Amazon unveils 9.7-inch Kindle DX with focus on education - Page 3

Originally Posted by melgross

Just think: You've gotten an entire years worth of annotated lectures and textbooks on your device, and you lose it. Now, the books can be downloaded again, and you can get the lectures again, but what about all of those valuable notes?

Originally Posted by melgross

It's not that they haven't done an amazing job with the hardware. The question is whether this entire category is viable.

You really have to remember that we have no idea how many Kindle's have been sold. Amazon refuses to answer that question. Estimates have been all over the place, from 250,000 to 750,000.

While Apple doesn't break out numbers for each model in their lines, they at least do tell us how many of a line have been sold, to a certain extent. So we know how many desktops, portables, iPhones, iPods etc.

Amazon has had ONE device. The fact that they have constantly refused to give out sales figures seems a bit suspicious.

Originally Posted by NasserAE

This one looks much better than the previous one.

Apple don't need to make ebook reader, they only need a touch tablet. The reader can be a software by Amazon.

Originally Posted by teckstud

Really? How many APPLETVs have been sold????

Originally Posted by quinney

I think the electronic versions are (or will be) much less expensive. The publishing costs
are much lower with no paper, no newsstands, many fewer union employees, etc.

Originally Posted by Virgil-TB2

You're right in that I probably overstated that a tad, but I was careful to say "get their news from" newspapers, not "read newspapers" even though I definitely implied "readership." Also, these kinds of things would clearly vary from area to area, and country to country as well so your mileage may vary as they say.

I would argue that while lots of people may still read newspapers, that in most cases it's neither the main source, nor the first source for news in that group. What I see in my area is that almost everyone has switched to the "free" newspapers, which are now handed out at every bus, train, and transit station. You actually have to dodge around these idiots handing out the papers and perhaps throw a few karate chops just to make it to the bus most days.

If the readers had to pay for the paper, only something like one in a hundred would do so IMO.


It certainly makes a difference where you live in that if I lived in New York I might be tempted to buy the paper simply because it's a better paper. The two main "pay for" papers in my town are horrible rags that are almost the same format and mostly the same information as the free papers.

I would still argue that you are in a minority in spending so much money per year for newspapers and magazine subscriptions. Other than a single obscure and very unique magazine that I get from the UK (because it's the only source of that information), I haven't bought or read a magazine in at least 15 years, and I'm a huge reader with a vast book collection etc. so it's not like I fill up my time by watching TV or something.

I think the newspapers did this to themselves to a degree in that the only real reason to pay for a paper over getting the news for free on the internet, is the analysis, not the news itself. The news The NY Times and the WSJ are some of the best traditional news sources for that reason.

What I see is that the majority of TV and newspaper news outlets have been moving more and more into the entertainment realm over the last couple of decades and backing away from any kind of editorial positions or analysis of the news. Now that this same news can be had on the net for free, they are up against the wall because (WSJ and NYT excluded) they don't really offer anything that the consumer can't get for free on the internet.

Originally Posted by solipsism

That is exactly his point, you break out numbers when the sales are impressive. The only numbers that Apple has broken out for the AppleTV hobby are that the sale rose 3x, but they didn't give a unit figure to compare it to, because while it maybe tops in media extender appliances, it's pretty low for an Apple product.

Originally Posted by mbmcavoy

Pioneer, yes. Perfect world-changing solution, no.

The very name "Kindle" to me describes Amazon's vision. This isn't the fire, it's not the fuel, it's just the little bit to get the fire started!

My biggest gripe is that the publishers see this as a way to make massively more money. eBooks have massively less manufacturing and distribution costs, cannot be resold (or, it seems, transferred from one device to another?), and have inherently less value. The price for the consumer should be far less than a paper copy.

Fix the business model, and mature the readers (bigger, faster, cheaper, color screens), and it just might catch on!

Originally Posted by brucep

I agree , a nice touch tablet .
wifi
internet
osx
all the app's from iphone store < kndle app is free >
colour
usb
firewire
dvd player
multi touch
all glass top
unibody bottom
camera
video
250 g hd
NVIDIA graphics
The GeForce 9600M GT
2.4GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
2GB 1066MHz DDR3 SDRAM - 2x1GB


help what else can 1 add ???

all this for 899 $

Originally Posted by teckstud

That's a bullsheet answer and you know it. 3X means nothing - that is not a number.
Who cares how many units Amazon has sold or "shipped" as Apple likes to say - as long as the product delivers? Who cares?

Originally Posted by dude abides

Everyone knocking the display seems to ignore the 2 huge advantages of e-ink over a back-lit screen:
1. Eye-fatigue
2. Ability to read in bright sunlight.

No doubt it sucks these things are only in B&W, but who cares if it's in color if you can't see the damn thing or you don't want to look at it any longer because it hurts to do so. I don't know how any new tablet device from Apple will overcome that problem.

Would I pay that much for it? Probably not, not without a stylus to mark up the docs (assuming this would be another limitation of the e-ink technology). But as a law student, I drool at the idea of ditching my textbooks for something like this.

Originally Posted by melgross

It's not that they haven't done an amazing job with the hardware. The question is whether this entire category is viable.

You really have to remember that we have no idea how many Kindle's have been sold. Amazon refuses to answer that question. Estimates have been all over the place, from 250,000 to 750,000.

While Apple doesn't break out numbers for each model in their lines, they at least do tell us how many of a line have been sold, to a certain extent. So we know how many desktops, portables, iPhones, iPods etc.

Amazon has had ONE device. The fact that they have constantly refused to give out sales figures seems a bit suspicious.

Originally Posted by teckstud

The price$ are already half for a book and have been. Go to Amazon and check it out.

Originally Posted by solipsism

Most... expensive... razor... EVER!

Originally Posted by solipsism

Any eBook that is to be used in colleges a text book reader—which seems unlikely until the readers are colour capable—would have to have a robust notes taking method and be able to back itself up, perhaps even automatically like MobileMe, before it begins to be viable. And the notes taking would have to be convenient and simple to write and read quickly.

Originally Posted by hiimamac

I can't wait for the Apple device that will probably run on Verizon.

Color, OS programs, email, just hope we are not raped by a contract.

Should work well with iPhone, Mobile Me. It's happening.

Originally Posted by teckstud

Really? How many APPLETVs have been sold????

Originally Posted by al_bundy

a 5MB song lasts 3 minutes or so. a 5MB book file is hundreds of pages

and will take you a long time to read. no reason for enough storage to last you 20 years of reading since you will buy a better model several times by then

Originally Posted by teckstud

That's a bullsheet answer and you know it. 3X means nothing - that is not a number.
Who cares how many units Amazon has sold or "shipped" as Apple likes to say - as long as the product delivers? Who cares?

Originally Posted by SpamSandwich

Amazon's overarching goal is to make a sale wherever and whenever the customer is ready to buy. It's likely they are not making big margins on Kindle's right now, but they are building a new distribution chain. Nothing wrong with that.

Originally Posted by solipsism

There is a lot more than a screen size increase.

Originally Posted by solipsism

Reading comprehension would do you some good. You say my response if bullshit but then repeat what I just wrote.

Originally Posted by melgross


I think that the Kindle is dead meat. It may take a year or two until we see that happening.

Originally Posted by melgross

That's the one thing Apple hasn't told us. If Amazon called this their experimental "hobby" line, it would be different.

Originally Posted by hillstones

Verizon loves to...So have a good time with that.

Originally Posted by melgross

Nothing wrong with it. I LOVE digital books. I have a couple hundred.

I just don't think that, long term, a reader as a device, will survive.

Originally Posted by teckstud

Right - and that why you answer a question "How many AppleTV's sold?" with an answer "3x, blah, blah ,blah".

Originally Posted by solipsism

I bet that is all you see since the context of my post, to even a rudimentary English reader, clearly states that the AppleTV numbers are too low, like the Kindle, for the units sales to be broken out for marketing fodder. Only reading what you want to does go a long way to explaining why you post the asinine things you do.

Originally Posted by QuantumEntanglement

Sorry had to finally register to say that.

But here are my thoughts:

The future will be color, handy device, very thin, maybe about 10", maybe aluminum/carbon-fibre, OLED, and all the functionality of the iPhone / iPod-Touch.

My guess is that Apple's R&D hasn't been sleeping all these years. It was very obvious that something like this would be important.

Maybe we'll have to wait for one or two years.

But there will be definitely something better than the Kindle.

what do you think?

Originally Posted by melgross

Nothing wrong with it. I LOVE digital books. I have a couple hundred.

I just don't think that, long term, a reader as a device, will survive.

Originally Posted by teckstud

Ok- there- now you say the numbers are too low- big difference. We'll get you to speak American yet.

That is exactly his point, you break out numbers when the sales are impressive. The only numbers that Apple has broken out for the AppleTV hobby are that the sale rose 3x, but they didn't give a unit figure to compare it to, because while it maybe tops in media extender appliances, it's obviously pretty low in sales for an Apple product.

Originally Posted by solipsism

I said it there and in my original posting that you didn't comprehend in which you responded to Melgross because you didn't comprehend what he wrote. If I'm using words with too many syllables or sentences that are too complex for a novice reader, let me know and I adjust any replies to you accordingly. See post run. (see what I did there?)

Originally Posted by paxman

Maybe not, but this, as all digital devices are, is an iterative process. It may not survive for ten years, or even five, but maybe for four years? Who knows. The point is that I don't think Amazon is selling this to make shedloads of money. It is in their interest to make it as cheap as possible (that is my only real complaint - its VERY expensive) in order to sell digital content.

Originally Posted by teckstud

Right - just like netbooks which have so infiltrated the psyche of the world now that Apple is like 2 years behind schedule with an ultra-portable device with a 7- 11" screen.
Well the NY Times and other news organizations obviously don't think it dead meat so I don't think your opinion really matters.

Originally Posted by mark2005

But a single-purpose device for reading will be a niche product. Which is fine. Someday it may be color and maybe it'll do more than just allow one to read. But Amazon is new to the consumer electronics business, and IF (a big if) they want to stay in hardware, they'll have to prove that they can keep making new products as quickly as their competitors, which will soon include Apple, PC manufacturers, and cellphone manufacturers. Even if they leave future hardware to others and stick to e-reader software, Amazon is accomplishing what it set out to do; to make reading on electronics devices plausible.

Originally Posted by teckstud

OK- it's a hobby but not a bag of hurt.
There- are you happy?

Seriously it's not the main thrust that drives Amazon. Other peoples goods are. This is a relatively new thing for Amazon. And all you guys do is put it down?

Originally Posted by melgross

Teck, there's a major difference between netbooks and book readers.

For one, a netbook can BE a book reader, but a book reader is just a book reader (ok it can play MP3s too).

If you're going to go off track and get personal, then why does your opinion matter either?

That's a very poor argument on your side. Just because the NY Times MAY be interested in this doesn't make it a success. Newspapers, including the NY Times, are having problems, they will try and talk up, anything they may think will help them. It doesn't mean anything. Everything they do now is already digital. It won't hurt to try, though there are all the problems I brought up.