The eBook, Mark 2 203
Selanit writes "David Pogue recently published a review of the Sony Reader, under the title Trying Again to Make Books Obsolete. Though he likes the device in general, he concludes that it's not destined to replace the book any time soon. Well worth a read."
Direct link (Score:1, Informative)
Re:Magazines and the Web (Score:3, Informative)
This is true only if by "replace" you mean "infringe somewhat upon the use of". While web sites have begun to take on some of the uses to which people put magazines, and while many people now forego printed magazines in favor of the Web, magazine sales are still strong enough to keep the industry going. I've worked in public libraries for nearly 20 years now, and the magazine reading room is always full of people browsing the shelves or using the magazines for school research. The usage is declining, but far too slowly to say that the Web has "replaced magazines".
New technology rarely completely replaces old. There is a period of adjustment during which a new technology will show rapid adoption, and then a new equilibrium is reached, in which users have expanded technological options, which they select on costs, relative merits and individual tastes. Radio exists happily alongside hardcopy recorded music and online music and live music. The arrival of cars did not "replace" the use of bicycles, horses, trains, or shank's mare. Chlorinated swimming pools have not replaced recreational swimming in oceans, lakes, rivers, and ponds. People still pay vast amounts of money for actual, as opposed to virtual, chessboards. Mass production of candles, soap, paper, and even vegetables have not replaced the older means of producing such goods; strong markets still exist for the handmade (or hand-raised) versions of these.
Re:We've heard this before... (Score:4, Informative)
My point, which I apparently failed to convey, is that alternative technology exists to accomplish the most common uses of all of the things I mentioned -- and in some cases, has existed for quite some time -- without "replacing" those things in any meaningful sense of the word. Yes, the new technology infringes on the size of the market for those things, and yes, some people will opt to use the newer technologies exclusively. But the older technologies have their advantages, too -- whether it be cost, safety, ease of use, familiarity, or simple idiosyncratic aesthetic appeal. As a result, I think that the use of the older technologies is far more likely to last than most of us neophile technogeeks seem to think.
(My mention of transparent glass windows was in reference to a trend some years back, now thankfully largely reversed, toward replacing clear glass in schools and office buildings with, yes, opaque brick, or else opaque glass, in the interest of "reducing distractions" in schools and "increasing productivity" in businesses -- till studies began to show that the end result tended to be exactly the opposite. Most people apparently need distraction occasionally to function at their best.)
Re:ebook reading (Score:2, Informative)
DIY (Score:3, Informative)
Awesome.
Re:Just one question: (Score:5, Informative)
You didn't RTFA.
If you had, you would find out it only consumes power when you have to redraw a page.
You would also have discovered that there is a prototype that has been displaying the same page for 3 years.
Sure, batteries slowly leak power. However, have you noticed that watch batteries can last for years - even with a constant power drain? As long as you don't need to provide huge bursts of energy, like those needed by a digital camera, you can design the battery to be more efficient in the long term.
Re:the one advantage (Score:4, Informative)
True, but how much is "enough"? I have a electric quartz watch that I have had for about 10 years and have changed the batteries twice. I would regard that as maintenance to the point of it being negligible.
The Sony Reader has an eInk display. Charged plates underneath capsules arranged in a fine grid push either dark or light ink into view. The resulting display is basically the same as ink on paper and needs no back light in the same way as conventional paper doesn't need them either. And crucially, there is no power required other than to change the display. I fully expect that in a few years, eInk will require about as much power as a quartz watch and will have as long a life without a change of batteries.
The Sony Reader isn't going to "replace" books or magazines any more than dishwashers "replaced" washing the dishes, or the car "replaced" the train. It's going to simply find a niche to co-exist with paper. All this huff-puffing about how you need batteries and can't swat flies with an eBook is hokum. DRM is going to be the biggest problem - by far - with this technology. Luckily, Sony haven't carried that particular innovation through with the Reader it seems.
PS: Here's a review of the Reader published on our company blog [lbigroup.com], which concludes that's it not too bad. Has a video of it in operation too (the Reader's screen refresh is rather slow, apparently), which is more than the NYT can manage.
Re:Things need for ebook success (Score:1, Informative)
e-books aren't practical for my "reading room". If it's not practical to read in the hot tub or while I'm sitting on the can, it's not going to replace books or magazines for me.
Re:the one advantage (Score:3, Informative)