Kindle 2 for booknerds or gadgetheads?
You can’t swing a dead cat around the Internet today without reading all about Amazon’s Kindle 2. I find the buzz puzzling.
Essentially the Kindle is an e-book reader. Sure you can get some blogs and newspapers and such, but what they’re really trying to pimp is the ability to download and read any book you want, instantly! Here’s why I find this so puzzling, in 2007 only one in four US adults claimed to have not read a single book that year. Not one.
Sure, sure the NEA has reported that for the first time in a decade or so the percentage of adults reading “literature” (ironic air quotes intentional from the booknerd) is on the rise, but still, are these the people who are going to shell out $300+ for an e-book reader?
As I’ve mentioned before. I’m a booknerd. I know a lot of booknerds. None of them are clamoring for a way to carry their entire library with them all the time. Unlike music, it’s not like you can shuffle on to a new book every four or five minutes. Heck, most of the people I know can’t even start reading a new book until they have finished the last one.
I’m convinced the Kindle is purely a device for the gadgethead and not the booknerd. It makes me wonder if makes the gadgetheads actually use their Kindle to read books or is it something they get and play with for two weeks and then resign it to the scrap heap with all the other toys?
Besides, no booknerd in their right mind would spend $359 on a device to read books when they could spend that money on 25 actual books.
5 Responses to “Kindle 2 for booknerds or gadgetheads?”
Leave a Comment
Jackie Burhans on February 9th, 2009
I’m a booknerd. I own a Kindle 1. I just ordered my Kindle 2. My huband gets the 1. Oh yeah, I’m a gadgethead too. So this is maybe targeted to booknerd/gadgetheads. Mostly I read books. Lately a lot of free books from Feedbooks–they would qualify as “literature”. But also paid books from Amazon–mostly business related lately but also fiction.. Not so much blogs. I get headlines of NYTimes from Feedbooks; occasionally buy an issue; always grab it when its free. I’ve been reading a LOT more since I got the Kindle and I already read a lot.
So why did I/am I buying this bookgadget? Because I AM clamoring to take multiple books with me on long business trips and to/from work and to/from the ice rink where I spend some time waiting around while my son plays hockey. Saw someone posit that, unlike music on the iPod, no one reads multiple books simultaneously they just start one and read it to the end–ha! If you are a booknerd really, look to your side table and see if that rings true.
Oh another reason I love the Kindle…I have NO more room for books in my house. It’s not a tiny house, it has a LOT of bookcases, but I’m FULL FULL FULL. I still buy physical books though (pBooks I call ‘em)–especially ones with tables, color images, etc. that don’t show well on the Kindle. While the $359 could buy 25 books (really? 35 or so on Kindle) I’d have to spend $$ to buy more bookcases (I just did this recently) and now $$$$ to expand my house.
Plus there is no waiting, instant delivery, no shipping, very green, etc etc etc.
So here at least is one booknerd/gadgethead (bookgadgetgeeks) who has and will shell out for this device AND will actually use it.
Jodi Chromey on February 9th, 2009
I knew there’d be a booknerd who’d come out and call me on this! I think you bring up very good points, but would argue that you’re probably the exception to the rule. I question the greenness argument. When you factor in the manufacturing process that is used to make the Kindle and what do do with all the old Kindles, I bet books vs. ebooks probably create the same kind of waste.
It’s an interesting topic and I hope more gadgetgeeks/booknerds weigh in on what they love about the Kindle. I think I’m sticking old school, I like the actual book.
room34 on February 9th, 2009
Right on the money! I have just never understood the appeal of the Kindle. Maybe I need to see one in person… but while the technology of the screen itself intrigues me, the device itself is simply a snoozefest.
Jackie Burhans on February 10th, 2009
Don’t get me wrong. I love actual books. I have to smile when people say no, no…no Kindle for me, “I love the feel of a book”. Yeah yeah so do I. Or they say “it’ll never do away with paper books. Who says it has to? It’s not an either/or scenario. I would say like the iPod hasn’t done away with the need for CDs but I’m not sure it hasn’t.
I haven’t ever seen a good comparison of the ecological benefits of Kindle vs pBooks or anything for that matter. Yes there is the cost of manufacturing and shipping the Kindle itself. There is the recycling of old devices–I’m going with reuse–give it to the husband, but if it dies someday I do have a great service for recycling all my old electronics through my county’s household waste site.
For books on the other hand, there is the matter of cutting down trees, paper making, ink printing, and shipping if I order online vs driving to a store to buy said book. And as for recycling old books, well with pBooks if I buy a book and don’t feel I need to keep it forever (it happens) I donate it to a library or gift/regift it to another person. I sometimes sell it at a garage sale and I could (but haven’t) take it to a used bookstore.
BUT the thing that tormented me the most was what to do with old technical and old travel books. Unless you are sentimental you probably don’t need and no one else wants your London 2001 guidebook or your Visual Basic 4 manual. Now that said, I DID find a way to recycle them through my local recycling center, a medium drive away. BUT if they were an eBook it would be a moot point. And if Amazon were smart they’d sell me “subscription” where I could update my guide book to the 2009 version or my manual to the Visual Studio .NET 2009. Sadly, technical books often haven’t translated well to eBooks and even travel books are quite different to read as an eBook. But maybe that will get better.
By they way don’t forget that Kindle can also read newspapers and magazines (more paper, ink and shipping and recycling avoided). Newspapers are not bad; mags are so far, for me, marginal. Maybe the 16 bit grey scale will be better. And Kindle can do audiobooks and now, intriguingly, text to voice. Hmm. But that’s experimental and those experimental things don’t always work. Kindle web functionality is quite marginal with v1 though Twitter works well with it. Do try and see one and see if that makes any difference.
You know I didn’t “get” the iPod when I first got one as a gift. Until my husband mentioned he meant to get me the device that let me play it through my car radio. Big light bulb! I think a lot of people don’t “get” the Kindle…but maybe they will have a light bulb moment.
Jodi Chromey on February 10th, 2009
I don’t think it has to be all Kindle or all book either. My argument is that I think the Kindle is developed for gadget-lovers more than book-lovers. And if you take a look at gadget/tech blogs (which averaged two to three posts per blog on the Kindle) and book blogs (which usually had one post on the new Kindle), you can venture to guess who has more interest in the device.
I’ve actually played around with a friend’s Kindle and it’s just not for me. I have a laptop to read newspapers, blogs, and twitter (and I’m not so much a magazine reader) so buying another device would be redundant and wasteful. Plus, I am one of those people who has a hard time reading longer works of fiction on a screen. I can’t even seem to do The New Yorker’s short stories online, I have to print them out.