iPod Reader
Digital readers unite!
Amazon has released Kindle 2.
For some reason, even apparently enlightened people tend to ignore the fact that Amazon’s Kindle is not the only kid on the ereader block.
Even MacRumors.com, my favorite hangout for all things Mac, gets it wrong when they bash the competition in a recent article about the second version of the bookstore’s ereader.
While they are possibly correct in their assumption that the iPod (and iPhone) have inadvertently – as in “contradicting Apple’s plans” – become the largest ereader format, they are sadly misguided when they fail to mention the fact that eReader.com has been on the market with their (free) ereader application since early summer 2008.
It is not only a brilliant reader, but it makes the iPod a brilliant ereading device. Yes, the ereader format is still locked, but it does support reading other formats too.
I can’t for the life of me understand why anyone wants to drag Kindle 2 around. No keyboard gets near my ereader. But I’m probably too ignorant (not to mention busy reading ebooks) to follow the, uh, ereader trends…
Comment Form
About iPod Reader
Plain and simple: This is a personal blog dedicated to spreading the word about using digital devices like the iPod, iPhone, Palm or similar gadgets for reading ebooks. An ebook is a digital copy of a print book.
Photostream
Categories
- Asides (5)
- Bookstores (1)
- Ereading (9)
- Featured (1)
- Gadgets (4)
- Software (4)
- Tips and tricks (4)
- Tormod: SG, thanks for your comments, they are much appreciated! My point about "un-paper"-like devices w [...]
- SG: Tormod, I think the point of it 'resembling' paper is exactly that, it's supposed to be like paper. [...]
- Tormod: I don't know about eye strain - I have read up to 4-5 hours on my iPod during flights and train ride [...]
- Holger: Well, the main problem with the Ipod (or any reader with backlighting of the screen) is that it's to [...]
- Tormod: No. :) [...]
- Why do people believe Kindle is the only ereader?
- Kindle 2 as ugly as #1?
- The iPod in a time of crisis
- Ereading 1 – Earbuds 0
- While reading: Anathem
- iPod as a flashlight
- Stanza – ereading evolved?
- The fear of the small screen
- A different use for iPod readers
- Second-gen iPod Touch adds nothing to ereading
4 Responses to Why do people believe Kindle is the only ereader?
Holger
February 20th, 2009 at 10:27 am
Well, the main problem with the Ipod (or any reader with backlighting of the screen) is that it’s too hard on the eyes to read for a long time. I read news and some articles on my phone, but I find it too tiring to read for an extended period of time on an LCD-screen.
IMHO, the reason why Kindle (or any other dedicated ebook hardware) is better is:
1) E-ink. It is good for the eyes.
2) It is good for all those who are not gadget freaks like us, but like the idea of an electronic book.
3) The screen is larger and resembles a paper book.
The problem is of course the price. When the price of a good reader drops below 1000 NOK, then we’re maybe talking, but I think it must fall even more to be considered by the public in general.
What I REALLY hope for is a smartphone with an ereader application and an optional e-ink screen!
Tormod
February 20th, 2009 at 10:37 am
I don’t know about eye strain – I have read up to 4-5 hours on my iPod during flights and train rides. I use inverted settings with white text on black. No problems as long as the brightness is set correctly (low in dark rooms, high in bright).
As for 3) – why should it look like a paper book? Isn’t the point of an ebook to be something *else* than a paper book?
SG
March 4th, 2009 at 7:47 am
Tormod, I think the point of it ‘resembling’ paper is exactly that, it’s supposed to be like paper. Paper is by far the easiest surface to read on, especially up close.
Respectfully speaking, I think you’re missing the point if you think ebooks “should be” as un-paper like as possible. The beauty of ebooks is that it gives you the ability to carry mountains of readable documents……without the mountains.
In addition to allowing you to read on the paper surface that many people, such as myself, desire.
I cannot read a book on the computer in the same way I can read a book. An ereader segragates the function of doing a specific thing, whereas a computer is also your work, your toys, and most likely more advanced media all in one.
But most importantly, it prevents eye strains for many people, takes up virtually no battery life to function (we are talking weeks, if not more without a wall outlet) and offers the ability to *gasp* read in broad sunlight.
For someone like me that moved alot in his life and strangely enough working for the US government (its a weird place to find myself) the portability is absolutely amazing.
Anyway hope my 2 cents makes sense for you. Thanks
Tormod
March 4th, 2009 at 8:26 am
SG, thanks for your comments, they are much appreciated!
My point about “un-paper”-like devices was basically a snide remark on the fact that what we’re seeing in the Kindle is an attempt at recreating the book but we’re using completely new technology. I think this will force a change in the way books are created and ultimately the way they look.
Your comments about ereading in general are on the spot but if you have read my previous blog entries you’ll know that I read virtually everything on an iPod Touch (after retiring my Palm TX) and thus I have both the small screen format, portability, media player etc (and yes, it too can be read in broad sunlight!).
Eye strain is not a problem since the backlight can be turned way down at night – and I read inverted (white on black) which helps tremendously as far as eye strain is concerned.
I don’t think there is any reason to have a segregated reader, but that is of course entirely up the consumer.