E-books to go ’straight to the deadpool’ if Amazon Kindle fails?
"The Kindle will have a lot of resources and content behind it so if anyone can make this work you’d think Amazon could. If it fails Ebook readers can go straight to the deadpool." - Amazon to rekindle interest in ebook readers Monday, a TechCrunch post from Duncan Riley.
The TeleRead take: So far I see potential in the Kindle despite the ugly prototype, but who knows until I’ve tried the machine? Hello, Amazon PR?
More important than the Kindle is whether the industry can do a good job with the IDPF’s .epub standard and the DRM issue—best handled by killing off "protection," though I won’t get my hopes up.
The F word
If the Kindle fails, as an InformationWeek guy expects, it will set back e-books. But we’re hardly talking about death eternal. To get technical, yes, TechCrunch’s pool allows for possible resurrections and maybe even immediate survival. Perhaps games fans can enlighten me further about the term, which appears to involve arenas where fighters try to avoid acid-dippings. Ideally e-books can stay out of the soup.
Meanwhile let’s remember the F word—format. Amazon can help by making the Kindle able to read .epub directly, without conversion. I won’t count on it, given the sizes of the egos at the company. Mobipocket or a variant is the format Amazon wants to push. Let’s just hope that Amazon doesn’t inflict on e-books yet another occupant of the Tower of eBabel.
Amazon would do well to heed a TechCrunch commenter named Travis2 (our friend Travis from Book Glutton?).
"Since Amazon is going to all the trouble to make its device wireless, it’s too bad they couldn’t make it more standards compliant and open," Travis writes. "The first ebook hardware device that builds around ebook standards and allows readers to interface with web-based content will rise to the top."
Exactly, Travis. The wireless part can’t hurt if it makes it easier to down books in many locations and without the hassles of syncing or copying to a memory card (no big deal to techies, but killjoys for less sophisticated users). An improved display and a small, decent-looking case will also help.
Still, I’ll forgive the Soviet-style design of the Kindle prototype even if it shows up in the final machine—just so the Kindle performs well. My interest in eBabel issues will remain, though. While Amazon has paid lip service to e-book standards, I’m eager to see them honored in real life.
Additional thought: Yes, some lower e-book-title prices would help, too. I’m talking about the e-books priced near the paper range.
And a detail: Commenters in TechCrunch and elsewhere keep blaming the Sony Reader for not doing justice to PDFs. The fault, dear commenters, isn’t really in the stars or the Reader. It’s the format. Epub would end the need for left-to-right scrolling and other fun on PDAs and also make the Sony Reader more usable. Supposedly Adobe will offer .epub-capable software for the Reader.
November 17th, 2007 at 4:36 pm
Ebooks seem to have survived for some years without the presence of the Kindle or the Sony or the other dedicated devices, and done well enough to keep a number of online vendors going. So a Kindle failure may set ebooks back, but it won’t kill them. And it will set ebooks back only with people who confuse the ebook with the device on which it’s read.
You’re absolutely right about format. The F word is more important here than even the D word (or rather, the D acronym — DRM). I’m not sure that syncing or the use of the memory card is going to be that much of an issue for a general public that has embraced the digital camera and music downloads. But eBabel is bad news for the dedicated devices.
It’d be interesting to know how many dedicated readers had been sold to people who were taking their first plunge into ebooks and weren’t already reading them on PCs, PDAs, laptops, and smartphones. Unless you do all your ebook reading from Project Gutenberg and other free sites like Manybooks or Munsey’s, chances are you’ve bought a number of DRM titles. If you have, chances are you’ve purchased some secured Adobe, MobiPocket, and EReader. Unless I’ve missed the news, there isn’t a dedicated reader that handles all three of those formats (with or without DRM). Is that enough to damage a dedicated reader irreparably in the market? Maybe not, but I can’t imagine it not doing some damage. After all, the initial buyers for these things are probably people who are already reading ebooks — how fast will they be to purchase devices that try to restrict them to one format when they’ve probably got a substantial number of DRM titles in multiple formats?
The dedicated reader I’ll spend money on will be able to handle open formats, but will also have to be able to handle Adobe, MobiPocket, and EReader, all three with or without DRM (and of those three I for one would be willing to do without Adobe). If my Palm Zire 31 can do that, I don’t see any reason why somebody can’t come up with a good dedicated reader that does the same. Unless maybe the folks creating the devices have overlearned the Gillette lesson and figure that nobody should be able to buy razor blades from any other seller.
Bests to all,
–tr
November 18th, 2007 at 4:09 pm
>>>The dedicated reader I’ll spend money on will be able to handle open formats, but will also have to be able to handle Adobe, MobiPocket, and EReader, all three with or without DRM (and of those three I for one would be willing to do without Adobe). If my Palm Zire 31 can do that,
Yes, your Zire can do that, but with separate programs, right? All formats must come under *one* UI. I’d hate to have to launch a different reader *program* on a dedicated reading *device*. What a waste of storage or program space (even if in ROM — bigger ROM = more $).
November 18th, 2007 at 9:40 pm
I agree with the pricing and other issues raised here but I think another another important issue is often ignored in this debate: There’s little, if any, value in simply porting the paper product to an e-device. Where e-content can shine is when it truly takes advantage of being digital. A printed book is a static, albeit effective, product. An e-device opens things up to a much more dynamic experience. Let’s tap into that and create some really exciting products!
Btw, sure, you *can* read on an iPhone, but would you really *want* to, especially for hours and hours at a time?! If so you can bet optometrists everywhere will cheer all the extra business, new glasses, contacts, etc., they’ll sell as we straining our eyes like never before!
Joe Wikert
Publishing 2020 Blog
http://www.joewikert.com
November 19th, 2007 at 6:48 am
It may be the death of COMMERCIAL ebooks but it would no more mean the death of ebooks than the death of iTunes would mean the death of downloaded music.
On that eyestrain thing - I think you’ll find that for years books have been blamed for people needing glasses and I don’t personally feel any difference between reading on my TX than on a paper book. (black background, gray text FTW, IMO.)
November 19th, 2007 at 10:30 am
Joe W.: You’re probably enjoying the findings that many people like their e-books on laptops. They’re better for interactivity than small dedicated devices with either no keyboard or small ones (no brand names need be mentioned). Of course, it’s a matter of app. For fiction, may people just want to read straight through without socializing. And E can increase the number of titles and drive down costs. Thanks. David
November 19th, 2007 at 2:44 pm
>>>There’s little, if any, value in simply porting the paper product to an e-device.
The value to me is no weight. I had to abandon reading a library-borrowed copy of Warren Zevon’s bio because it was killing my shoulder toting it around in my shoulder bag. 1.5″ thick, about two frikkin pounds (that’s 2lbs on top of everything else shoved in that bag).
>>>For fiction, may people just want to read straight through without socializing.
Yes. I’m not interested in commentary from other readers. If I want that, I can go to an author’s blog and peer into their message board. (Which, let me tell you, is something you really don’t want to do!)