Notify the Next of Kindle
On Monday November 19th, Amazon released something called Kindle, the latest “e-book” reading device. I’ve been asked to comment on what effect I think this will have, if any, on book design as we know it. Here goes.
None.
Sincerely,
Chip Kidd
PS: What no one seems to get through their thick skulls, even after untold millions of dollars have been wasted on the concept: PEOPLE DON’T WANT TO READ BOOKS ON A SCREEN. Why is that so hard for someone as obviously smart as Jeff Bezos to accept? The reason the iPod took off is that music was never meant to be a “thing” in the first place. It was born as pure sound, and pure sound is what it has returned to. But books were always physical objects, and the printed book as a piece of technology has yet to be improved upon. And won’t. Certainly not by something that looks like a prop from Charlie’s Angels and has, are you ready, a whopping ONE typeface. For everything! Yay! For further explanation as to why this is doomed, go to Amazon’s own website and read Kindle’s Customer Reviews. Ouch. Caveat emptor!
Chip Kidd is a writer and graphic designer in New York City. His book jacket designs for Alfred A. Knopf (where he has worked since 1986) have helped spawn a revolution in the art of American book packaging. His second novel, The Learners, will be published in February of 2008. Mike Essl is a graphic designer, a design educator, a rabid collector, and a Tetris World Championship Semi-Finalist. He is trying hard not to be Chip-Kidd-lite. This assignment didn’t help.
Remarks 142 total remarks were added before the post was closed.
Eric B.
As much as you may personally hate books on a screen, there is a segment of the market that is willing to buy that. The Kindle may not be the killer app for that crowd, but it is a step in that direction. Will this technology kill physical books for good? Of course not, but it does provide another option for those who want it.
Books are things-in-themselves just as much as albums are. Yet, many consumers are willing to part with them in favor of the music itself. To use your iPod analogy, books are nothing but containers for information -- from information they came, and to information they are returning.
C L
I want to read books on a screen.
Tom Carmony
They'll sell Kindles to the same sub-set of gadget fans that have bought previous e-book readers. This is simply not a device (or a class of devices) that the mainstream is going to endorse or be interested in.
mave
I couldn't disagree more. I am EAGERLY awaiting the next generations of devices such as the kindle (when all the bad design and bugs are worked out), because I vastly prefer reading books on a screen. I've been reading books on a screen for almost a decade now, on my palm pilot. I like the palm pilot for this purpose - in fact I love it for this purpose - but I would love to have a device specifically designed for this purpose.
I've been trying to live a more paperless lifestyle for years now. when cassettes came along, people purged out their vinyl. when cds came along, people purged out their cassettes. when mp3 players came long people purged out their cds. I think books and dvds are next. I purged out my books years ago.
it's progress, and it's going to happen. we need to do this for environmental reasons, but we'll want to do it for convenience and flexibility. sure, there will still be certain books we'll want to collect, just as I still collect vinyl and specialty dvd sets, and I don't see myself getting rid of my art & design books, but digital will happen.
Matt McVickar
Just because this implementation is horrible doesn't mean it can't be done right. This is horrible, though.
I frequently read technical books on screen, and I'd love to do it on something other than my laptop. A vertical screen at extended-arms' length while I sit at a desk gets tiring quickly. Reading on the iPhone, on the other hand, has shown me that holding something where I'd hold a book and flicking my way through a page isn't as difficult or unnatural as it may have seemed. With the right type of screen, the right type of container for that screen (or none at all, eventually, I suppose), the right fonts, and a brilliant interface, I think reading on screen could be perfectly acceptable, if not rather enjoyable.
That said, I completely agree that paper books aren't going anywhere. They're perfect.
Elliot Jay Stocks
Excellent post, chip. Despite the pro-eBook comments left on this entry so far, I think it's fairly safe to say that the majority of readers do not enjoy reading books on the screen (and I'm with them).
As you quite rightly point out, it's pretty amazing that this simple fact hasn't sunk in for eBook manufacturers yet. It's like the record labels still thinking that DRM is what consumers really want.
Peter Gasston
For a hilarious (and foul-mouthed) continuation of the same theme, try this:
So Book-like, You’d Think It Was a Book (but it’s not)
Do you love to read books but hate reading books? Amazon.com finally has the answer for you.
Hay
I do believe people will read things from a screen, if it is a *good* screen. The Kindle uses the e-ink technology, which is completely different than a normal LCD or TFT screen. I've tried one of these things and it's just like reading from a sheet of paper under a glass plate. Although there is still a long way to go before these devices are as popular as an iPod (the interface is still horrible, and the fact you can't easily put PDF's on the Kindle is just stupid) i think that it's ideal for reading technical documents and articles.
E. M. Pink
I'm with the other pro-ebook peeps here, because I'm forever running out of space to put my blindly growing book collection. Oh, and because I really love the idea of having whatever book I want at my fingertips in five seconds. The Kindle is exactly what I need-- a 10-ounce library with which I can mainline content without getting any more blind. If you like books and don't like reading them on screens, it isn't for you.
Also, pointing to the reviews of the Kindle and saying 'caveat emptor' doesn't hold much weight for anyone who's actually read some of them-- most of them are from people who haven't used the device, for goodness' sake. The reviews there from beta testers and others who own it are way more useful to me, because the test of a device for me is not how many people murmur approval for the *concept* but how many people actually buy and use it, and how they feel about it.
Jim
Books are wonderful, no question. However, our preference toward screen reading is a learned. The Safari bookshelf from O'Reilly has considerably lightened my messenger bag, is available to me anywhere there is an Internet connection and is actually much more efficient than the paper equivalents.
I suggest that people can (and will) become screen readers. I think I'd use a laptop instead of Kindle, but they are on the right track.
Chris B
I believe we are far from making such a big switch to screen reading, just take a look at the still opening of new Borders, Barnes & Nobles etc. There is a tactile and even more portable (ie batteries not required) nature to print books that screens can't replace. The product does serve its purpose for its target audience, yet that's the extent of its impact. On a side note, please don't use the environment as a reason, the amount of e-waste this could create (plus the pollution created in production) versus the thousands of other sustainable living options we could make instead of switching to screen readers, isn't even comparable.
BlueStreak
Memo from the chancery, circa 1450:
Fear not brothers. PEOPLE DON'T WANT TO READ BOOKS PRINTED ON PAPER. Why is that so hard for someone as obviously smart as Johann Gutenburg to accept? Nothing could replace fine handwriting using hand-made inks on stretched animal skins — nothing — ever!
Embrace the future CK.
Alan Pritt
Problems with paper books that an electronic device can improve upon:
- They are difficult to hold with one hand.
- The index is slow and incomplete.
- Referencing is even slower.
- If you want lots of books for reference, you need a strong shoulders and a solid bag.
- You can't buy books instantly.
- You have limited space to write notes.
- You can't resize text.
- They wear out.
People have a love affair with the paper book. But as much as they like to think the design is perfect, it is not.
Jeremy Techtmann
I must say I am also not a screen reader. There is something about having the actual book-in-hand that can not be replicated by any device.
Why does one have to digitize something in order to "embrace the future"?
beth
I wouldn't even glorify this device by saying it looks like a Charlie's Angels gadget. It looks more like something I'd use to monitor diabetes or my car engine.
Wasn't a big part of the iPod's success in it's design, that it was this cool looking object people wanted to be seen with?
Dennis Eusebio
I agree that there's something about actual physical books that remains optimal for reading. Maybe its because I stare at screens all day long and books provide relief. Maybe its because I just like feeling paper sometimes.
I don't mind using electronic devices for quick reads and periodicals but trying to read a novel or in depth book electronically somehow triggers different parts of my brain. I don't experience the material the same as if I were reading the actual book for some reason.
Michael
It was interesting that the testimonials in the movie were all from people in there 50's and 60's. I think this product is missing the point in a big way. The idea of making a pleasurable electronic reading format is on target, but the future isn't in making an electronic book.
But.. there is still something about a book that hasn't been approached by digital products. When you have a book in your hand, you don't have to think about anything else. Its not reminding you to check your email. You can't do your taxes on it or play video games. Its not constantly advertising something. So this makes it easier to focus and relax.
I think the evolution will come with a better screen on a large palm pilot or iPhone. Something that is dynamic, but where the use is a little more intentional. A smaller format would mean you couldn't fit so much stuff on the screen. So, this would create new conventions for Web designers.
Well, until then we still have books.
Jon
The only time I get to read books anymore is when I travel.
I hesitate to take another $400 piece of electronics with me where a $9 paperback will do just fine.
Anonymous Coward
Dear readers, think before you post. Please, Don't Feed The Troll.
Fred Schechter
While I love the passion, the anger seems slightly misplaced.
1."Screen" is a term incorrectly placed here. The E-ink screen isn't like anything you've looked at before (have you really tried this yet it's a very book-like feel?)
2.Graphic designers have one more format to make interesting. I'm really looking forward to the little easter eggs authors can place in their books now.
3. For research and annotation, it will absolutely be a boon. My Phd. seeking wife and her ridiculous piles of daily printed (.pdf) research papers now can be able to tear through article after article neatly (and silently while I attempt to sleep, fantastic!)
4. I think the fees sound a little ridiculous, but I understand they're necessary.
5. I do understand its another plastic technological geegaw, that'll always anger some people, I get that (and I think the ID could have been better, but it is a Generation 1 item). I'm excited about the second version (and quite frankly I'd do fine with just a wiFi version, skip all the other high end stuff.
6. Don't worry, books aren't going away, we're just getting new ways to read them.
(Nice image Mike)
Brian Artka
nice.
The kindle ranks up there with the Palm Folio.
useless.
On behalf of the hundreds of books on my oversized bookshelf, thanks for writing this brief article.
Being as computer geeky as they get, a device will never replace my precious books.
B
El Duke
What if I want to loan you the great book I just read?
MikeFats
E-ink it may not be a book replacement. So what? Periodicals and newspapers fit the bill beautifully and I'm betting the market is just as, if not more, lucrative.
Will Powers
I have earned my living making books for 40 years. I started by hand-setting metal type, moved on to machine-set metal type, then to printing books letterpress. Then to proofreading, copy editing, designing books, typesetting on a computer, managing book production.
I do not like gadgets: no iPod, no blackberry, no cell phone, hell, not even a microwave oven.
I'm exactly the sort of person the world expects to share Kidd's opposition to electronic readers.
Plus: I have been an avid reader of books for, oh, 58 years.
I eagerly await that day there's a really good electronic device with a vast library of text available, that is well designed, that has a good feel in the hand, that has a good screen, and (since I'm a typographer) that has a good choice of typefaces. & is not too expensive.
I'm not seeing it yet. Will I see it in my lifetime? Probably. I hope so. It remains to be seen if I'll be able to overcome my gadget aversion and to expand my love of printed books to include this device.
But I'm eager and I'm hopeful. Bring it on!
Ray Bradbury
I told you so...
Avner Kashtan
Reading the many objections, both in the article and in the comments, I can't help but feel that most are very subjective, not to mention purely a matter of habit. "I like the touch of paper". "E-books simply don't feel right". It is similar to people buying vinyl albums because they like the feel of them: it's a perfectly legitimate choice, but don't make the assumption that your particular preference for paper books is shared by everyone, or that people won't prefer the convenience of the electronic format to the tactile sensation of holding a book.
Many, many people are starting to purchase their music online, forsaking CDs and physical media. I still buy CDs because I like having them, and having the liner notes. But I don't go around predicting the end of the iTunes music store just because I like CDs.
The Kindle is another in a long line of failed products. But remember that the iPod took into the mainstream what hundreds of similar devices failed to popularize before. Maybe the Kindle won't be the breakthrough hit that the iPod was, but I think the advantages are such that eventually a good enough device will make this mainstream.
MattE
Remember when e-mail came out? It was going to put the Post Office out of business. So much for that. You still can't replace the emotional connection you feel turning the pages of a book, just like you can't replace the emotional feeling of getting a birthday card in the mail from grandma with a $10 bill in it. Imagine your nana sending you an e-card and $10 via PayPal. Not the same. Not cool. God bless this neat gadget, but Chip's right -- books ain't goin' nowhere.
Aaron
The iPhone has changed my opinion on the possibility of e-books having a real chance to supplant physical books (though never entirely). Since I got my iPhone I have found that I spend a lot of time reading things on the web. And I mean actually reading, not just skimming like I would on a computer screen. I've even read a couple of software manuals as PDFs that I've emailed to myself. When I try to read a physical book in bed now, it actually feels cumbersome and awkward. I think e-books have a chance, but not the Amazon Kindle or Amazon's whole e-book model. What a turd.
Paul M. Watson
I expect more from A Brief Message than a 200 word rant with a capitalised sentence.
Juliette
In this day and age, do we really need to be spending more time at our computers for the sake of recreational (or even lengthy "required") reading? The day that e-books take over will be the day that literature and tactile experiences are put to death. What happened to making notes in the margins? Autographed copies or special editions? The way the pages smell and the feel of text on a page? The people who appreciate the experience of the book will never be conquered by Kindle.
Beerzie
From what I've seen, Kindle is pretty lame for a variety of reasons. But I do want to read books on a screen AND read and own books. Why are so many people acting as if these are mutually exclusive?
Calabash
I don't have the Kindle but I do own and love the Sony Reader. I think many critics would do well to actually read a book using the eink and see the difference between a PDA/computer screen and these readers. Night and Day!
Glenn Fleishman
I had a Kindle for a week to review it for The Seattle Times (not a loaner: I bought one, and decided not to keep it, so am returning it).
If you think of the Kindle as Amazon advertises it, as a replacement for a book, it's not very good. If you think of it as a book and periodical complement, it's not bad.
The design is immature, the interface poor, and the locked-down format problematic. (You can convert documents, but it's irritating, and you have to manage the process as well as synchronization.)
Still, I can see that for a class of business traveler spending a lot of time on the road, this might be the right fit because you can automatically receive newspapers and magazines as well as carry books.
The screen is remarkable, but the flash as the page refreshes irritating.
There is no graphic design opportunity, partly because the Kindle's first release has one typeface, one leading, one layout. I've seen people looking at ragged right type, but it was justified with oceans of white space between words in everything I viewed.
Tony
I want to read books on a screen. And if you're going to judge the Kindle by the reviews on amazon, which you obviously are, you must be ignorant of the fact that quite a large amount of the reviewers haven't even used the device.
I found the ignorance of this article surprising.
Maybe they didn't ask you what you think because it doesn't/no one cares?
Tom
I've already written about this on my blog, it's not the technology, because e-paper is fine. It's the price not only of the reader, but of the books, and of the blogs, and everything. Give me a $400 kindle and 50% off $800 of books. Then I'll consider it. Until then, used books are cheaper and don't have DRM.
Peter
The Kindle will be to a revolution in reading as the Segway was to a revolution in transportation.
Overhyped.
Overestimated.
avagee
Like eReaders before it Kindle tries to design something from the top down to be 'book like' but with added computer stuff (search, annotate, now with added connectivity!). I came across something interesting that takes a bottom up approach to re-purpose an existing device to provide a reading experience.
www.booksinmyphone.com lets you download books packaged to be read on 'dumb' cell phones (only requires java).
So what? the interesting thing is that these phones are already designed around the human hand / pocket and people are already 'trained' to carry and keep them charged. This means its very seamless - easy to hold one handed and thoughtlessly with me.
Cell phones are very constrained so booksinmyphone have stripped out almost everything except the idea of text and page. You start up the book, you press to 'down' to go forward, you press 'up' to back up - within a few minutes the device is forgotten and it's just you and the story.
Phones will get better screens but probably not much larger. It will be interesting to see all these improvement curves 'battle it out'.
marcus
»But books were always physical objects, and the printed book as a piece of technology has yet to be improved upon«
one can argue that books is also just the holder for pure information which is — by design — not nailed to any particular medium as well :)
David S.
You're right that Kindle will change nothing, but wrong about why. I've got scores of ebooks, I certainly do want to read on screens, but not on an expensive, ugly, limited functionality device like any of the dedicated e-book readers.
I want to read ebooks on my PDA, my smart phone and my iPod touch. I don't want to put up with absurd DRM schemes that limit what devices I can use, what I can do with them, and that tie me into one book seller, crazy hb-like prices for books that shouldn't cost more than 1/2 a pb, I don't want to have to contend with several mutually incompatible file formats (pick one for God's sake!)
Fix these problems and ebooks will take off like downloadable music, keep trying to prevent them from competing with the "real" publishing business by crippling them and they'll continue to fail (and publishers and authors will continue to miss the opportunity to expand their market by an order of magnitude).
John Hendron
I believe that in the future, less emphasis will be placed on text for mainstream society. I see it with students now who simply would prefer to watch a video, or listen to something, than actually read.
Picard et al. in ST:TNG carried tricorders for computers and some kind of slates for "reading." (And, yes, he also read Shakespeare from books!)
I think the Kindle is an evolutionary product. To echo others, I feel it's too limited to replace a book. If I spend $400 on a piece of tech gear, I want it to do more. And there's no reason something that size couldn't.
I believe a more perfected product would physically show the amount left to read (like pages left in a book), and mimic a real book, but also offer something profoundly improved in the model. The Kindle, likely, isn't that product, yet (for reasons already pontificated here).
David Livingston
It's not a book. It just doesn't count. It's something else entirely... with no substance at all.
Jorge Arango
On Wednesday November 28th, Chip Kidd wrote a short post about the effect of the Amazon Kindle (and by implication, e-books in general) on book design. I've been thinking about his answer ("None"), and have decided to post a comment about it. Here goes.
Wrong.
Sincerely,
Jorge Arango
PS: Books are just devices that make language -- an ephemeral construct -- durable. They are not the most effective way of doing this, nor are they the final word in technologies that transmit knowledge. Something better will come along; the Kindle and its kin are first-generation devices with lots of faults. This will change with time.
Stewart Johnson
Clearly you're not interested in reading books on a screen, but I certainly am. I think it's a bit arrogant of you to claim that *nobody* wants to read books on screen.
Remember that e-ink screens are nothing like laptop/PDA screens.
Stephen
As much as I do agree what you say. You might want to take out the remark about looking at "Amazon’s own website and read Kindle’s Customer Reviews."
I just did and they are overwhelmingly positive! Unless Amazon is editing them, this does NOT make your point!
Jon Hendry
Michael wrote: "I think the evolution will come with a better screen on a large palm pilot or iPhone"
Uh, weren't you just complaining about distractions when reading on a computer?
The kindle has no such distractions. It's just the text. iPhones an palm pilots are full of such distractions. You don't want those, you want a kindle-like device.
David S. wrote: "I don't want to put up with absurd DRM schemes that limit what devices I can use, what I can do with them, and that tie me into one book seller, crazy hb-like prices for books that shouldn't cost more than 1/2 a pb, I don't want to have to contend with several mutually incompatible file formats (pick one for God's sake!)"
The Kindle has a USB port and a flash card slot with which you can put your own files on the device. So you aren't limited to what Amazon is selling. You could be like an iPod user who doesn't use iTunes or buy from the iTunes store.
Mel
As the man says, there are two kinds of fool.
One says, this is old, and therefore good.
The other says, this is new, and therefore better.
Saying "Embrace the future" just makes the you second kind of fool. There's been a lot of futures that weren't worth embracing.
Jon Hendry
beth wrote: "Wasn't a big part of the iPod's success in it's design, that it was this cool looking object people wanted to be seen with?"
The first iPod looks pretty clunky compared to the modern ones. Fat, chunky buttons, black and white low-res screen...
I'm not likely to buy a Kindle right now; I'd like a bigger, higher-resolution screen, for one thing. And faster page refreshes. And PDF support. The design could use some work, too. But these are not insurmountable, and the selection of books is decent, especially since you can put your own files in via flash or USB.
It's a good start, I think. The 'free' cellular downloads are nice, especially with the automatic downloading of subscription items.
Patrick
Beerzie had it right. Why is this debate treated as if they were mutually exclusive? E-books will continue to become more prevalent and popular for certain situations but debating whether or not it will replace printed books is pointless. This is the same senseless back-and-forth that went on when email first took off and futurists were proclaiming the death of postal mail, telephones, and faxes. Each has its place and use. Similarly, we can expect different genres of printed material to become more mainstream in e-book depending on their benefit in existing in a digital form.
Jon Hendry
Matt wrote: "That said, I completely agree that paper books aren't going anywhere. They're perfect."
Except for the part where long texts make physical books heavy, unwieldy, and awkward. If you're a history buff, try taking Gibbon's Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire on an airplane and see how that works. If you had an e-text version, you could fit all of it, along with a lot of works by the Classical sources, on a Kindle or laptop. Along with plenty more.
Perfect? Not really.
Lee Stanford
I've owned a Kindle for a week now. I've read two full novels on it, and numerous book samples. I like the Kindle. It's not perfect, but it's good enough that I will continue to use it and purchase books for it.
Likes:
Instant gratification. I can shop the Kindle Store from just about anywhere, purchase a book and start reading in a minute or two.
Sample chapters.
The screen is great. Once you get used to it (took me about 2 chapters), you totally forget it's an ebook. NOTHING like a laptop or cell phone.
Space saver. I read a lot of paperbacks which I really have no interest in saving. Kindle version is much easier to deal with.
Environmentally friendly. No need to print book (energy & wood pulp), shipped to Amazon (energy), then shipped to me (energy & shipping box). Yes, the paper and box is recyclable, but even recycling uses resources.
Dislikes:
I wish I could share Kindle books with others. Should be able to transfer ownership. I'll only buy Kindle books which I doubt I'll want to share.
Hardware design is lacking. The buttons especially are poorly placed.
3.5 stars of 5.
Dan Lewis
The Kindle won't change anything, it's the least important part. The big deal, and it really is a big deal, is the infrastructure that Amazon is putting behind it. It is what has been the problem with ebooks from their inception. Previous incarnations of ebook put gadget first, because it is the easiest part and content second because that is the hardest part -- content and an easy, convenient system for distributing content is the holly grail of ebookdom -- this is what Amazon is capable of doing. The gadget will change, evolve, multiply -- it will get better, prettier, more book-like, or not, but if you are judging Kindle by comparing it to a printed book, you are missing the point.
Jon Hendry
"I believe a more perfected product would physically show the amount left to read (like pages left in a book)"
I believe there is an indicator on the right side of the device. In the slot, which is above a thumbwheel.
That said, even books are imperfect at this. For example, in an anthology, the parts (essays, stories, or articles) each stand alone. Your place in the book tells you nothing about where you are in a given essay/story/article. It might end in two pages, or it might take up the rest of the book.
Adam McIsaac
There is certainly a market for e-books. But the Kindle is likely the wrong tool for it, simply because it's another "thing". The iPhone would be better: I used to read books on my Treo all the time and came close to enjoying it (in spite of the crap type) because: since I had to carry a phone, if I had books loaded on it, it meant I always had a book with me; it was convenient if I wanted to read while my wife slept; and the inline dictionary was useful when working through Victorian texts got from Gutenberg.org. I miss all of that with my iPhone.
That having been said, I see e-books as a useful complement to -- rather than replacement of -- printed books. Even disallowing the pleasure of lending books to friends and not having to worry if your battery is about to crap out, nothing beats a well-considered printed book for reading experience. Reading is a sensual experience: Dickens in print (Heritage edition-- lovely setting of Baskerville) just felt more nutritious than reading the same text on my Treo.
Scott Johnson
E-ink has a promising future. Kindle is not it.
Jon Hendry
Adam wrote: "". The iPhone would be better: I used to read books on my Treo all the time and came close to enjoying it (in spite of the crap type) because: since I had to carry a phone, if I had books loaded on it, it meant I always had a book with me; "
Er, *lots* of people carry a phone at the same time they're carrying books to read or use.
I bet every person I saw on the MBTA lugging a fat copy of the last Harry Potter book was also carrying a phone. Every person reading a newspaper on the train is probably carrying a phone as well.
Jon Hendry
" and the inline dictionary was useful when working through Victorian texts got from Gutenberg.org. I miss all of that with my iPhone."
The kindle has a dictionary, and free wireless access to Wikipedia. Also, there's apparently a free service where you can ask a question ("WTF is Fahrvehrgnugen?") and get one or more answers back via the internet.
Colin
Wow that was sure "A brief message" though not really an insightful one. Most of the other posts here have been much more thought provoking. This one is nothing more than a shallow rant designed to make the writer laugh at their own assumed wit.
Yes you are correct that books are a "thing" (as are albums), but text was liberated from physicality a long time ago. People don't want to read for long periods on LCD screens but e-ink is different. Sure the Kindle is flawed, but someone will make it work merely because there is a market for anything.
Frankly I'm surprised that Amazon issued such a product with so many flaws -- they should have been the company to make this work.
Personally I think this rant was just inspired because you fear that if this takes over then your book cover designs will become as irrelevant as album art.
Joe W.
PS: What no one seems to get through their thick skulls, even after untold millions of dollars have been wasted on the concept: PEOPLE DON’T WANT TO LISTEN TO MUSIC ON THE GO. Why is that so hard for someone as obviously smart as Steve Jobs to accept? The reason the PC took off is that data was never meant to be a “thing” in the first place. It was born as pure data, and pure data is what it has returned to. But vinyl records were always physical objects, and the pressed record as a piece of technology has yet to be improved upon. And won’t. Certainly not by something that looks like a bar of Ivory soap and has, are you ready, a whopping ONE interface. A clickwheel for everything! Yay! For further explanation as to why this is doomed, go to slashdot own and read the review. Ouch. Caveat emptor!
http://apple.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=01/10/23/1816257&tid=107
Erik
@Alan: You wrote, "You have limited space to write notes" as a critique of the printed codex.
While I think e-ink is incredibly promising as a technology, I wonder: how is the Kindle's note-taking/annotation interface? With a printed book I can make all kinds of annotations, some that wouldn't make sense to anyone else. If I run out of room in the book--unlikely, since publishers conveniently include a few blank pages at the beginning & end--I can simply use index cards and stick them in the appropriate parts of the book.
Digitized texts are wonderful for certain things--searching, indexing, copying--but I doubt they'll ever displace the book.
Hamranhansenhansen
I agree the Kindle is awful, but it's not the screen only.
People will happilyy read a screen if it is the exact size and resolution of a trade paperback. But that doesn't exist yet.
With iTunes they beat the audio cassette in every way and replaced it. Kindle is years behind the trade paperback in dozens of ways.
Panasit Ch
I wouldn't underestimate where the next step in technological evolution. There's no written rule saying it can't be stupid.
Pure sound aside, before I-Pod comes out there are other mp3 players out there with more function and plays music without having to download I-Tune and all that, and are much cheaper. But I-pod has the best interface. And even though it has limited function and expensive, being a design student, I am obligated to feel sexually attracted to it the same way middle age anti-gay priest and republican politician would feel obligated to feel sexually attracted to a teenage page.
This version of digital book may not take of well (because as you say, it uses only one typeface) but digital reading can still evolve . Although one thing I am sure of, no teacher in America will force kids to read a book on computer. That's a lawsuit Amazon will not be happy about.
I must admit one thing. I love writing book and designing book, and if I have it my way I will be doing those two things the rest of my life. However, I do wish that in a few years, all books use recycle paper.
Me
I'm really curious. How many people scrawl notes in the margins of their paperback books? If I want to write notes, I get a separate sheet of paper. But maybe that's just me.
vanny
Do you like eye strain and headaches? do you long to spend even MORE time squinting at a glowing, blurry screen than the 10 hours a day you spend at your work computer? Are you indifferent to the enticement of elegant typography and clever design? do you love the cold feel and offgassing aroma of plastic?
Then you'll love ebooks. And while you're at it, you're probably the type who could forego the inconvenience of food and live off vitamin pills and protein bars.
Josh Osborne
Hey, I want to read on a screen far more then I want to take up a big room of books espacally with expensave bay area real estate!
Tom Saxton
I suspect most of the people trashing the Kindle have never used one or even seen one.
The screen doesn't glow. It looks like paper. It's actually shocking how different it looks from every other screen you've ever seen.
Books are perfect if you don't mind lugging them around, if your eyesight is 20/20, and if you like holding the darn things open while reading them.
I'm not saying the Kindle is perfect, but it is better than every previous e-book. It offers some real advantages over paper books, which some people will value enough to tolerate the things that need to be improved.
And the next version will be better.
Josh Osborne
Hey, I want to read on a screen far more then I want to take up a big room of books espacally with expensave bay area real estate!
Ray Baxter
Chip is correct. The Kindle will have no effect on book design. It also won't have any effect on the design of hand-lettered manuscripts.
Book design is a dying art; in a few years there won't be any book design to effect.
Within a few years there will be a well designed hand-held electronic book reader (probably attached to a cell phone). Within a few years after that most most books will be as widely distributed in electronic format as on paper. In another few years after that almost all books will only be available new in electronic formats. Books will be used only for exceptional works and specialist collectors.
To be ridiculously conservative, each of these step will take less than a decade, or 30 years for the entire sequence.
You can go on as you wish about how people don't want to read books on a screen, the pleasures book ownership and the satisfactions of holding a book, but those are insufficient to overcome the accessibility, affordability and convenience that electronic books will have over paper books.
Today half the world's population doesn't own any books. They'll appreciate the advantages of having an electronic book.
Jim Treacher
"PEOPLE DON’T WANT TO READ BOOKS ON A SCREEN."
You hope.
Unless you're a book designer, I'm not sure you really care about the typeface of the book you're reading unless it somehow interferes with your, y'know, reading. I don't, anyway. All this anti-Kindle book fetishism is bewildering to me. I love papercuts and cardboard boxes full of old paperbacks as much as anybody, but I can't wait to try this thing. Having the amazingly deep backlist of somebody like Donald Westlake right at my fingertips, for example, that's just amazing to me.
The Kindle is back-ordered until after Christmas, presumably because nobody wants to read books on a screen. Well, here's a FAQ for anybody who's on the fence...
Aaron Pressman
It's getting tiring and annoying to refute all the misinformation about the Kindle, an imperfect 1st gen product but a ground-breaking, remarkable, undeniably useful product. Too many of the people criticizing the Kindle have never touched one and/or aren't avid book readers.
If you like to read lengthy hardcover books, the Kindle offers many advantages (weight savings, cost savings, acquisition time savings). If you want to follow up references in a book to get more info online, without even getting up off the couch, Kindle is cool. If you want to take notes and flag passages in a book in a file that you can actually move onto your computer and reference later, Kindle works great. If you want to carry the book store with you wherever you go, go with Kindle. If you want an ebook device that fades into the background as you read for hours and become engrossed in the story, Kindle is your man.
On the other hand, if it's actually the typeface that makes Moby Dick or Pride and Prejudice or The Adventures of Kavalier and Clay so good, the Kindle is not for you.
BJ Nemeth
I think the Kindle has too many small, but important, flaws. And, like all new things, there are those traditionalists (like you) who will never, ever want to read a book on an electronic device. Me? I can't wait for a well-designed eBook reader, even though I started my career as a book typesetter (and a damn good one).
Here are a few history lessons to consider:
1. When the motion picture came along, some swore that it would never replace theater.
2. When TV came along, some swore that it would never replace radio or movies.
3. When the compact disc came along, some swore that it would never replace vinyl.
4. When the internet came along, some swore that it would never replace newspapers, or TV, or radio, or movies.
Yet here we are in 2007, and we still have books, plays, movies, radio, TV, newspapers, and the internet, all coexisting. (Vinyl is effectively dead, even if a handful of traditionalists cling to their precious albums.)
And guess what? A decade from now we will have paper books alongside ebooks. Books are about the ideas behind the words, not the physical ink and paper.
James
Meanwhile, in the early 20th century...
"Transportation has always been by horse, and I don't see why anyone is going to want something as loud and ugly and impersonal as this new...what's it called....'car' contraption. It's ugly and inefficient, and plainly doomed to failure."
James Wilding
"For further explanation as to why this is doomed, go to Amazon’s own website and read Kindle’s Customer Reviews. Ouch. Caveat emptor!"
Quoting latin can't hide the fact that the average review on Amazon is a respectable 3 stars, and at least some of the poor reviews are from people who seem to just dislike it on principle (like yourself). After the backlash has died down, I wouldn't be surprised if the average review score improves further.
LeMel
The Kindle gets many things wrong - but eventually, large numbers of people will read books on e-ink screens (the Kindle uses e-ink). When that day comes, people will likely look back on the Kindle as the turning point, even though if it doesn't sell well.
Everyone loves to use the iPod as an example: But even the iPod wasn't a runaway hit until the 3rd generation devices - look back at the sales numbers!
Matt McVickar
Jon Hendry: I knew someone was going to call me out on that. ;-)
I still think the fact that it's stuck around more or less unchanged for so long makes them "perfect" enough, but you're right: for stuff like a gigantic historical tome, a book isn't the optimal format. And not just for the unwieldiness you mentioned. How about searching? Hyperlinks? Linked indexes? Annotation, excerption, et cetera. Yeah, those are all things that a _good_ e-reader would have. Sure, the Kindle handles some of them, but poorly.
The perfect e-reader will be just that -- perfect. Perfect for doing the sorts of things with information that we do these days. The Kindle is quite simply ridiculous.
The book will remain perfect in its own way, for reasons both sentimental and practical on which legions of other commenters have elaborated.
It's easy to say it's a good start, but why not an amazing start? It's not like the technology isn't there. Look at the iPhone. The early iPods were ugly by today's standards, but not back then -- they were gorgeous. And they were clunky because of technical and industrial restrictions. There's really no excuse for the Kindle.
Mamma Wolf
if only Amazon did the infrastructure and Apple did the interface and device.
stg like this device is great for information that degrades with time, like O'Really's reference books (hence I switched to Safari, rather than having to throw away out of date books every couple of years), and newspapers and magazines. There still needs to be a way of keeping an article.
Still, I'll be able to do all this on my iphone.
Stephen
"For further explanation as to why this is doomed, go to Amazon’s own website and read Kindle’s Customer Reviews."
A pet peeve of mine: The way Amazon lets any registered member review anything, regardless of whether they bought it or read it or know anything about it.
Things like the Kindle (and the OJ book, and on and on) attract little online lynch mobs to the reviews on Amazon.
Adrián Alvarez
Saludos a todos:
Beth commented: "I wouldn't even glorify this device by saying it looks like a Charlie's Angels gadget. It looks more like something I'd use to monitor diabetes or my car engine." I TOTALLY AGREE!,
I'm not completely sure, but looks like this ugly device have just a Black & White screen display, which probably is enough for the people who writes or edit the books, but not enough for EVERYONE.
If I'm right, let me tell you this... the color on the TV signal has more than 50 years of life... the newspapers has been publishing in color since the 80's... the Internet websites you are reading daily was designed with a colors... the iPhone or the iPods are soo beauty and also have a display in color... OUR ENTIRE LIFE WE HAS BEEN LIVING IN A COLOR ENVIROMENT!
Why this UGLY, U-U-U-U-UGLY DEVICE will be replacing the books?
Ralphy
It is disheartening to read the idea, on a design website, that books are merely a carrier for 'information.' Books are physical objects with their own sensual consequences - they feel, look, smell a certain way. You can't say 'Kindle is just as good as a book, nay, better' and at the same time say 'Kindle isn't mean to replace books' without some cognitive dissonance.
At the same time that Kindle changes the medium, it will also change how and what we read. Kindle is not an electronic book any more than the iPod is a portable record player. With any new medium, the social relations and rituals involved will change.
Landon Godfrey
I can barely stand to read all the words on this electronic website!
At least this argument isn't about reading itself. That activity will continue despite changes in formats.
But our persistence in mythologizing formats seems interesting. If you remove the sentimental arguments on behalf of the thingness of books and the "newness" of e-readers, you are left with something seemingly inarguable: we like to read.
The question becomes: how do I like to read poems? (See Paul Fussel on why I'd want to read poems rather than listen to them read). I've long preferred the aesthetics of the book & bookstore. But I've happily read many poems online, perhaps without the frisson of the tactile. Ah, the frisson of the tactile! That must be it; I desire, I want. In what form do I want to own texts? I guess ultimately I want to own the whole bookstore, because I want to be surrounded by books, a phenomonology of the experience of reading a book and feeling inside it. I may be able to get that inside-the-book feeling reading online, but I can't surround myself with e-texts. However, I can recreate the bookstore in my own library. Therefore: books!
Jack
Ralphy's right.
"Book design is a dying art; in a few years there won't be any book design to effect."
There will always be a place for books, just like there is still a place for vinyl records and letterpress. Technology advances but people still have their individual preferences when it comes to user experience. I get my news online (faster, I hate the feel of newsprint) but I prefer to write my daily agenda in a little notebook (I like the feel of writing with a fountain pen).
I'd probably use a Kindle (or something similar) for traveling... but I'd still buy books because I love the feel and design of them.
"Today half the world's population doesn't own any books. They'll appreciate the advantages of having an electronic book."
Er... I doubt it. Half the world's population doesn't own books because they can't afford them or they can't read in the first place.
If you make an e-book reader that's even cheaper than a single printed book, that can be hand- or solar-powered, then maybe I'd agree that it could change the world.
Lauren
As someone with a library of 7,000 or more (paper) books, I have to say I love my Kindle. And I think there is a definite market out there based on my experience reading it in public--every time I'm on the train, I end up having to answer questions about it and people seem to leave ready to buy it. I love physical books. But I also love trees and the environment. I love getting newspapers and magazines on it especially since those get tossed into recycle anyway. I'm not sure why people think it is an either/or proposition. As if buying it is a vote against printed books. Most of the people I know who would love to have one see it as being in addition to their physical book collection not a replacement. I love being able to read big heavy hardcover books without getting cramps in my arms on the train. I love being able to turn pages with gloves on or with the same hand I'm holding the Kindle with while hanging on to a pole on the train. And, by the way, usability matters more than design to me. Design will follow later.
felix sockwell
"don't go changing..." —Manilow
Zzzz.
ps- Essl, you left a few 20s on the couch at Scores®. I pity the fool who had to pay the ATM service charge in that place.
Arthur's Design
I love to touch, look at, and smell paper. Does this thing allow me to do that?
ok then . . .
Ralphy
To elaborate on my previous point (am I allowed to do that?), to get the discussion beyond a simple bun-fight maybe we should stop comparing Kindle to a book and consider it an altogether new medium. TV is not radio with pictures, a computer is not a television with a keyboard, and Kindle is not simply a book on a screen. It is something else altogether, and perhaps that is why we are so emotionally wrapped up in it, one way or another.
There is a whole series of media, Kindle has been added to that series, not as a replacement, but as a new medium unto itself.
Winslow Theramin
Most people have missed the point of this post. The question posed is: How will the Kindle effect *book design*?
The question is about whether reading text on a screen is good or not, but how will the physical book be changed by the existence of the Kindle.
"None" is the correct answer.
I would rather read a physical book myself, but an electronic version of same text would certainly aid looking up specific passages, etc., easier.
There are certain types of text where the electronic version would be more useful: manuals, text books, etc.
I don't see the point of an single-purpose eBook reader; e-text seems like something that could be part of a more general purpose device.
Amazon's model stinks too. They should at least make electronic versions of any physical book you buy from them available for free for any medium.
Jim Treacher
"I love to touch, look at, and smell paper. Does this thing allow me to do that?"
Book fetishism. I just don't get it.
Print is great. I love print. This isn't going to replace print. But it seems like a pretty good adjunct to it. Did TV replace movie theaters? No, they're just two different ways of doing the same thing, each with its own advantages and disadvantages.
The Kindle's been available for less than 2 weeks, so maybe it's a bit early to proclaim the death of print or the stillbirth of the ebook. Maybe there's room for both.
leslie
Not only does reading on a screen present a problem for many people. There is a cost of 400.00 per KIndle and then you still have to buy the books in downloadable form. Four hundred dollars will buy a lot of paperback books.
Anwar
I've read enough science fiction to realise I really want what the Kindle is offering.
It's not quite there yet, but I really want to encourage the development of the Kindle.
Might do that by buying one. When are they out in the UK?
sk66
Wrong hardware or wrong price. Looks cheap and by all accounts hardware (buttons etc) not well designed. But priced like an iPhone.
This would be a killer if they offered it for $100 or if they made it look and behave like an object of desire. Realistically offering it at a loss would do miracles for sales (the book format locks punters into their platform, so captive audience anyway).
Colin Scroggins
So just out of curiosity, exactly how many of you folks bitching about the Kindle have actually used or own one? You, Chip? Sounds about like the same amount of naysayers I encountered in 2001 when I bought my first iPod for $400.
I do have a Kindle. I enjoy having my newpaper first thing in the morning - portable and ready to go, at a fraction of the cost of the print version. I like having 15 or so books on hand with me, whenever I want (with thousands more available). I also like paying for only my use. I don't buy books to loan to other people or resell. I buy them for me.
The Kindle does not have to replace all books to be a success. It just has to be useful for one person at a time.
Nick Lo
I actually don't mind its "Empire Strikes Back" looks too much, but I do wonder how well it would dry out with a hairdryer if you drop it in the bath?!
One of our kids borrowed a copy of Harry Potter from their grandmother and spilt some water on it. If it'd been a Kindle would they have had to apologise for spoiling her whole library?
Also, would you read a Kindle in the toilet?
To elaborate on Jim Teacher's comment: "Maybe there's [bath]room for both".
Michael McWatters
The art of being provocative, succinct, and pithy are great tactics when designing a book cover. Unfortunately, that skill is less useful for a meaningful discussion on an important emerging technology.
Of course, those whose livelihoods depend on the design, printing, distribution, and sale of printed books may find it all too easy to dismiss eBooks.
However, as many posters have noted, eBooks will provide an important alternative to paper-based books when cost, environmental impact, portability, accessibility, and technology make them truly viable alternatives.
Jon H
Nick Lo writes: "I actually don't mind its "Empire Strikes Back" looks too much, but I do wonder how well it would dry out with a hairdryer if you drop it in the bath?!"
I've seen a tip that you can dry out electronics by putting the device in, say, a thin sock or stocking, and putting that in a box of dry rice for a day or so. The idea being that the dry rice would absorb the moisture. You wouldn't want the device directly in the rice, I don't think, since wet rice goo would get all over it.
Amazon backs up your books (along with annotations, I assume) so you can redownload them if necessary, and the flash card would provide another way of copying them. If the Kindle did die, you could reload it pretty easily.
I wouldn't hesitate to use a Kindle in *my* bathroom.
Jon H
Michael wrote: "Of course, those whose livelihoods depend on the design, printing, distribution, and sale of printed books may find it all too easy to dismiss eBooks."
I bet ebooks, if they take off, will lead to a segmentation into: super-budget books for people who don't have a reader or computer; expensive, super-high-design, high-quality books for collectors, fans, and archival copies; and ebooks. The designed books will be conversation pieces, status symbols, heirlooms.
Jon H
Matt wrote: " There's really no excuse for the Kindle."
I think part of the problem with the kindle is the keyboard. It makes it look like a very thin fax machine.
Unfortunately, the keyboard is likely to be pretty important for a certain subset of users - the web surfers, the kindle store shoppers, and the heavy note takers.
If a second version used a slide-out keyboard, like on phones, the device would look a lot better.
Incidentally, the 'one font' complaint is pretty insubstantial. That will probably be very easy to fix with a software update.
Ishtiaque Omar
It's silly to juxtaposition music's "purity" with a book's physicality. Books are stories or information afixed in physical form. It's the content stupid. And the oral tradition existed for longer than the written has, so this argument is misconceived.
Others have espoused advantages of a properly designed e-book such as searchability, hyperlinking, instant referencing previous books, etc. Kindle's specific limitations can be overcome.
More importantly the overreaching comment that printed books in their current form will *never* be improved upon is ludicrous. Read Arthur C. Clarke's first law (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clarke's_three_laws). Given that the author, Kidd, is an artist (in the broad sense) and not a scientist, his lack of imagination is particularly disappointing.
dave
What I find really odd is a that a major advocate for books and the largest bookseller in the world would push such a technology. It just seems so anti-brand and shows a huge lack of faith in their biggest selling product . Very odd.
Surely no coincidence that "kindle" means :
1. to start (a fire); cause (a flame, blaze, etc.) to begin burning.
2. to set fire to or ignite (fuel or any combustible matter).
Quite a jump - to go from biggest book advocate to book burner in one short ill-conceived step.
Jon H
dave wrote: "Quite a jump - to go from biggest book advocate to book burner in one short ill-conceived step."
Er, what? They'd still be selling books, they just won't be dealing with as many physical objects. While people may like reading a physical book, they aren't buying books for the paper and cardboard. They're buying what's printed in it, and that can be delivered through other media.
I expect they'd love to be able to cut the cost of dealing with inventories, shipping, packing and boxing, etc.
(Of course that leaves the same issues for all the other things they sell, but considering their music and video download services, it appears they want to de-materialize what they can.)
April Holle
I love that everyone automatically assumes that when one delivery option for media comes around it will automatically destroy all others.
The fact is that people are different, and that everyone will want to use the media differently. We're just giving the user more choices on how to consume it, not eradicating them. Long live the power of choice!
Michael McWatters
Dave wrote: "Quite a jump - to go from biggest book advocate to book burner in one short ill-conceived step."
That is like saying iTunes is anti-music. Quite the opposite. It's a technology that, if anything, has created a revolutionary new venue for music producers and lovers alike. Yes, it has changed the way we find, purchase, and interact with music, but it certainly hasn't destroyed music itself.
Ralphy
"It's silly to juxtaposition music's "purity" with a book's physicality. Books are stories or information afixed in physical form. It's the content stupid. And the oral tradition existed for longer than the written has, so this argument is misconceived."
This is simply incorrect, and myself and others have already addressed it. The structure of stories in an oral tradition differs from the structure of stories that are found in book form, e.g. after the printing press. Also, what is the oral tradition equivalent of an encyclopedia? a chapbook? an illustrated story? Every medium shapes its content, so the claim 'it's the content, stupid' is misinformed on the history and nature of mediation, and rude to boot.
paul merrill
I think it will be interesting to see if this technology ever DOES take off - if it's done right.
Michael
- I Love the image Mike
- I disagree with the premise Chip
My take is that the Kindle will do what the Sony e-reader failed at: Take the digital book to the next level. We're still very early in the evolution of e-books and I do agree that the Kindle is not going to be the story as much as the service behind the Kindle. There will be new and improved versions of the Kindle to address people's angst over this device. However, the service and the sheer number of e-book titles will continue to be in Amazon's favor.
The best move for Amazon is to open up their Kindle store in the same vein that Google is doing with Android. Let technology vendors create fantastic e-readers that connect to the Amazon store just as the Kindle does. Give consumers choice and allow competition to make e-ink great.
I'm waiting for my Kindle to arrive next week and will reserve judgment until then.
dave
Just to clarify - of course writing can be delivered in other media, but a book consists of pages in my eyes. Kindle is not a book.
And long-form writing rarely works digitally. Just look at the idea behind this website.
Amazon's rally call for burning books of course is for economic purposes, but those who spend years toiling on writing books would want to be very careful in their consideration of where this is leading, and just look where music and film have led in recent years. It is not all roses for the creatives who hope to make a living from their work. Cheaper return for creatives, rampant pirating, advertising integration, etc., etc.,
Shane
I would have to say that a books natural habitat is indeed in the form of print. I don't think that will EVER change.
Jon H
dave wrote "And long-form writing rarely works digitally. Just look at the idea behind this website."
a) long-form writing on a kindle will be different from such writing in a web context, because the device is not as multi-purpose/multi-distracting. (There is a web browser, but it seems like a suboptimal device for that, so it's unlikely to be a big temptation.)
b) Whether long-form writing works has also been dependent on display quality. CRTs were awful. LCDs are much better, but power-hungry and the brightness can tire the eyes. e-ink displays are new, so the jury is still out on whether they are sufficiently paperlike.
I'll also note that clinging so tenaciously to the idea of bound paper sheets as books is like rejecting the typewriter in favor of paper manuscripts and correspondence.
Given that books are largely composed on screens these days, it seems odd to reject the reading of them on screens, which takes so much less time than the composition. Especially when the screen for reading can be better than the screen used for writing.
Thomas
First of all, the "screen" is a different technology that your casual reader might assume. Yes, it is hard to ready on a glossy backlit LCD screen. eInk is different.
Secondly, the customer reviews on Amazon are based upon a device that has not yet been delivered and therefore only "partisans" who have already formed a strong opinion on the subject bother to comment. They are not commenting on the product, but merely thier opinion of the concept and implementation based on very limited evidence, and little or NO practical experience.
Mr. Kidd: It takes a carpenter to build a house. Any fool can knock one down.
Michael McWatters
Imagine a small, desolate, impoverished village. Purchasing and shipping dozens of books would be a logistical nightmare. However, distributing an eBook to each citizen and giving them access to as many books as are available digitally would be quite an easy task to accomplish.
So, to the posters who claim this is a form of "book burning," do you think those less fortunate than yourself should not have access to the great wealth of written information the eBook format might unlock? Are you willing to argue that the preciousness of the printed format outweighs the need to bring books to the entire world?
dave
"Given that books are largely composed on screens these days, it seems odd to reject the reading of them on screens, which takes so much less time than the composition."
If you knew anything about writing long form you would know writers never read their work in entirety on screen - they print it out.
My point is, regardless of how great the Kindle turns out to be, that by choosing the name "Kindle" (to set fire to or ignite) Amazon is clearly referencing book burning and the end of the traditional book. And that this is purely for economic reasons. I am all for print on demand to save on space and paper etc., but to advocate book burning to me seems an incredibly off-brand strategy by Amazon and a real lack of faith in its own product. It should be championing the book not destroying it. With print on demand and a standardisation of book formats it could easily do this.
Ralphy
"Imagine a small, desolate, impoverished village. Purchasing and shipping dozens of books would be a logistical nightmare. However, distributing an eBook to each citizen and giving them access to as many books as are available digitally would be quite an easy task to accomplish."
The obstacles to global book distribution and mass literacy are not technical, they are social, political, and economic, and the task certainly is not easy to accomplish.
Besides, who is going to set up the infrastructure to get an eBook to each citizen (6 billion eBooks? even 6 million? which villages count?) and free access to every digital book? Who is paying for this?
People invest every new technology with all sorts of Utopian possibilities. It happened with sound recording, with television (a new means for education!) and now you are doing it with Kindle.
Michael McWatters
Ralphy said: "Besides, who is going to set up the infrastructure to get an eBook to each citizen (6 billion eBooks? even 6 million? which villages count?) and free access to every digital book? Who is paying for this?"
You might want to tell the folks at One Laptop to give up hope, all is lost. If it's not paper, it's useless garbage. As you point out, sound recording and electronic images have had little impact on learning (not to mention entertainment, politics, the arts, etc.). (Now THAT is a funny idea.)
Anyway, my point wasn't that Kindle is a utopian solution to the world's educational woes, but that people holding onto paper books as the one true format a book might take should ask themselves about some of the great opportunities eBooks might provide for those unable to get access to bookstores and libraries in far-flung regions of the world.
Michael McWatters
Dave said, "If you knew anything about writing long form you would know writers never read their work in entirety on screen - they print it out."
They print it out because screens cannot match the quality of paper. But as OLED (or other technologies) allow for low-light, 300 dpi (or greater), large-format, paper-like (or better) display of text, they may not need to. Wouldn't that be a nice thing for the trees. :)
Matt
I'd read from a screen like kindle. Forget having to carry around or even store all those heavy books.
BJ Nemeth
The difference between handwriting and typing is *HUGE* compared to the differences print on paper or on a screen. Handwriting is unique for each individual author, providing insight into the author's personality and feelings while writing. Type is uniform and impersonal.
Yes, as a designer, you can argue that good typography adds an emotional element. But it's not direct from the author, is it? Why should a random typographer working for whichever publisher purchased the rights get to interpret the author's words for the rest of the world? Wouldn't the author's own handwriting be more "pure"?
Paperback books were created to cram as many words as possible onto as few pieces of paper as possible -- cheap production was the primary goal.
Is a mass-market paperback as beautiful as a well-designed hardcover edition? Probably not. But history shows the mass-market paperback book became one of the biggest successes of the 20th century. People love them.
Paperless books (eBooks) just take the mass-market paperback one step further. Are they as beautiful as a well-designed paper book? Probably not. But I'm confident the next 10-20 years will show that eBooks become one of the biggest successes of the early 21st century.
Daniel Reeders
I would settle for being able to read this article on the screen. I'm using IE7 on WinXP and the text is obscured by the photo.
Jon H
dave wrote: "If you knew anything about writing long form you would know writers never read their work in entirety on screen - they print it out."
Sure, but the total time spent reading the text while editing is vastly larger than the time spent while reading a hard copy.
A novelist might spend a year or more, hours each day, looking at the text on the screen, adding more, editing, throwing parts away, revisiting earlier passages, re-ordering sections. There's just no way they'll spend anything like that much time reading hard copy.
Jim Treacher
"Also, would you read a Kindle in the toilet?"
No, but I might read a Kindle while I was sitting ON the toilet. Not only would I have a lot of different reading material to choose from, but it would also prevent others from wanting to borrow my Kindle.
"What I find really odd is a that a major advocate for books and the largest bookseller in the world would push such a technology. It just seems so anti-brand and shows a huge lack of faith in their biggest selling product."
I wonder if the publishers and authors of the top-selling Kindle books would agree with you.
RS
The smell of book, the nice matt finish of its cover, the feel of the pages....it's more than just a sum of its parts.
I get inspired by looking at all the spines of my CD cases. Yet sifting through my iPod listings does nothing for me anymore.
And besides, this thing looks like my Mum's old set of kitchen scales.
carolita
No, that's just not true! I love reading on a screen! I was one of the first people to buy a Palm and download books onto it. I made a valiant effort to make it into my portable library, but the battery life was just so limiting, not to mention the LED screen. (I coudn't afford the color screen).
Whenever my New Yorker magazine is late arriving, I read it on my 2 by 2.5 inch cellphone screen on the subway. I have no problem with it, and even like it! Takes no room up on a crowded subway.
Ever since I saw The Martian Chronicles ages ago, and saw someone reading a "book" that was just a small tablet with what seemed like a touch screen, I've been waiting for technology to catch up.
Yes, I love a beautiful bound, hardcover book as much as the next person, absolutely. They are wondrous objects of beauty. But an digital reader is also a wondrous object to me, and I'd like to see someone finally do one right! This Kindle thing is so FUGLY! That's my big problem with it. Apple should do one, and then we'd see something really pretty!
Lulz
"A novelist might spend a year or more, hours each day, looking at the text on the screen, adding more, editing, throwing parts away, revisiting earlier passages, re-ordering sections. There's just no way they'll spend anything like that much time reading hard copy."
Yeah, cause nobody ever wrote and edited a book before electronic word processors.
dave
I'm sure eventually we might hopefully have a situation where a 'master' book still has pages and the feel of paper but the electronic ink just flows from page to page like the newspaper in Minority Report.
Jon H
Lulz wrote: "Yeah, cause nobody ever wrote and edited a book before electronic word processors."
Hey, nice anachronistic counter-argument, there. I'm not sure what relevance Hemingway's choice of writing tool has today, when most writers have moved on, but thanks anyway!
Or, maybe writers should be real old school and write on scrolls or little chips of wood like the Romans did. Bound paper just lacks that woody essence.
Kyle
eBook readers are at the same place that the internet was in 1997. Like the Web, we'll see these readers develop to a point where they can visually imitate print.
Just as people have dropped physical attachment to a CD, they'll do the same for books, newspapers, and magazines. But for now, print media still wins.
dave
The key question is whether digital novels will see rampant pirating a with music (more than likely), and a huge devaluation in writing as a profession and a vast shrinking of the meagre funds writers already receive. Spending 5 yrs to write a novel and then seeing it easily available to download free from pirate websites could totally devalue the whole idea of long form writing and kill the novel in one fell swoop. Amazon could end up with NO product to sell at all! Music in many ways has been reduced to the form of a hobby, with a growing disillusionment among many artists to surviving as a recording artist -especially the notion of the 'album'. I still feel the book is a lot more than just a medium for delivery, like vinyl or dvd.
Tanner Christensen
I like my paper books, with their hard covers and worn pages that are easy to stain.
And, because I like it that way, everyone must else like it that way.
Isn't that like Amazon saying: "We created an e-book reader and, because we created it, it will change the world."?
It's not that they are changing the "book" or the design of literature for the next generation, it's that they have presented an option (like Apple with the iPod) for consumers.
Unfortunately, the Kindle is nothing new. Go ask Sony.
Rich Ward
I've got one. I was one of the first deliveries (within 24 hours of the announcement)I've used it a lot in the last 8 or 9 days.
So, the answer is.... its transformational.
in the last 9 days I've:
- Sampled the 1st chapter of 20+ books
- Purchased 3 books and read them (world war Z, still standing, hotel chesil)(read 1 novel in all of 2006)
- read the New York Times and Wall Street Journal everyday
- Cancelled my paper subscriptions to both
- emailed from my blackberry 11 contracts to read and review (word.doc)
- NOT stuffed 300+ pages into my briefcase for my trip this morning.
Now for the FlameWar:
- Bookcovers are just advertising for the text
- Fonts are just like bit/rate for music. some are better than others, but I get the message, even if not _perfectly_
- The radio is what makes this different; Instant Gratification.
Ben
I say boo to Kindle.
However, this device would have been fantastic when I was in college a few years ago. I would have picked a 10 oz. Kindle over 60 lbs. of books anyday.
Now that I think about it, this could help eliminate having that pile of newspapers in the trunk of my car.
Hmmm. I'll give 1/2 boo to Kindle. They'll never replace actual books. Though, they never said it was meant to 'replace'...
Rob
The Kindle is a great device for reading newspapers (the two best selling items so far are monthly subscriptions to the Wall Street Journal and the New York Times, respectively). It beams today's edition directly to your hand with no big mess of paper.
However, when it comes to reading an actual book, there's nothing like, well, reading an actual book. I understand the desire to save money ($10 a book, dependent upon the book, may be a bargain...though an initial $400 certainly is not), which is why I subscribe to BookSwim - www.BookSwim.com - (it's like Netflix, but with books). I'm on the 5-at-a-time plan (they have anywhere from 2 to 11), so I'm reading at my own pace (no due dates or late fees) and saving money hand over fist (my monthly subscription costs about as much as one hardcover new release).
And on the topic of compactness...come on; have you seen the size of the Kindle? iPod-small it is not. There's little else in the world as compact as a book (especially considering how much is in it).
Noel Jackson
I
CT
Doesn't it seem logical to praise this little thing because it provides more people more options to relate to the written word in all forms. I'm excited about the youtube factor (maybe I'd rather have a funny short text rather than what a publisher needs in order to make a profit). Writers will be able to post anything, any size, finished or evolving, available to everyone (with weblinks, videos, powerpoint, etc. built into the text). Not just writers with agents, publishers, bookstores, and, ahem- book designers (if my job were threatened by this technology, my opinion would be jaded too...).
Doesn't it seem logical that 20-40% of the market will swing this direction (like music). Readers will have a bookshelf and an ereader- using both to fit their lives.
Me- I like reading lying down and hate holding a heavy book open. I read 3-4 books at a time. I don't like carrying books around everywhere. I'm a great candidate for this thing (they're sold out). Just like I'm listening to a lot more music now because of my ipod- I'll be reading a lot more.
My relationship with the 20 or so books I buy each year will change.
Joe Wikert
Kindle is definitely sparking the publishing equivalent of a religious war and it's causing people to lose sight of what really matters. First of all, I agree that *no* e-book device will take off as long as it's only goal in life is to replicate the printed word electronically. Very few people need or want this capability.
Where things get quite interesting is when the real capabilities of an e-product are tapped into and fully leveraged. Again, some folks will be perfectly content to read their analog book as they always have. (Some folks were pretty happy listening to their radios after TV came out too, for that matter!) But for those who want to take reading, exchanging information and operating in a social network with the written word to the next level, well, a new tool/device takes us in the right direction.
Is the Kindle perfect? Heck no, not even close! Whether it's pricing, lack of color, fonts, etc., that you hate most, try to look beyond all that for a moment. Compare today's iPhone to the original iPod of 6 years ago. Now think about where the Kindle could be in 5-10 years!
Name
You're wrong.
Charles Wilkes
Nobody posting here has seen the largest user set for Kindle -- the business whch is spending fortunes making copies for attendees at meetings. But give everyone a Kindle, and then send them to each Kindle's email address (zip them together and Kindle will unzip and format each file individually), and it doesn't even matter where people are -- they could be in a video conference and still get all the handouts almost immediately.
If this happens quickly as I expect, Amazon will NEVER catch up with the backlog, which will just get longer and longer. And Kinko will go out of business.
Personally, I love my Kindle, and am always finding new applications for it. I put in a 4 GB SDHC card so I can add tons of ebooks I already have to my Kindle. And once I get this going, I'll never print one again.
Cody Petruk
Mail, music, movies, photography... you name it. It's all going (or gone) digital. To say that books (or anything else, for that matter) is immune is incredibly naive.
People will always write letter, listen to vinyl, and shoot on film. But it is a romantic attachment, not one of convenience or quality. And anyone who refuses to embrace these new technologies, in a professional manner, will soon find themselves left behind.
This type of technology isn't going to go away because people don't abandon new technologies for old ones, they simply improve the new ones till they work right.
The snowball is rolling, and it's not going to get any smaller as it goes.
deckard
steve jobs bezos isn't.
leslie
Candles didn't go away after electricity was invented--there are still stores devoted to candles of all types. (many very exotic and expensive ones!)
It appears that the Kindle will be a commercial success and fulfill the need for many who want to store large amounts of information in a convenient manner. However, traditional books will still retain their appeal for those that like the haptics of paper and don't want to lug around yet another gadget that costs 400.00.
andré stikkers
Recently I watch bladerunner.
Back then (1982) I was very impressed by it's view on the future.
While watching it this time I was surprised by the scene where
Harrison Ford reads a newsPAPER.
It was out of place and looked as ridiculous as reading a web-page on paper.
Sure I like books!
Sure I like how they smell!
Sure I like to collect them!
Sure I'm trilled with a good designed jacket!
Sure I work in a bookstore for over 30 years now
(with pleasure I might add)
But most of all I like what's in them.
The content
I will be as content reading them digital as I was when reading them on paper.
And it will..
- save a lot of paper which is made by a very polluting paper-industry
- take some pressure of the distribution network
- kill overproduction
- change the way we read and write
and it will be good
you can count on it.
andré stikkers
david sky
the kindle is something new, it offers free highspeed wireless connectivity, free access to the top 20 major international news sources...FREE. that means no more buying newspapers. not to mention free access to wikipedia.
if you think the kindle is going to flop, one look at amazons site and you'll see youre dead wrong. a look at ebay and you'll ask yourself how its going to be a flop when its going for $800-$1000. in fact, i cant wait to get my hands on one.
the only problem is the price.
Your name
If the ipod were born from pure sound, it--as a device--would hardly be the experience it is today. Consider the form and functionality of the first generation, then compare that to its current iteration. It was/is hardly born to merely return sound--quite the contrary. With each new generation comes an increasingly fully-articulated visual presentation and user experience. Delivering sound merely requires a vehicle, and if the goal experience for the user of such a device is to simply receive sound, what impact does appearance and interface have? I'm hard-pressed to say that music is written with a delivery device in mind! I agree that the Kindle has room for improvement as far as those issues are concerned, but your focus, Chip, should not mire in whether or not the device is trying to replace or re-invent the experience of reading bound books, because it obviously isn't. Thanks for your narrow value judgment about its appearance, and expressing your clear disdain for any reading experience outside a bound and printed assemblage of paper and ink, but why not apply your skills and training to a fair and considered evaluation before signing off as an anecdotal dismissive of such 'new-fangled gadgets?'
Ehren Cheung
It is really interesting to hear the opinions of the Amazon Kindle, but I'm disappointed in hearing a number of opinions that seem to reject the opportunity for books to reach a new platform.
The book itself is a platform, just as a newspaper or computer. The ability to deliver content that has been until recently, only been available in a book, to another platform (or format) can only benefit designers, authors and readers around the world.
Just as those who don't like hardcover books, there are those who love mass market paperbacks. The content however can be delivered in many different ways and reach people who each enjoy reading in their own way.
This is a freedom that we should be embracing ... not something to be ignored or condemned.
Designer
Some books will always be printed, some will be digital only, some will be both. Don't worry about it. Move on.