Sony v Kindle

[karunaji]

Originally Posted by Crowl

Your implication is that because the Kindle is cheaper it is inherently worse and that simply isn't the case in my experience.

I suspect that Amazon subsidizes Kindle and it actually costs more than we paid for it.

[Crowl]

Originally Posted by karunaji

I suspect that Amazon subsidizes Kindle and it actually costs more than we paid for it.

They claim to make money from the hardware and not just the ebook sales, but you would have to assume that they are happy to work on much lower margins than sony who are trying to make most of their money from the hardware.

[Richey79]

I can't help but give my opinion on this one... .

I think the Kindle is great in many ways: the idea of making the ereader available to everyone, prioritising the quality of screen and having well-placed page-turn buttons; their everything-plus-the-kitchen-sink approach to features.

But when I look for a little longer, I start to get somewhat irritated by the light weight design of the Kindle, how it creaks when you hold it, the obviously cheap plastic, how easily the spaces between the keys are cracked. If they're cutting their profit margins by so much on this product, then why are they as happy to give you five Kindles as one? - Yes, Amazon's custom service is excellent, but I can't help feeling the value of the product must be approaching negligible.

It helps to think in terms of comparisons.

I enjoy photography a great deal. If the Kindle is a modern compact digital camera, then the Sony is a Leica: the Kindle does eveything you want at a great price-point and even offers modern features that the Sony doesn't: wireless browsing! 3G! and there's nothing wrong with that. Whereas, the Sony is made from metal, feels nice and heavy and you're forced to side-load books onto the device. It also has far nicer fonts than the Kindle, and the same screen renders images better (I'm not sure why this is from a technical perspective, but I'm pretty sure that it is objectively the case). The back of the Sony feels lovely to hold and the efficiency with which the device's size is used to perfection reminds me of nothing more than the Leica M6.

Do people buy the Leica rather than the digital compact to show off, rather than because it represents good value for money in a side-by-side comparison? - Certainly.

Does the Leica offer a more pure experience of photography? - Almost certainly.

Yes, Sony has dreadful computer software and a poor book-store in relation to Amazon. However, this matters not-a-jot when Sony concentrate on the things that really matter to a degree that no other manufacturer does. They deserve respect simply for bucking the trend and having the guts to decide that their product's iidentity is at the higher end of the market.

I'd be disappointed if Sony left the ereader market. Having said that; I'd be disappointed if Amazon left the ereader market-place.

But those people who say the Kindle offers more than the Sony at a fraction of the price have very different priorities to me.

[elcreative]

Richey... got to agree with that... and like the avatar, got a black & white one that loves the same position...

[pidgeon92]

Originally Posted by Richey79

But when I look for a little longer, I start to get somewhat irritated by the light weight design of the Kindle, how it creaks when you hold it, the obviously cheap plastic, how easily the spaces between the keys are cracked.

I've owned 4 different Kindles.... none of them have creaked, nor have they cracked. Neither have my Sonys.

[jbcohen]

I would like to ask a question - Since pidgeon owns several kindles and a Sony 950 pidgeon is in a position to compare the Kindles to the Sony readers. How does the Kindles and the Sony compare in your opinion? Apart from the obvious that the Sony is touch screen and the Kindle is not. I am interested in how much an improvement is the Kindle 3 over the Kindle 2?

[pidgeon92]

Originally Posted by jbcohen

I would like to ask a question - Since pidgeon owns several kindles and a Sony 950 pidgeon is in a position to compare the Kindles to the Sony readers. How does the Kindles and the Sony compare in your opinion? Apart from the obvious that the Sony is touch screen and the Kindle is not. I am interested in how much an improvement is the Kindle 3 over the Kindle 2?

The improvement between the K2 and K3 is in the screen. The text on my K3 is far more crisp than on my K2. The screen on my 950 compares comparably to my K3; aside from the 9500 being larger they are pretty much interchangeable.

I keep Kindle books on the Kindle, and I put all others on my 950 or Boox M90. I don't keep a lot of books on the Sony, so the user interface isn't something I use a lot. I do like the dictionary options on the Sony, and being able to click a word vs. navigating to it on the Kindle is a plus. The touch screen on the Sony is responsive; perhaps too responsive, I've had it turn a page when I've tried to blow a hair off the screen.

My favorite thing about my Kindle is the cover. I love the Amazon cover with the built-in light. Perfect for reading at night. I wish I could get the integrated cover/light for the 950. I use a Verilux light on the 950, and it makes it top-heavy. Thus, I read my Kindle at night, and my Sony and M90 during the day.

Do I find the Kindle lighter/flimsier than the Sony? Not really, especially since both stay in their covers. The Amazon cover is very sturdy, and the light adds quite a bit of weight. I just weighed them, and my Kindle in the cover is 15.8oz, my 950 in the cover is 13.7oz. I'm rather surprised by that, I thought the 950 was heavier all around.

[Salgueiros]

Originally Posted by Crowl

Your implication is that because the Kindle is cheaper it is inherently worse and that simply isn't the case in my experience.

Both the k3 and the latest generation sonys have equal quality screens and then the kindle has the benefit of more convenient purchasing and synching between versions which enable me to read more books whereas the touchscreen on the sony has zero impact on my reading experience.

No. My implication is not that the Kindle is worse because it is cheaper. I said Sony is more expensive and it is better, and that makes buying a Sony gratifying. Not the same thing. And the touchscreen was absolutely phenomenal in my reading experience, so i win

[Ditchleyportrait]

Originally Posted by HarryT

Have you considered the possibility that some people might value features other than networking? To call someone's personal preference "a bald faced lie" is a little over the top.

i know. i said as much in the post of mine that followed. i went a bit further, actually.

[Pinecone]

OTOH sideloading allows me to organize my books.

If you ahve 10 books, no problem, you have close to 1000 books, and organization is KEY.

Sony for me. Waiting to see the next offering. My wife wants my 650 (she got my 600 and wants the better screen).

But then again I also drive a BMW M3.

[Rizla]

Originally Posted by pidgeon92

I use a Verilux light on the 950, and it makes it top-heavy. Thus, I read my Kindle at night, and my Sony and M90 during the day.

The Amazon cover is very sturdy, and the light adds quite a bit of weight. I just weighed them, and my Kindle in the cover is 15.8oz, my 950 in the cover is 13.7oz. I'm rather surprised by that, I thought the 950 was heavier all around.

Yes, it is surprising. I was surprised to discover that the 650 weighs less than the K3, being metal instead of plastic. But then aluminium is light. The K3 includes wifi technology so that adds to the weight. I don't want wifi, so that suits me.

Re: the light, I have a mightybright travelflex. It is very light and runs on one (rechargeable) AAA battery. It clips to the standard case and is not heavy or imbalanced.

[carpetmojo]

I find the question of Amazon prioritizing (?) content sales over hardware sales interesting at present.

Here in the UK, amazon are doing a massive TV-led advertising drive, specifically pushing the entry level kindle @ £111 - referring initially to "the book" without mention of e-book, or, obviously, that you'll need to get them from Amazon.
I know TV advertising costs have come down, but it still represents a big investment in pushing the product, and the cheapest one at that, to hopefully create even more of a near-monopoly position, via supply, for them.

The "oh that's a kindle, can I see" syndrome is exactly what they are aiming for - I've certainly seen no other reader advertised here.

Is it the same Stateside ?

[elcreative]

carpetmojo, Sony did have a TV advertising campaign as well as adverts in the national press last year... not a lot I'll admit but they did have some...

[Bookworm_Girl]

Originally Posted by elcreative

carpetmojo, Sony did have a TV advertising campaign as well as adverts in the national press last year... not a lot I'll admit but they did have some...

Sony had a series of ads for several of their products starring US celebrities such as Justin Timberlake and Peyton Manning. That was maybe a year and half ago or so. Blink and you probably missed the entire campaign. Here is the info on the Sony ereader campaign:
http://www.techflash.com/seattle/200..._campaign.html

On the other hand, the Kindle ads are very memorable and well done. Also, I am frequently getting advertisements in the mail from companies (like banks) that say buy our product, and we'll give you a free Kindle. I remember one of the ads was a lifesize image of Kindle 3 on the postcard. Barnes & Noble currently has ads on TV and in popular print magazines advertising their new Nook Touch.

[elcreative]

Sorry bookworm_girl but I wasn't clear... The person I responded to was UK based and I was talking about the UK ad campaign which was spread over several months and didn't use US celebrities but no-name actors as the reader was the point of the ads...