It's not a lie nor is it false in any way. I said "people LIKE YOU". I didn't say that you said that.
(where 'people like you' would be all the apple-hating trolls infesting this forum. I'm still trying to figure out how so many people are displaying such clear signs of narcissistic personality disorder).
Do you ever get tired of being incapable of reading? I guess that's why they call you Dr. Dopey.
Immature name calling -- a clear sign of intellectual impotence.
You literally said "you also attack" -- that includes me. But given that you're used to moving the goal-posts, I'll let you give me one example of people LIKE ME who said they were angry at Apple not suing Amazon, or shut up.
Immature name calling -- a clear sign of intellectual impotence.
You literally said "you also attack" -- that includes me. But given that you're used to moving the goal-posts, I'll let you give me one example of people LIKE ME who said they were angry at Apple not suing Amazon, or shut up.
Read what I wrote. I said: "People like you attack Apple if they sue and you also attack if they don't sue. In your view, nothing Apple does can ever be right."
Basic reading comprehension would tell you that the 'you' later in the sentence refers to the subject - which is "people like you".
Not only did you get it wrong, but you are continuing to prove that your reading comprehension fails to reach the level of an average 4th grader.
Read what I wrote. I said: "People like you attack Apple if they sue and you also attack if they don't sue. In your view, nothing Apple does can ever be right."
Basic reading comprehension would tell you that the 'you' later in the sentence refers to the subject - which is "people like you".
Not only did you get it wrong, but you are continuing to prove that your reading comprehension fails to reach the level of an average 4th grader.
Splitting hairs, yet still wrong. The correct personal pronoun to exclude the listener would have been "they". Besides, you still haven't given me any examples. Do that, or stay quiet under your bridge.
This is a rare instance that Apple can't offer a higher service for a higher price.
I've been thinking about this. For ebooks, this is true. But when it comes to devices for reading ebooks, it's no longer as true as it once was.
Prior to the release of the iPad 3, Apple did not have a tablet which was good for reading a book, even indoors. The resolution was just too low. Now, with the release of the iPad 3 and Amazon's Kindle Fire, Apple and Amazon are starting to intrude into the same space, Apple with a high price/high value solution and Amazon with a low price/low value solution. (I'm talking about the Kindle Fire, not the eInk Kindles where Apple doesn't have a competing product.) IMHO, neither of these is good for reading. The Kindle Fire is too low resolution and the iPad 3 is too heavy.
Maybe if Apple releases a smaller, lighter tablet which is otherwise like the iPad 3, they'll have a great tablet for reading which is also a great general use tablet. And if Amazon releases a Kindle Touch with backlit eInk, they'll have an excellent reader for ALL situations. Then both will be on the same general low-cost/limited use : high-cost/high-value curve.
Even in this case, though, Apple still won't have the advantage in the ebooks themselves. Kindle format books can be used on just about any platform. Apple's iBooks are no more convenient that Amazon's. iBooks can have features that Kindle can't, but using those features comes at an extra cost of development for publishers; which is a bit of low-cost/low-value vs. high-cost/high-value for those particular titles. So Apple probably should be competing on price. But they're not. Instead, customers are finding the price for ebooks going up when competition should be driving the prices down.
I've been thinking about this. For ebooks, this is true. But when it comes to devices for reading ebooks, it's no longer as true as it once was.
Prior to the release of the iPad 3, Apple did not have a tablet which was good for reading a book, even indoors. The resolution was just too low. Now, with the release of the iPad 3 and Amazon's Kindle Fire, Apple and Amazon are starting to intrude into the same space, Apple with a high price/high value solution and Amazon with a low price/low value solution. (I'm talking about the Kindle Fire, not the eInk Kindles where Apple doesn't have a competing product.) IMHO, neither of these is good for reading. The Kindle Fire is too low resolution and the iPad 3 is too heavy.
Maybe if Apple releases a smaller, lighter tablet which is otherwise like the iPad 3, they'll have a great tablet for reading which is also a great general use tablet. And if Amazon releases a Kindle Touch with backlit eInk, they'll have an excellent reader for ALL situations. Then both will be on the same general low-cost/limited use : high-cost/high-value curve.
Even in this case, though, Apple still won't have the advantage in the ebooks themselves. Kindle format books can be used on just about any platform. Apple's iBooks are no more convenient that Amazon's. iBooks can have features that Kindle can't, but using those features comes at an extra cost of development for publishers; which is a bit of low-cost/low-value vs. high-cost/high-value for those particular titles. So Apple probably should be competing on price. But they're not. Instead, customers are finding the price for ebooks going up when competition should be driving the prices down.
Your prayers have been answered. There's a back lit eInk reader already on the market.
I know, which is why I expect a backlit reader from Amazon. (Though the backlit Nook isn't shipping yet.)
For the time being, previously purchased books don't cross between Kindle and Nook. (Someone may figure out how to make it happen eventually.) Generally speaking, once you start buying books for one platform, I don't think it makes much sense to start buying books for a second incompatible platform. This is one place where Apple has a bit of an advantage over B&N and Amazon. If you're going to buy an iPad anyway, there's no harm in buying an iBook in addition to buying books from the other platforms, giving Apple room to take market share from the other two (if they otherwise compete effectively).
Looking at the comparison of the Nook to the Kindle, B&N is bringing the competition just as they should, and as Apple should.
I know, which is why I expect a backlit reader from Amazon. (Though the backlit Nook isn't shipping yet.)
For the time being, previously purchased books don't cross between Kindle and Nook. (Someone may figure out how to make it happen eventually.) Generally speaking, once you start buying books for one platform, I don't think it makes much sense to start buying books for a second incompatible platform. This is one place where Apple has a bit of an advantage over B&N and Amazon. If you're going to buy an iPad anyway, there's no harm in buying an iBook in addition to buying books from the other platforms, giving Apple room to take market share from the other two (if they otherwise compete effectively).
Looking at the comparison of the Nook to the Kindle, B&N is bringing the competition just as they should, and as Apple should.
What free market? Those most favored nations clauses will eliminate competitive pricing.
what's interesting is that Amazon has a Favored Nation Clause as well. But the DOJ isn't looking at that, or if they had it before Apple came on the scene, which may have made them guilty of predatory pricing or such since no one else has the 'other stuff' Amazon has to make up the costs of selling ebooks as a loss leader.
What's also interesting is that no one is actually pushing that the FNC is the issue. And it might actually be wrong doing in the sense of competitive pricing. They are pushing that the agency model is the trouble. But you can have favored nation on wholesale and you can have agency without favored nation.
And in regards to this particular bit of news, lets not forget that you are all whacking yourselves blind arguing over a detail in the class action suit. THe actual DOJ case is a higher court and thus what they say is the game. Even if the class action suit goes against Apple if it is before the DOJ is done Apple will file an appeal until that judgment is handed down. That is if their next action isn't to file a motion to delay the class action suit until after the DOJ is over.
Apple can only compete on price against Amazon since iBooks is an inferior product. Wgt would I buy a ebook on iBooks when its limited to Apple's ecosystem. I'd much rather buy it from Amazon and have access to it across multiple platforms.
1. Some folks don't think that ibooks are inferior
2. some folks don't care that they can only read ibooks on their iStuff cause they have no plans to buy anything else.
So why shouldn't they have that choice or is it only a valid choice if you think it's valid (and you don't).
1. Some folks don't think that ibooks are inferior
2. some folks don't care that they can only read ibooks on their iStuff cause they have no plans to buy anything else.
So why shouldn't they have that choice or is it only a valid choice if you think it's valid (and you don't).
My understanding of iBooks is that the format has more technical capabilities than other formats. But taking advantage of those capabilities requires more development work by the publisher. From that viewpoint, it's a classic cost/benefit analysis.
You're right that some people have no plans to buy anything other than iStuff, and that it's iOS only limitation isn't a problem for them. But those people aren't the entire market. In fact, I think it's safe to say that they're not even a majority of the market. So iOS only is generally a disadvantage for the entire market.
BTW, I'm almost one of those iStuff only people. I use a Mac, even for Windows software development (thanks to Parallels) and I strongly dislike Android. But my preferred electronic reader is the eInk based Kindle. (The iPad 1 and 2 were too low rez, and all of them so far are too heavy for extended reading.) I also have an aversion to content that is restricted to a single-platform where my investment in that content could be lost as technology advances/changes.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
It's not a lie nor is it false in any way. I said "people LIKE YOU". I didn't say that you said that.
(where 'people like you' would be all the apple-hating trolls infesting this forum. I'm still trying to figure out how so many people are displaying such clear signs of narcissistic personality disorder).
Do you ever get tired of being incapable of reading? I guess that's why they call you Dr. Dopey.
Immature name calling -- a clear sign of intellectual impotence.
You literally said "you also attack" -- that includes me. But given that you're used to moving the goal-posts, I'll let you give me one example of people LIKE ME who said they were angry at Apple not suing Amazon, or shut up.
Read what I wrote. I said: "People like you attack Apple if they sue and you also attack if they don't sue. In your view, nothing Apple does can ever be right."
Basic reading comprehension would tell you that the 'you' later in the sentence refers to the subject - which is "people like you".
Not only did you get it wrong, but you are continuing to prove that your reading comprehension fails to reach the level of an average 4th grader.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
Read what I wrote. I said: "People like you attack Apple if they sue and you also attack if they don't sue. In your view, nothing Apple does can ever be right."
Basic reading comprehension would tell you that the 'you' later in the sentence refers to the subject - which is "people like you".
Not only did you get it wrong, but you are continuing to prove that your reading comprehension fails to reach the level of an average 4th grader.
Splitting hairs, yet still wrong. The correct personal pronoun to exclude the listener would have been "they". Besides, you still haven't given me any examples. Do that, or stay quiet under your bridge.
I've been thinking about this. For ebooks, this is true. But when it comes to devices for reading ebooks, it's no longer as true as it once was.
Prior to the release of the iPad 3, Apple did not have a tablet which was good for reading a book, even indoors. The resolution was just too low. Now, with the release of the iPad 3 and Amazon's Kindle Fire, Apple and Amazon are starting to intrude into the same space, Apple with a high price/high value solution and Amazon with a low price/low value solution. (I'm talking about the Kindle Fire, not the eInk Kindles where Apple doesn't have a competing product.) IMHO, neither of these is good for reading. The Kindle Fire is too low resolution and the iPad 3 is too heavy.
Maybe if Apple releases a smaller, lighter tablet which is otherwise like the iPad 3, they'll have a great tablet for reading which is also a great general use tablet. And if Amazon releases a Kindle Touch with backlit eInk, they'll have an excellent reader for ALL situations. Then both will be on the same general low-cost/limited use : high-cost/high-value curve.
Even in this case, though, Apple still won't have the advantage in the ebooks themselves. Kindle format books can be used on just about any platform. Apple's iBooks are no more convenient that Amazon's. iBooks can have features that Kindle can't, but using those features comes at an extra cost of development for publishers; which is a bit of low-cost/low-value vs. high-cost/high-value for those particular titles. So Apple probably should be competing on price. But they're not. Instead, customers are finding the price for ebooks going up when competition should be driving the prices down.
Your prayers have been answered. There's a back lit eInk reader already on the market.
http://www.barnesandnoble.com/nook/index.asp#
I know, which is why I expect a backlit reader from Amazon. (Though the backlit Nook isn't shipping yet.)
For the time being, previously purchased books don't cross between Kindle and Nook. (Someone may figure out how to make it happen eventually.) Generally speaking, once you start buying books for one platform, I don't think it makes much sense to start buying books for a second incompatible platform. This is one place where Apple has a bit of an advantage over B&N and Amazon. If you're going to buy an iPad anyway, there's no harm in buying an iBook in addition to buying books from the other platforms, giving Apple room to take market share from the other two (if they otherwise compete effectively).
Looking at the comparison of the Nook to the Kindle, B&N is bringing the competition just as they should, and as Apple should.
Ok NOW your prayers have been answered lol
http://www.geekosystem.com/illuminated-e-ink-kindle/
When it ships.
That was more info than I had before. Thanks.
You're welcome, and there is a way to install the kindle app on a nook but its limited to the ones running Android.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69
What free market? Those most favored nations clauses will eliminate competitive pricing.
what's interesting is that Amazon has a Favored Nation Clause as well. But the DOJ isn't looking at that, or if they had it before Apple came on the scene, which may have made them guilty of predatory pricing or such since no one else has the 'other stuff' Amazon has to make up the costs of selling ebooks as a loss leader.
What's also interesting is that no one is actually pushing that the FNC is the issue. And it might actually be wrong doing in the sense of competitive pricing. They are pushing that the agency model is the trouble. But you can have favored nation on wholesale and you can have agency without favored nation.
And in regards to this particular bit of news, lets not forget that you are all whacking yourselves blind arguing over a detail in the class action suit. THe actual DOJ case is a higher court and thus what they say is the game. Even if the class action suit goes against Apple if it is before the DOJ is done Apple will file an appeal until that judgment is handed down. That is if their next action isn't to file a motion to delay the class action suit until after the DOJ is over.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69
Apple can only compete on price against Amazon since iBooks is an inferior product. Wgt would I buy a ebook on iBooks when its limited to Apple's ecosystem. I'd much rather buy it from Amazon and have access to it across multiple platforms.
1. Some folks don't think that ibooks are inferior
2. some folks don't care that they can only read ibooks on their iStuff cause they have no plans to buy anything else.
So why shouldn't they have that choice or is it only a valid choice if you think it's valid (and you don't).
I just have to point this out: Apple also has 'other stuff' that they sell.
My understanding of iBooks is that the format has more technical capabilities than other formats. But taking advantage of those capabilities requires more development work by the publisher. From that viewpoint, it's a classic cost/benefit analysis.
You're right that some people have no plans to buy anything other than iStuff, and that it's iOS only limitation isn't a problem for them. But those people aren't the entire market. In fact, I think it's safe to say that they're not even a majority of the market. So iOS only is generally a disadvantage for the entire market.
BTW, I'm almost one of those iStuff only people. I use a Mac, even for Windows software development (thanks to Parallels) and I strongly dislike Android. But my preferred electronic reader is the eInk based Kindle. (The iPad 1 and 2 were too low rez, and all of them so far are too heavy for extended reading.) I also have an aversion to content that is restricted to a single-platform where my investment in that content could be lost as technology advances/changes.