressivity on 'em, mainly for line-height property.

1. Hierarchical tables of contents? Would be nice to have but not a real need for me.

2. Better detection of note links? In most of the books I read that have footnotes, the problem is the footnote link is so small, it's hard to touch. The Aura does better here with the finer resolution of it's capacitive touch.

3. Title display in ACCESS? Again not a real biggie for me.

4. Huh? I've never noticed that CSS styles either in a stylesheet or embedded in the text has had issues with being detected. I have seen issues where the creator of the ebook has forgotten the that CSS stands for Cascading Style Sheets. When you apply multiple styles, inheritance can cause odd results. My personal preference is to handle styling though the stylesheet.css and not by embedding styling in the body text.

Regards,
David

[Rev. Bob]

Originally Posted by DNSB

4. Huh? I've never noticed that CSS styles either in a stylesheet or embedded in the text has had issues with being detected.

I think he means cases where, for instance, all the paragraph styles are set to Calibri but every paragraph contains a span that covers the entirety of its content and changes it to Times New Roman.

[DNSB]

Originally Posted by Rev. Bob

I think he means cases where, for instance, all the paragraph styles are set to Calibri but every paragraph contains a span that covers the entirety of its content and changes it to Times New Roman.

Or every chapter is wrapped in a <div></div> that sets properties that react with the stylesheet to give "interesting results". At least, they could have set the div's style from the stylesheet but no, the <div> tag had the styles embedded such as setting the font size in points. Made it a real PITA to edit.

Regards,
David

[Rev. Bob]

Originally Posted by DNSB

Or every chapter is wrapped in a <div></div> that sets properties that react with the stylesheet to give "interesting results". At least, they could have set the div's style from the stylesheet but no, the <div> tag had the styles embedded such as setting the font size in points. Made it a real PITA to edit.

I feel ya. It so happens that I've started writing a novel, and I've got my templates set up to produce nice, clean HTML at the end. It's surprising how much some word processors work against you that way, but I think I've got LibreOffice Writer pretty much tamed.