This is quite an embarrassing prognostication from Newsweek.
Who the heck cares about Jeff Bezos and what amounts essentially to a revamped e-reader? Talk about overhyping a product. This dorky, unwieldy implementation is going nowhere. If anyone can tap the potential market for digitized books (which so far doesn't even exist) then it's Apple with its prospective sexy tablet computer.
I agree. All of the e-reader folks are ENTIRELY missing the boat. The Eink technology and flex circuit printing will be ready for prime time in about five to ten years. Now, we're in the stage of the technology where the PDA was ten years ago.
An e-book reader is a great concept for many reasons. The thing can remember where you left off, it can facilitate looking up words or references, and it will save who knows how many thousands of acres of forest. Especially for reading material one usually dumps, such as newspapers or magazines.
That said, this thing is ugly. Something you use so much should look good. As good as a good hardcover book.
I can live without color, especially if I get sunlit reading in exchange.
Apple will get it right if they do it. As usual, Steve will show them how it's done. His business model might stink though, or not. We'll see.
Memo to Amazon: You don't have to pay each time you transfer something you ALREADY OWN to your iPod. Whereas Kindle tacks on 10 cents for each similar transfer, which can really add up if you're a heavy reader. Plus you have to pay to read RSS feeds that you can see for free on a smaller device that's in color and happens to be called an iPhone, which costs as much as this dumb monochrome block but without the pickpocketing price schedule. Thanks, but no thanks, Bez.
To me the screen is a real killer. (I'm guessing the 399 price tag is for the vintage greyscale screen-how many recycled gameboys does it take to make a kindle)
I think if you just read novel type books for fun this would work well, but how many do you really need to drag along. Even on a relatively decent length trip. Still easier to pick up a newspaper on the way to work. Seems like, by the time you chop up the revenue for a newspaper between the publisher, distributor, and sprint it wouldn't be that spectacular (meaning I'm not sure how much you'd save versus buying a real paper-spilling your coffee on it, treating it poorly, not caring)
I think it is a brilliant idea if you could replace all of your reading material, but the screen limits it. If you could really put your magazines, novels, and work/school related books it would be well worth the 400 or even more (it looks rugged enough and I like the side buttons to flip pages-- makes it seem more like reading). But for me, there are few magazines I really want to read in black and white (I guess with the one exception being some work related stuff). Again greyscale is good for novels, but not so much for magazines(at least it limits which ones are enjoyable). Second, most textbooks can benefit from color of some sort. Don't get me wrong there are texts that are very doable in black and white, but the key is to create a device that can appeal to as many people as possible. I can't see schools picking this up for textbooks.
I would say this could be a big money saver for schools, but the textbook powers that be would probably still charge a lot for the electronic version. Kids might have to put a deposit down, drop it, break it, etc. Not sure how that works out in the long run.
Basically what I'm saying is that the idea has a ton of potential, but not in its current form. To me it is a 400 device for mostly novels and it's easier for me to drag a few books along on trips. Plus if I leave a paperback semi unattended no big deal, I can throw my bag around with it in there, etc.
Hopefully it will find enough adopters to push the idea and keep it evolving. I'd also like to see any print book you purchase allow you to DL an electronic version to it, any newspaper/mag subscription to DL to it.
They've already invented the iPod of reading. It's called a book. Nobody needs to carry around all their books--it's just not like music.
I wish that this were true for everyone, but I go through a book every night or two, and when I'm shooting on location, or working on a series in another country, I'm traveling or working out of my bags for months on end. Having a few hundred books in a small package would be fine for me. I have read quite a few Project Gutenberg books on my computer when necessary (got a great widget for that), and it isn't so bad. Amazon's reader isn't there yet, but having a boatload of books in a handy-dandy electronic form would be great for me.
From my original post: "Why not partner with another company (Apple, Dell, etc.) to get a high res screen and whatever other necessary items incorporated into a sub compact?"
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism
A high-res screen would be a huge drain on the battery. The screen they chose allows for 30 hours of operation with less than a 2 hour charge. While I wish they offered something with colour that had a backlight option, I think they may have made the right choice for their target market, which is heavy readers of text-only books that are sitting in well lit areas.
Hence my thought in the same post:
"They should have taken a page from Jobs' playbook and either waited, partnered or killed it."
As it is, it's not all that compelling, and certainly not a game changer like iPod.
Also to reply to SpamSandwich's quote:
"Just view Kindle as you viewed the first iPod. Big, unwieldy, expensive... uh, and very white. As a 1.0 product for Amazon, this ain't bad, but it is too expensive for most. Imagine the possibilities in the next couple of years, though. "
That may be what you think of the first iPod now, but when it came out people were gooping themselves over it. Your music library in a device about the size of a deck of playing cards? Now that was a game changer. Kindle? Nope. Silly to think so, I think.
I think you guys are really missing the point. The folks who talked about using the iPhone or PDA for reading books are also way off.
How many of us even HAVE ebooks? I have maybe one - and the reason is that I hate reading on my computer. I also got to play around on an iPhone at the Apple Store for an hour or so and I have to say I'm stunned to hear anyone say that they'd be thrilled to read a book on that thing either. Really?
What does $399 get you? Lifetime wireless access, a screen that's easy on the eyes, and a functional keyboard that doesn't always wrongly guess your inputs (a la iPhone/iPod Touch). How much easier would college have been for me if I wasn't always dragging around my books? The dilemma regarding which books to pack on a trip would also be practically solved for me. Need to reference something you read/saw in a newspaper or nonfiction book? Search and it's there.
I also think the people who complain about the ugliness of the device are in serious denial about the original iPod. Yeah, it looked better than most other mp3 players out there, but that wasn't a difficult contest to win. The original iPod was still a 'lump'. I loved it, but it was a lump.
Others have brought it up in this thread already, but it bears repeating. How many of you have actually experienced an e-ink screen? No doubt a bright, colorful, high-resolution screen is nice. That same backlight is also incredibly stressful on the eyes and I, as well as most people I would imagine, would despise reading a book of a standard screen for hours on end. e-ink isn't just a monochrome LCD, it allows a naturally lit reading surface.
That said, I just don't see a demand for a device like this until maybe the technology improves and costs are reduced. More importantly, I can usually buy a paperback of a book for <$10 new, I can buy used copies anywhere, I can borrow books from the library for free, I don't have to worry about batteries or breaking anything, maybe I'm too old school but I don't see myself choosing an e-ink reader over real books anytime soon.
I agree with most comments in this thread. Comparing this thing to the iPod is ridiculous.
When the iPod came out, i was very compelled by the idea of being able to carry around my whole music collection in my pocket and listen to what i want whenever i want. It was smaller than CD players and the interface made it quick and easy. It wasn't much of a change as far as the listening experience goes - you had an electronic device, a pair of headphones, and the fun was over when the battery ran out, as expected.
I do not, however, dream of carrying around all my books in the pocket. I read one book at a time, and bring it with me if i want to read. I very rarely decide to spontaneously read a book from my collection - i tend to buy or borrow a new one. This thing isn't smaller than your average book (well maybe it is - but it doesn't fit on your pocket!). This is too much of an experience change - you can't throw it around like a book, you can't sell books on at a garage sale, you have to squint at an LCD to read it, and the batteries can run out - how annoying.
Also, the iPod appealed mainly to young people. They bought it in droves and still do. I can't see my little brother getting a Kindle for christmas, not in a million years.
The only useful applications i see for this thing (pocket reference, education, etc...) can be acheived at the exact same price point by a PDA or Laptop - and they do a hundred other things on top of that.
It's too expensive, it's ugly, and you depend on one source: Amazon. Oh, goodie: the opportunity to buy a book with copy protection.
The iPod had the great virtue that it did what it did better than other devices -- I mean, better than a Walkman or a portable radio. This let you listen to a ton of music compared to its competitors. Then there was the Apple Store and then it was compatible with Windows. Yes, there was copy protection, but you could rip CDs you owned and borrow music you didn't. It was a vast radio station, and you were the programmer.
Frankly, for $10, I can get a paperback, read it to hell, and then give it to a friend if I liked it, or throw it away if I didn't. I can keep it on my shelf to refer to later. Every ten years, I read Ulysses. In ten years, it'll have some dust on the edges, but it'll still work. It doesn't use batteries. I don't have to download it, though I can get it at Amazon and a zillion other places, too.
And if I leave it on an airplane, I can get another one for $10, not $100.
Most of all, when I read a book I feel kinship with readers from Greece and Rome to the guy who first cracked open a Dickens book, or Principia Mathematica, or one of a million books that changed the world. If I buy this, I feel like a dweeb.
I totally agree with swift's post (@33), but didn't comment on it previously because I was trying to keep it "techy". Now that it's been said though...
"When someone buys a book, they are also buying the right to resell that book, to loan it out, or to even give it away if they want. Everyone understands this."
Jeff Bezos, Open letter to Author?s Guild, 2002
"You may not sell, rent, lease, distribute, broadcast, sublicense or otherwise assign any rights to the Digital Content or any portion of it to any third party, and you may not remove any proprietary notices or labels on the Digital Content. In addition, you may not, and you will not encourage, assist or authorize any other person to, bypass, modify, defeat or circumvent security features that protect the Digital Content."
First off, books HAVE copy protection already - copying them is tedious, costly, and inconvenient...maybe not so for ebooks or audiobooks, but arguing that the copy protection is somehow draconian is just silly.
Quote:
Frankly, for $10, I can get a paperback, read it to hell, and then give it to a friend if I liked it, or throw it away if I didn't. I can keep it on my shelf to refer to later. Every ten years, I read Ulysses. In ten years, it'll have some dust on the edges, but it'll still work. It doesn't use batteries. I don't have to download it, though I can get it at Amazon and a zillion other places, too.
Can you do a cross-referenced search to see what any given number of your resources about a given topic might have to offer (all in one place)? Can you search your paper books to try and remember that 'thing you read somewhere but can't remember where' that you may need in a given conversation or meeting?
Quote:
And if I leave it on an airplane, I can get another one for $10, not $100.
If you leave an expensive electronic device on an airplane, you get no sympathy from me. Should you buy a very cheap phone instead of an iPhone because you might also leave that on an airplane?
The remarks about not being able to share (except across multiple devices on the same account) point out a true downside, but it's more than made up for by the convenience of reference and of having your entire library with you in one tiny place.
This new Kindle is a big Flop. I am astonished how it can be compared with iPod which is revolutionary. A reader(UGLY) at $399 is a bad deal. every one has a laptop or nobody would buy this everybody would prefer a laptop over this. There are pdf readers on mobile phones or other devices but this idea of separate (only) reader seems to be absurd.
A neat concept, with two glaring flaws. First, they've locked you into Sprint, which you then end up paying for in hidden costs ... it should've included WiFi and let you choose to pay for the Sprint service either on demand or through a separate subscription. Second, a convoluted model for accessing open content: specially formatted RSS feeds for $$$?, per document charge to e-mail your own documents to yourself???, otherwise you have to fiddle with an SD card or USB cable and get the files into a format the Kindle willl handle?
It's obvious the second issue is intimately bundled with the first. The convoluted usage model is being forced on you to pay for the Sprint wireless service. Amazon should've focused on making a usable device first.
Also, where did the article get that it has a "basic web browser"? It isn't mentioned in the specs or video I saw. I doubt they're going to offer you free wireless browsing on Sprint.
I have to wonder if this would be cheaper without the Sprint service? Offer a cheaper WiFi version with fewer content restrictions and I'll think about it.
To me the screen is a real killer. (I'm guessing the 399 price tag is for the vintage greyscale screen-how many recycled gameboys does it take to make a kindle)
It is not an LCD. It is not vintage. The technology used in that screen (eInk) has only been commercially viable since shortly after the turn of the millenium.
It maintains full contrast over an extremely wide viewing angle - much wider than any monochrome or colour LCD panels.
It can be used in full sunlight, or under various types of artificial lighting, with no appreciable change in quality. Every colour LCD panel I've seen is quite simply useless in direct sunlight.
It is, in short, very nearly indistinguishable from real ink printed on a piece of paper.
It consumes virtually no electricity except when the image is actively changing. When a static image is on the screen, the power source could be totally removed, and without failsafe mechanisms to reset the thing, the image wouldn't start to visibly decay for several hours.
I most definitely would buy one. People are missing how much of an industry changer this could be. Its not just about story books!
EVERY pupil will have to have one.
All newspapers will be published on them.
All magazines..
With an easy setup micropayment system, an elegant simple design, basic interface, touch screen with gestures, this could be as big if not bigger than the iPod market
At the extreme, many internet media publishing businesses could be enticed... BBC, CNN, CNET, theregister.... blogs...
Essentialy I want it to have variable speed auto scroll, wifi and a browser, fit at least 50 books, animated UI with page turning gestures, OSX, PDF, >=150dpi color screen, reasonable battery life(but not excessive). about 8" diagonal, bookmarks, USB2, calculator, dictionary,
OR it utilizes fold up OLED and fits in my pocket. I'm not fond of the eink malarky until its speed and blacknwhite issues are sorted.
This device would cater for your average joe public market. but a VERY basic version with eink, some classroom networking software to synchronise reading/display of charts/images and other learning material would be more apealing for bulk school purchases me tinks.
Those of you that are calling it a screen are missing the point. It's not a screen, it's an e-ink (or electronic paper) display. It's designed to simulate the experience of reading paper and it has nearly the resolution of paper, so eyestrain isn't an issue. Just like you can't backlight paper, you can't backlight electronic paper. And the reason it's black and white is that i-ink works by charged particles that are black on one side and white on the other and rotate. The technology isn't there yet to create a color e-ink display.
This is not at all the same as reading on a computer screen, an iPod touch, or a PDA. All of those have screens, use a lot of power, and can cause eyestrain. The e-ink display uses very little power and doesn't cause eyestrain.
Having said that, I agree that the Kindle is ugly and looks like a kluge. I really wish that Apple would make an e-book reader with an e-ink display. I read a lot of books and I would love to have something like this, but I haven't seen one yet that lives up to my expectations. I think that Apple would do it right.
Comments
This is quite an embarrassing prognostication from Newsweek.
Who the heck cares about Jeff Bezos and what amounts essentially to a revamped e-reader? Talk about overhyping a product. This dorky, unwieldy implementation is going nowhere. If anyone can tap the potential market for digitized books (which so far doesn't even exist) then it's Apple with its prospective sexy tablet computer.
I agree. All of the e-reader folks are ENTIRELY missing the boat. The Eink technology and flex circuit printing will be ready for prime time in about five to ten years. Now, we're in the stage of the technology where the PDA was ten years ago.
That said, this thing is ugly. Something you use so much should look good. As good as a good hardcover book.
I can live without color, especially if I get sunlit reading in exchange.
Apple will get it right if they do it. As usual, Steve will show them how it's done. His business model might stink though, or not. We'll see.
I think if you just read novel type books for fun this would work well, but how many do you really need to drag along. Even on a relatively decent length trip. Still easier to pick up a newspaper on the way to work. Seems like, by the time you chop up the revenue for a newspaper between the publisher, distributor, and sprint it wouldn't be that spectacular (meaning I'm not sure how much you'd save versus buying a real paper-spilling your coffee on it, treating it poorly, not caring)
I think it is a brilliant idea if you could replace all of your reading material, but the screen limits it. If you could really put your magazines, novels, and work/school related books it would be well worth the 400 or even more (it looks rugged enough and I like the side buttons to flip pages-- makes it seem more like reading). But for me, there are few magazines I really want to read in black and white (I guess with the one exception being some work related stuff). Again greyscale is good for novels, but not so much for magazines(at least it limits which ones are enjoyable). Second, most textbooks can benefit from color of some sort. Don't get me wrong there are texts that are very doable in black and white, but the key is to create a device that can appeal to as many people as possible. I can't see schools picking this up for textbooks.
I would say this could be a big money saver for schools, but the textbook powers that be would probably still charge a lot for the electronic version. Kids might have to put a deposit down, drop it, break it, etc. Not sure how that works out in the long run.
Basically what I'm saying is that the idea has a ton of potential, but not in its current form. To me it is a 400 device for mostly novels and it's easier for me to drag a few books along on trips. Plus if I leave a paperback semi unattended no big deal, I can throw my bag around with it in there, etc.
Hopefully it will find enough adopters to push the idea and keep it evolving. I'd also like to see any print book you purchase allow you to DL an electronic version to it, any newspaper/mag subscription to DL to it.
They've already invented the iPod of reading. It's called a book. Nobody needs to carry around all their books--it's just not like music.
I wish that this were true for everyone, but I go through a book every night or two, and when I'm shooting on location, or working on a series in another country, I'm traveling or working out of my bags for months on end. Having a few hundred books in a small package would be fine for me. I have read quite a few Project Gutenberg books on my computer when necessary (got a great widget for that), and it isn't so bad. Amazon's reader isn't there yet, but having a boatload of books in a handy-dandy electronic form would be great for me.
http://www.charlierose.com/home
http://www.sony.jp/products/Consumer/LIBRIE/
xD
A high-res screen would be a huge drain on the battery. The screen they chose allows for 30 hours of operation with less than a 2 hour charge. While I wish they offered something with colour that had a backlight option, I think they may have made the right choice for their target market, which is heavy readers of text-only books that are sitting in well lit areas.
Hence my thought in the same post:
"They should have taken a page from Jobs' playbook and either waited, partnered or killed it."
As it is, it's not all that compelling, and certainly not a game changer like iPod.
Also to reply to SpamSandwich's quote:
"Just view Kindle as you viewed the first iPod. Big, unwieldy, expensive... uh, and very white. As a 1.0 product for Amazon, this ain't bad, but it is too expensive for most. Imagine the possibilities in the next couple of years, though. "
That may be what you think of the first iPod now, but when it came out people were gooping themselves over it. Your music library in a device about the size of a deck of playing cards? Now that was a game changer. Kindle? Nope. Silly to think so, I think.
How many of us even HAVE ebooks? I have maybe one - and the reason is that I hate reading on my computer. I also got to play around on an iPhone at the Apple Store for an hour or so and I have to say I'm stunned to hear anyone say that they'd be thrilled to read a book on that thing either. Really?
What does $399 get you? Lifetime wireless access, a screen that's easy on the eyes, and a functional keyboard that doesn't always wrongly guess your inputs (a la iPhone/iPod Touch). How much easier would college have been for me if I wasn't always dragging around my books? The dilemma regarding which books to pack on a trip would also be practically solved for me. Need to reference something you read/saw in a newspaper or nonfiction book? Search and it's there.
I also think the people who complain about the ugliness of the device are in serious denial about the original iPod. Yeah, it looked better than most other mp3 players out there, but that wasn't a difficult contest to win. The original iPod was still a 'lump'. I loved it, but it was a lump.
That said, I just don't see a demand for a device like this until maybe the technology improves and costs are reduced. More importantly, I can usually buy a paperback of a book for <$10 new, I can buy used copies anywhere, I can borrow books from the library for free, I don't have to worry about batteries or breaking anything, maybe I'm too old school but I don't see myself choosing an e-ink reader over real books anytime soon.
When the iPod came out, i was very compelled by the idea of being able to carry around my whole music collection in my pocket and listen to what i want whenever i want. It was smaller than CD players and the interface made it quick and easy. It wasn't much of a change as far as the listening experience goes - you had an electronic device, a pair of headphones, and the fun was over when the battery ran out, as expected.
I do not, however, dream of carrying around all my books in the pocket. I read one book at a time, and bring it with me if i want to read. I very rarely decide to spontaneously read a book from my collection - i tend to buy or borrow a new one. This thing isn't smaller than your average book (well maybe it is - but it doesn't fit on your pocket!). This is too much of an experience change - you can't throw it around like a book, you can't sell books on at a garage sale, you have to squint at an LCD to read it, and the batteries can run out - how annoying.
Also, the iPod appealed mainly to young people. They bought it in droves and still do. I can't see my little brother getting a Kindle for christmas, not in a million years.
The only useful applications i see for this thing (pocket reference, education, etc...) can be acheived at the exact same price point by a PDA or Laptop - and they do a hundred other things on top of that.
Crap idea.
The iPod had the great virtue that it did what it did better than other devices -- I mean, better than a Walkman or a portable radio. This let you listen to a ton of music compared to its competitors. Then there was the Apple Store and then it was compatible with Windows. Yes, there was copy protection, but you could rip CDs you owned and borrow music you didn't. It was a vast radio station, and you were the programmer.
Frankly, for $10, I can get a paperback, read it to hell, and then give it to a friend if I liked it, or throw it away if I didn't. I can keep it on my shelf to refer to later. Every ten years, I read Ulysses. In ten years, it'll have some dust on the edges, but it'll still work. It doesn't use batteries. I don't have to download it, though I can get it at Amazon and a zillion other places, too.
And if I leave it on an airplane, I can get another one for $10, not $100.
Most of all, when I read a book I feel kinship with readers from Greece and Rome to the guy who first cracked open a Dickens book, or Principia Mathematica, or one of a million books that changed the world. If I buy this, I feel like a dweeb.
"When someone buys a book, they are also buying the right to resell that book, to loan it out, or to even give it away if they want. Everyone understands this."
Jeff Bezos, Open letter to Author?s Guild, 2002
"You may not sell, rent, lease, distribute, broadcast, sublicense or otherwise assign any rights to the Digital Content or any portion of it to any third party, and you may not remove any proprietary notices or labels on the Digital Content. In addition, you may not, and you will not encourage, assist or authorize any other person to, bypass, modify, defeat or circumvent security features that protect the Digital Content."
Amazon, Kindle Terms of Service, 2007
More here: (link stolen from Daring Fireball)
http://diveintomark.org/archives/200...ure-of-reading
Frankly, for $10, I can get a paperback, read it to hell, and then give it to a friend if I liked it, or throw it away if I didn't. I can keep it on my shelf to refer to later. Every ten years, I read Ulysses. In ten years, it'll have some dust on the edges, but it'll still work. It doesn't use batteries. I don't have to download it, though I can get it at Amazon and a zillion other places, too.
Can you do a cross-referenced search to see what any given number of your resources about a given topic might have to offer (all in one place)? Can you search your paper books to try and remember that 'thing you read somewhere but can't remember where' that you may need in a given conversation or meeting?
And if I leave it on an airplane, I can get another one for $10, not $100.
If you leave an expensive electronic device on an airplane, you get no sympathy from me. Should you buy a very cheap phone instead of an iPhone because you might also leave that on an airplane?
The remarks about not being able to share (except across multiple devices on the same account) point out a true downside, but it's more than made up for by the convenience of reference and of having your entire library with you in one tiny place.
Sachin
QTP
It's obvious the second issue is intimately bundled with the first. The convoluted usage model is being forced on you to pay for the Sprint wireless service. Amazon should've focused on making a usable device first.
Also, where did the article get that it has a "basic web browser"? It isn't mentioned in the specs or video I saw. I doubt they're going to offer you free wireless browsing on Sprint.
I have to wonder if this would be cheaper without the Sprint service? Offer a cheaper WiFi version with fewer content restrictions and I'll think about it.
To me the screen is a real killer. (I'm guessing the 399 price tag is for the vintage greyscale screen-how many recycled gameboys does it take to make a kindle)
It is not an LCD. It is not vintage. The technology used in that screen (eInk) has only been commercially viable since shortly after the turn of the millenium.
It maintains full contrast over an extremely wide viewing angle - much wider than any monochrome or colour LCD panels.
It can be used in full sunlight, or under various types of artificial lighting, with no appreciable change in quality. Every colour LCD panel I've seen is quite simply useless in direct sunlight.
It is, in short, very nearly indistinguishable from real ink printed on a piece of paper.
It consumes virtually no electricity except when the image is actively changing. When a static image is on the screen, the power source could be totally removed, and without failsafe mechanisms to reset the thing, the image wouldn't start to visibly decay for several hours.
I most definitely would buy one. People are missing how much of an industry changer this could be. Its not just about story books!
EVERY pupil will have to have one.
All newspapers will be published on them.
All magazines..
With an easy setup micropayment system, an elegant simple design, basic interface, touch screen with gestures, this could be as big if not bigger than the iPod market
At the extreme, many internet media publishing businesses could be enticed... BBC, CNN, CNET, theregister.... blogs...
Essentialy I want it to have variable speed auto scroll, wifi and a browser, fit at least 50 books, animated UI with page turning gestures, OSX, PDF, >=150dpi color screen, reasonable battery life(but not excessive). about 8" diagonal, bookmarks, USB2, calculator, dictionary,
OR it utilizes fold up OLED and fits in my pocket. I'm not fond of the eink malarky until its speed and blacknwhite issues are sorted.
This device would cater for your average joe public market. but a VERY basic version with eink, some classroom networking software to synchronise reading/display of charts/images and other learning material would be more apealing for bulk school purchases me tinks.
This is not at all the same as reading on a computer screen, an iPod touch, or a PDA. All of those have screens, use a lot of power, and can cause eyestrain. The e-ink display uses very little power and doesn't cause eyestrain.
Having said that, I agree that the Kindle is ugly and looks like a kluge. I really wish that Apple would make an e-book reader with an e-ink display. I read a lot of books and I would love to have something like this, but I haven't seen one yet that lives up to my expectations. I think that Apple would do it right.