Another Log
I made a few remarks about Amazon's new Kindle e-book reader a week or so back. Since then, my buddy's boss posted an entry on his own blog about how he views the Kindle as analogous to the iPod. I don't think so, and I posted the following as a response (I think it makes sense as a standalone entry and hopefully invites comments of its own). At the risk of being walking over the same ground twice, here it is:
I've always thought that the iPod blew up more or less because of timing and Apple's cachet. The user base for MP3 players had reached a certain point so that when Apple jumped in with their cool and groovy marketing and a catchy name (the only MP3 player at the time to have a name that didn't mean something else (i.e. Jukebox, Zen); an iPod could only be an iPod), the flash point took over. That kind of environment doesn't exist for e-books now; there isn't a dry forest for the Kindle to ignite.
I don't think the interface or method of obtaining content is a big obstacle to widespread adoption. While I think this is the Kindle's strongest feature when compared to other readers, I'm not convinced that this is all that big an issue regardless. Comparing MP3 software of years ago to ebook reading
software of today seems out of synch; comparing any computer-to-portable-device software of ten years ago and today makes sense. Initial releases today are much more mature out of the gate. Sure it's simpler to eliminate the computer but it certainly isn't necessary. My guess is that beyond the initial downloading it's a lot easier to manage your e-library on a computer than on the device itself.
A Kindle book at $9.99 is only cheaper than a new book or one that's currently only available in hardcover. And there are no twenty five dollar books at Amazon: a $24.95 hardcover sells for $14.97. Sure, the Kindle version is still cheaper than that but when compared to a $7.99 mass market paperback, the math works the other way. So the price advantage is a very limited one. And if price were the main consideration, there'd be a lot more people patronizing the library.
To me the bottom line is that as a delivery device, the Kindle is way overpriced. Couple that with book prices that are more expensive than mass market paperbacks and I don't think this device is going to do much widening of the e-reader audience. This is neither a "give away the razor and make money on the blades" scenario or one where there is simply an improved value to the consumer. I'll either buy cheaper books (used, mass market) or pay $15 for a first edition hardcover (just five bucks higher than the Kindle price).
Unless something changes radically in the publishing industry, I think the Kindle is fated to appeal to the same group as the existing e-book readers, namely literate technophiles. Commuters, travelers, or people like me with an eye issue (I use my Sony with the large font size to rehab one of my eyes), may want one but as for attracting new users, there's not enough there to sway the reading community away from actual books.
I've always thought that the iPod blew up more or less because of timing and Apple's cachet. The user base for MP3 players had reached a certain point so that when Apple jumped in with their cool and groovy marketing and a catchy name (the only MP3 player at the time to have a name that didn't mean something else (i.e. Jukebox, Zen); an iPod could only be an iPod), the flash point took over. That kind of environment doesn't exist for e-books now; there isn't a dry forest for the Kindle to ignite.
I don't think the interface or method of obtaining content is a big obstacle to widespread adoption. While I think this is the Kindle's strongest feature when compared to other readers, I'm not convinced that this is all that big an issue regardless. Comparing MP3 software of years ago to ebook reading
software of today seems out of synch; comparing any computer-to-portable-device software of ten years ago and today makes sense. Initial releases today are much more mature out of the gate. Sure it's simpler to eliminate the computer but it certainly isn't necessary. My guess is that beyond the initial downloading it's a lot easier to manage your e-library on a computer than on the device itself.
A Kindle book at $9.99 is only cheaper than a new book or one that's currently only available in hardcover. And there are no twenty five dollar books at Amazon: a $24.95 hardcover sells for $14.97. Sure, the Kindle version is still cheaper than that but when compared to a $7.99 mass market paperback, the math works the other way. So the price advantage is a very limited one. And if price were the main consideration, there'd be a lot more people patronizing the library.
To me the bottom line is that as a delivery device, the Kindle is way overpriced. Couple that with book prices that are more expensive than mass market paperbacks and I don't think this device is going to do much widening of the e-reader audience. This is neither a "give away the razor and make money on the blades" scenario or one where there is simply an improved value to the consumer. I'll either buy cheaper books (used, mass market) or pay $15 for a first edition hardcover (just five bucks higher than the Kindle price).
Unless something changes radically in the publishing industry, I think the Kindle is fated to appeal to the same group as the existing e-book readers, namely literate technophiles. Commuters, travelers, or people like me with an eye issue (I use my Sony with the large font size to rehab one of my eyes), may want one but as for attracting new users, there's not enough there to sway the reading community away from actual books.
posted by Rick Ollerman at 12:00 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home