Interesting, but flawed, article on eBooks in the International Herald Tribune

[luqmaninbmore]

The author gets the price range of the Kindle wrong (the lowest regular is 115, not 140) and he insists, at several points in the article, that the Kindle has no web access to " hop off to the Web to look up facts, which I often wanted to do when reading a historical novel."

His last line is worth quoting, too: "But if money is tight, go for print. My used paperback cost only $4." And, I might add, he will most likely be able to sell the paperback after he has read it, recouping some of his cost. Can't do that with an ebook.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/11/te...ref=technology

[elcreative]

Wonderfully informed and accurate article...

[TimW]

Originally Posted by elcreative

Wonderfully informed and accurate article...

Yes, it was chock full of nifty observations like "The Kindle is light and costs much less, but it is also limited in that it can’t connect to the Web." The Times should advertise for some competent writers.

[DMB]

I can't see where one can make a comment either.

[anamardoll]

Not sure how on board I am with the "money is tight" argument.

If you don't care what you read and are happy with promotional freebies, indie freebies, free PD books, and NetGalley arcs (Be a reviewer! Come to the dark side!), then an eReader works out to mere pennies per book.

On the other hand, if you REALLY want to read, say, X specific book, then it's possible that an eReader isn't saving you money in the long run... unless you're the type that needs it on release day, in which case you *might* save money if the eBook is cheaper than the hardcover (big if).

[TimW]

Originally Posted by DMB

I can't see where one can make a comment either.

Yes, isn't that interesting?

I sent the so-called author an email earlier...I see he hasn't bothered to correct anything.

[jgaiser]

Most (a lot?) of NY Times articles have no way to comment online. Just another example of the fine work of our nations newspaper reporters.

[kjk]

That's odd-Nick Bilton is usually pretty tech savvy.

[Nancy Fulda]

Originally Posted by kjk

That's odd-Nick Bilton is usually pretty tech savvy.

It may be deliberate. I expect they don't want every complaint about inaccuracies in their articles posted on the web for all their other readers to see. It would impact their credibility.

[luqmaninbmore]

Which credibility they do noy deserve if they refuse to correct errors.

[Bikeridr]

Actually, there is a "correction" present.
It's not corrected in the article, but there's a footnote stating that the Kindle was "misstated" and that it does have a simple internet/web-feature.

So, it seem that the author *do* listen to mailed in corrections.

[elcreative]

Originally Posted by Bikeridr

Actually, there is a "correction" present.
It's not corrected in the article, but there's a footnote stating that the Kindle was "misstated" and that it does have a simple internet/web-feature.

So, it seem that the author *do* listen to mailed in corrections.

When something is completely wrong then it should be clearly noted with a direct pointer to the proper information... this is one of the things that the web is really good at but dropping in a footnote just means most people are likely to miss it and take the original statement as gospel...

[khalleron]

Originally Posted by anamardoll

Not sure how on board I am with the "money is tight" argument.

If you don't care what you read and are happy with promotional freebies, indie freebies, free PD books, and NetGalley arcs (Be a reviewer! Come to the dark side!), then an eReader works out to mere pennies per book.

Well, I *do* care what I read, and I LOVE PD books, so my Sony has been quite a money saver (as well as space saver) for me.

Of course, in this day and age, for most of us it's not either-or what device. There's no law against having more than one.

Pick what suits your needs. Just don't force your needs on everyone else. Pretty simple.

As to 'whatever's cheaper', don't forget your public library. Your tax dollars at work!

[jersysman]

Originally Posted by elcreative

When something is completely wrong then it should be clearly noted with a direct pointer to the proper information... this is one of the things that the web is really good at but dropping in a footnote just means most people are likely to miss it and take the original statement as gospel...

Newspapers have been doing this for years. The will print out accusations in bold and very large print on the front page. If they ever have to correct information or print a refraction, you will find it on page 64 or something similar. I think they hate admitting mistakes.

[Hellmark]

Originally Posted by anamardoll

Not sure how on board I am with the "money is tight" argument.

If you don't care what you read and are happy with promotional freebies, indie freebies, free PD books, and NetGalley arcs (Be a reviewer! Come to the dark side!), then an eReader works out to mere pennies per book.

On the other hand, if you REALLY want to read, say, X specific book, then it's possible that an eReader isn't saving you money in the long run... unless you're the type that needs it on release day, in which case you *might* save money if the eBook is cheaper than the hardcover (big if).

Not to mention library access. Between freebies, books I've read through the library, etc, I've averaged about 82 cents an ebook. And that is factoring in the ebooks bought for school, tech books I've bought for work related things, etc (the one ebook for school was $90 by itself).