3 ms·

I thought the comparison was between paper books vs ebooks, not ebooks vs the web. That was what I was responding to anyway. But you're right about eBooks b

by iamwil 19y ago

I thought the comparison was between paper books vs ebooks, not ebooks vs the web. That was what I was responding to anyway. But you're right about eBooks being a neutered computer. That doesn't mean it won't be well suited for reading, buying, sharing, and talking about books however. If you showed me a mobile phone in the mid 90's and told me people millions of people would communicate via text message on a shitty little keypad, I'd have called you crazy, bet you a kobe beef steak.....and lose. All I'm saying is that new forms of the same thing allow you to do things you might not been able to do before, and that's advantageous even if it loses some of the good properties of its old medium (like a bookshelf). Sometimes, people treat the same thing with a new form in different ways. Comments are really just topic centered guestbooks of the 90's. And yet bloggers, trading opinions on a guestbook all the time since we call it comments. By the same token, I suspect having digital books on a neutered computer will have its advantages, not immediately apparent, mostly from how we view or interact with the things. I don't know if Kindle itself will be successful, but I think eBooks might have a chance. Of course, it's just a hunch as I have no proof as to exactly how, and I could lose another kobe beef steak to you. If I knew exactly what, I probably would be doing this as my startup, rather than post this comment to let you know.

apathy 19y ago
> I thought the comparison was between paper books vs ebooks, not ebooks vs the web. That's the thing, though -- it's as if we're pretending that the Web and eBooks are as different as radio and TV, when in reality, they're about as different as FM and AM radio. I think that one of them offers enough marginal benefit to trounce the other -- and in the case of the Kindle, the ''other'' is more expensive while offering less! I don't see a divide between the Web and eBooks. I see a divide between digital content and print content. And I think that, just like the Web is reducing the market for newspapers, it's going to reduce the market for print books. It won't eliminate it. But god knows any eBook has all the drawbacks of the web (the transient nature of its contents) and few if any advantages beyond the low power draw and sharp screen. The former can be made irrelevant by better batteries; the latter is being made irrelevant by better screens. So what's the advantage of Kindle? It's quite mad. Mark Pilgrim does a great job of documenting the misfeatures in his 'Future of Reading' bit.

by iamwil 19y ago

apathy 19y ago

> I thought the comparison was between paper books vs ebooks, not ebooks vs the web. That's the thing, though -- it's as if we're pretending that the Web and eBooks are as different as radio and TV, when in reality, they're about as different as FM and AM radio. I think that one of them offers enough marginal benefit to trounce the other -- and in the case of the Kindle, the ''other'' is more expensive while offering less! I don't see a divide between the Web and eBooks. I see a divide between digital content and print content. And I think that, just like the Web is reducing the market for newspapers, it's going to reduce the market for print books. It won't eliminate it. But god knows any eBook has all the drawbacks of the web (the transient nature of its contents) and few if any advantages beyond the low power draw and sharp screen. The former can be made irrelevant by better batteries; the latter is being made irrelevant by better screens. So what's the advantage of Kindle? It's quite mad. Mark Pilgrim does a great job of documenting the misfeatures in his 'Future of Reading' bit.