Defective by Design is targeting the Kindle

[Moejoe]

Originally Posted by Sonist

First, $350 is not a huge amount - many spend more on a dinner with friends.

Second, I am not arguing against convergence, just that at the present time, I don't see an alternative to the e-ink technology. It is a different animal, as I said before. Much better for reading than your iPod. Much. Trust me, I have both.

It is more like paper, thus easier on your eyes over longer periods. When something similar comes along which can do full motion in color, of course it would take over. But there is nothing like this, that you should wait for.

Bigger, cheaper e-ink type screens will come in the next year or so, and so will greater sales.

This is totally anecdotal evidence, but it seems over the past year a third of my friends have purchased an e-reader. Not all are such avid readers. I think Amazon is really spearheading this in the US, and within a year or two it will do it in Europe.

What kind of world do you live in, because I'd love to live in a world where someone can spend $350 on a night out (about £280) and not have to worry about rent and food and whether or not they're going to get laid off next week because the economy is up the swanny.

Next time I go out for 'dinner' (read: to the chippy) I'll be sure to find some of these people who spend so much and ask them to pay.

[Sonist]

Originally Posted by dmaul1114

... I always hate people that get so defense over some product the spent money on....

Speaking of calming down, I am really not sure what your point is, or why you are getting excited?

If you want to maintain e-readers will never be more than a niche product, fine. Kind of like red wine, hard-cover books, smart-phones, or push email. Not all will have it, or like it, but many will.

Nevertheless, Citigroup estimates the Kindle to generate $1.2 billion for Amazon in 2010, which should boggle your mind, particularly if you think that $350 is such an exorbitant sum (for a device, which among other things, would allow you to read any classic you want, for free.)

Originally Posted by Moejoe

What kind of world do you live in, because I'd love to live in a world where someone can spend $350 on a night out (about £280)....

The same world, where people spend $299 for a touch device to listen to music on the go (or $399 for the 32gb version of the iPod Touch.)

Just different priorities, I guess. Some dance, some read, some eat....

[Moejoe]

Originally Posted by Sonist

Speaking of calming down, I am really not sure what your point is, or why you are getting excited?

If you want to maintain e-readers will never be more than a niche product, fine. Kind of like red wine, hard-cover books, smart-phones, or push email. Not all will have it, or like it, but many will.

Nevertheless, Citigroup estimates the Kindle to generate $1.2 billion for Amazon in 2010, which should boggle your mind, particularly if you think that $350 is such an exorbitant sum (for a device, which among other things, would allow you to read any classic you want, for free.)



The same world, where people spend $299 for a touch device to listen to music on the go (or $399 for the 32gb version of the iPod Touch.)

Just different priorities, I guess. Some dance, some read, some eat....

You want to know why I'm getting annoyed with you, do you really want to know? Because you're an ignorant idiot, that's why. And I'm not going to apologize for my tone.

I tell you what, and this is my thinking, come to my neighorhood and ask the people who are about %70 unemployed at the moment, whether £300 is an exhorbatant amount. I'm lucky, I've got a job, but there's a lot of people around me who are getting evicted and have bailiffs at the door who would rather use some of that money on, you know, eating food and paying their bills. But you could tell them about all the free classics they'd get, I'm sure that would impress them.

You talk from an elevated position, ignorant of what other people are going through at the moment. Red wine this and smart phone that, when people are suffering big time. Bandying about sums of money like it's nothing and in such an arrogant tone when that kind of money is the difference between having a roof over your head and being homeless.

[dmaul1114]

"Not all will have it, or like it, but many will."

That's pretty much a solid definition of a niche product. Smart phones are a niche products. Anything that does much less business than that is a failure.

Huge profits can be made on niche products, so I'm not at all surprised that Amazon is making a killing on them.

$350 is a lot for me as I don't do a ton of leisure reading, nor make a lot of money after bills.

In any case, I think we're just arguing over semantics as you have a wrong definition of a niche product as something hardly anyone buys and that makes little money.

A niche product is just something that's not mainstream, not something that's not profitable or successful.

[thibaulthalpern]

Originally Posted by Sonist

You guys keep saying this, but where do you get your information? From Steve Jobs?

My inkling is, that there are probably more readers today, than at any other point in history.

part of my impression comes from my students who usually don't do their readings and enjoy another form of media (aka video and audio).

[Sonist]

Originally Posted by Moejoe

... Because you're an ignorant idiot, that's why... come to my neighorhood and ask the people who are about %70 unemployed at the moment, whether £300 is an exhorbatant amount....

Oh, excuse me, I must be an ignorant idiot, who thinks that spending $350 on a reading device on which you can read free classics, is no different, than spending $300 on a music-playing device, for which you actually have to BUY music (unless in your neighborhood you just steal it.)

Again, it all comes down to different priorities.

(Keep your iPod well-hidden, since it sounds like in your neighborhood, it may be much more desirable, than an e-reader. And just as unaffordable for most of your neighbors.)

[Moejoe]

Originally Posted by Sonist

Oh, excuse me, I must be an ignorant idiot, who thinks that spending $350 on a reading device on which you can read free classics, is no different, than spending $300 on a music-playing device, for which you actually have to BUY music (unless in your neighborhood you just steal it.)

Again, it all comes down to different priorities.

(Keep your iPod well-hidden, since it sounds like in your neighborhood, it may be much more desirable, than an e-reader. And just as unaffordable for most of your neighbors.)

I very much doubt anybody in my neighborhood paid $300 on a music player (around £280 again). And I do keep my iPod hidden, because I've been mugged several times for a lot less than a iPod. I got my nose broken for a packet of cigarettes about a year ago, so you can see, really, where I live isn't so pleasant.

Oh and yes, you're still an ignorant idiot

[dmaul1114]

Originally Posted by Sonist

Oh, excuse me, I must be an ignorant idiot, who thinks that spending $350 on a reading device on which you can read free classics, is no different, than spending $300 on a music-playing device, for which you actually have to BUY music (unless in your neighborhood you just steal it.)

Again, it all comes down to different priorities.

(Keep your iPod well-hidden, since it sounds like in your neighborhood, it may be much more desirable, than an e-reader. And just as unaffordable for most of your neighbors.)

The problem was the way you phrased it. You said $350 is a lot of money and that people regularly spent that on dinner with friends. Yeah maybe in the upper class!

$350 is a lot of money for a music player. It's a lot of money for an ereader. And it's a ridiculous amount for a meal (most will never pay that much for a meal--maybe with a group of friends splitting the cost but not totally out of their pockets).

$350 is a lot of money to most people, especially in today's economy. So you came across as pompous by saying it wasn't.

Yeah I don't think it's any more outrageous to spend $350 on an ebook than it is that much on an mp3 player. Which is a better "value" just depends on what people enjoy more. And reading is far below things like music, movies, tv, video games etc. to the majority of people in today's culture.

To an avid reader like you it's a bargain, just like the iPod is a bargain to the music buff who loves having their 1000s and 1000s of songs with them everywhere they go. So I agree with you there. But still $350 is a lot of money for other device--and personal interest will determine if you'd spend that much for either.

Personally I wouldn't for either. I've never spent more than $150 for an mp3 player and got my Kindle 1 used for $200. On the other had I had no qualms dropping $1,000 on my TV and will spend more on an even nicer model sometime down the road. So it's not just money it is definitely priority as you say. My free time mostly goes to a combination of movies, tv, sports and video games so the TV is the most "important" gadget for me.

So the point of this rambling is I see where you're coming from but it's pompous to say that $350 isn't a lot of money. It is. You were trying to say an ereader isn't more "overpriced" than an mp3 player and other gadgets. And that's fair, you should have just said that rather than saying it isn't a lot of money period.

[RWJ]

Oy.

Yes, the economy sucks. Yes, people have less discretionary income than they did, on average, a couple years ago. But it's all about perspective. I'm not wealthy by any means, and I'm not particularly well positioned with respect to the Global Economic Apocalypse of Doom, and so on. I'm not 100% sure I'd buy my 505 today, given the choice, partly out of financial concerns. But I might - because I don't watch TV, almost never go out to the movies, and eat in a restaurant a handful of times per year. (By choice - don't like most movies and TV, and am a vegetarian in a city with few good veggie restaurants.) So while $300 for the reader is a good chunk of change, it's not unreasonable as a good share of my entertainment budget, given that I am a book addict, read a lot of documents for work, and am saving lots of money and hassle with cheaper and free ebooks, and so on. I know people who are selling their houses or moving to cheaper apartments who have cell phone plans that are $50 a month. Not how I'd allocate my budget, but - chacun a son gout.

On a less bombastic note, as to the potential readership of electronic books: the number of people who read lots of books is appallingly low, and it shows in the general literacy of university students. But reading things other than books is still fairly healthy: newspapers and magazines are read more often than books (although declining) but news content and magazine-style journalism, as well as blogs and other internet-only content are expanding tremendously. A device that allows people easily to transfer the content they want to a device that is light, small, durable* and lasts for ages on one charge could work out very well.

I also find that the major conversion factor among the people I know who've bought them (often after seeing or hearing about mine) is the travel angle. Lots of people travel for work regularly; odds are pretty good that anyone who flies for work once a month is earning enough money that $300 or so for the portability and convenience of a reader isn't a big deal. Even if devices only get sold to frequent fliers, there's still a hell of a lot of money to be made.

[Sonist]

Originally Posted by dmaul1114

... it's pompous to say that $350 isn't a lot of money. ... you should have just said that rather than saying it isn't a lot of money period.

Actually, what I said is: "$350 is not a huge amount - many spend more on a dinner with friends."

"Huge" means, according to Merriam-Webster, "very large or extensive."

And this is what I meant, precisely. There are people of all walks of life, who have purchased a Kindle, as you can see in the forum. It is not just a millionaire's toy. And saying that it is possible to own one, if one really cares about it, is hardly pompous. Particularly, since many e-readers are below this price-point.

As to the dinner part: if you live in a large metropolitan area, you can easily spend more than $350 on two couples ("dinner with friends.") And I am not speaking of the most expensive restaurants, either. This is valid for the US, as well as for Europe, Australia and parts of Asia and Africa. And I never said whether I do it, or not, but merely stated the fact that many have and will spend such amount.

As to the mp3 player: Moejoe mentioned owning an iPod Touch. These go for $299, or $399 in the US Apple store, depending on the capacity. More than most 6" e-readers.

[rcuadro]

Originally Posted by pilotbob

You can have the "file" on the computer, sure. But, you can't view/read it on the computer.

BOb

Oh... I got ya now. I guess that for me it is not an issue since, well, I do not read on my desktop... though I can see how it can bother people who do.

[dmaul1114]

Originally Posted by Sonist

Actually, what I said is: "$350 is not a huge amount - many spend more on a dinner with friends."

"Huge" means, according to MW, "very large or extensive." And this is what I meant, precisely. There are people of all walks of life, who have purchased a Kindle, as you can see in the forum. It is not just a millionaire's toy. And saying that it is possible to own one, if one really cares about it, is hardly pompous. Particularly, since many e-readers are below this price-point.

As to the dinner part: if you live in a large metropolitan area, you can easily spend more than $350 on two couples ("dinner with friends.") And I am not speaking of the most expensive restaurants, either. This is valid for the US, as well as for Europe, Australia and parts of Asia and Africa. I am sure some of those living in London, would have experienced this

As to the mp3 player: Moejoe mentioned owning an iPod Touch. These go for $299, or $399 in the US Apple store, depending on the capacity. More than most 6" e-readers.

Yeah it's really a dead horse. $350 is a lot of money to most people--more than some peoples rent or mortgage payments. And sure people can spend $350 on dinner, but MOST aren't wealthy people dining out in Manhattan.

And I'm not a cheapskate. I drink microbrew and import beer. I spend $50-100 on dinner and drinks for myself about once a month. But $350 at one time is still something I have to think about--and probably would never spend on dinner. I also only pay for myself and sometimes my girlfriend (we tend to alternate who pays). Friends can pay their own way.

But I just can't get your argumentativeness here. Whether $350 is to much to pay for an ereader (or an mp3 player or whatever) is a personal decision based on:

1. The person's budget. To some it's a lot of money, to some it's pocket change.

2. How much they read (or listen to music). If someone reads 3 books a year (or buys 1 or 2 cds a year) then the gadgets don't make sense for them. Read a ton (or listen to a ton of music) then they're probably worth the money.

So it's a function of how much disposable income someone has and how much value a particular device has to them (based on how much they'd use it).

I don't think anyone can disagree with that. And you just have to be careful when you talk about money and how much is or isn't a lot or a huge amount. It's as sensitive subject for many (especially now with the economy), and being dismisses of cost just makes you seem like a pompous rich person looking down on those worse off. Which I don't think was your intent, but it came across that way.

[dmaul1114]

Originally Posted by RWJ

Oy.
On a less bombastic note, as to the potential readership of electronic books: the number of people who read lots of books is appallingly low, and it shows in the general literacy of university students. But reading things other than books is still fairly healthy: newspapers and magazines are read more often than books (although declining) but news content and magazine-style journalism, as well as blogs and other internet-only content are expanding tremendously. A device that allows people easily to transfer the content they want to a device that is light, small, durable* and lasts for ages on one charge could work out very well.

I think a barrier there is so many people have already ditched print subscriptions for free online versions of newspapers. And the problem with ereaders now is you either pay for delivery of versions sometimes missing articles, pictures, graphs etc. Or you have to be tech inclined enough to use Calibre or something to pull from RSS feeds etc. (and still probably not have ideal formatting vs. the web versions--I've not tried yet).

But I think a few years down the road when we have color e-ink readers with bigger screens that can display magazines etc. close to the print/web version it will be a big draw.

I also find that the major conversion factor among the people I know who've bought them (often after seeing or hearing about mine) is the travel angle. Lots of people travel for work regularly; odds are pretty good that anyone who flies for work once a month is earning enough money that $300 or so for the portability and convenience of a reader isn't a big deal. Even if devices only get sold to frequent fliers, there's still a hell of a lot of money to be made.

Definitely. It's sure to be big among frequently travelers like any portable gadget. It's a big part of why I got mine, I hated lugging books on flights etc. Not the main reason (that was just not having physical books laying around that I read once and never touch) but it was a big selling point.

And you're right, there's a ton of money to be made there. Like I said, it's a niche but it can easily be (and probably will be) a VERY lucrative and profitable niche.

[Sonist]

And just to put this "niche" thing in perspective, here is what a quick elctronic (not paper:-) search produced:

"... if you turned back the clock and launched both at the same time, the Kindle would be outselling the iPod by 32 percent."

http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/02/03...ly-ipod-sales/

[dmaul1114]

Originally Posted by Sonist

And just to put this "niche" thing in perspective, here is what a quick elctronic (not paper:-) search produced:

"... if you turned back the clock and launched both at the same time, the Kindle would be outselling the iPod by 32 percent."

http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/02/03...ly-ipod-sales/

Good. Now lets see if it explodes like the iPod did.

And again, for godsake, niche isn't an insult that needs to be defended. Your precious ereaders aren't going anywhere. There's a lot of money to be made in this niche market and Amazon and others aren't going to every stop. The only thing that may change is we'll probably eventually move from pure reading devices to multifunction devices with e-ink screens down the road since they can sell them not just to avid readers--but also to people wanting an all in one device that they can read on, web surf on, etc. etc.

But I'd be absolutely flabbergasted if pure readers like the Kindle and Sony were every owned by nearly as many people that own mp3 players, so I'm not sure why your so fixated on the comparison. People don't read books at anywhere near the prevalence they listen to music, watch TV, watch movies etc. Culture has changed.