Anyone have the Kindle 3 yet?

[holymadness]

You act as if I have never heard of an e-reader before. Problem is we've moved on. I don't see a long term future for the kindle in a future filled with tablets. $200 is already too much to spend for something that can only fulfill one of the dozens of functions of an iPad or other slate.

 

[rjakapeanut]

Originally Posted by holymadness

^^ Hmm no, that is a poor analogy.

BryanHarig has got it right. Its one advantage is its price.

that analogyis perfect. i'd liken it more to test driving a prius and going "well this isn't very fast/powerful." the kindle was designed with one job in mind: to be the best e-reader tablet on the market. no other device comes close to it.

Originally Posted by holymadness

You act as if I have never heard of an e-reader before. Problem is we've moved on. I don't see a long term future for the kindle in a future filled with tablets. $200 is already too much to spend for something that can only fulfill one of the dozens of functions of an iPad or other slate.

you're just wrong, then. they've sold millions of these devices. the market will always be there as long as they continue to improve upon the design and as long as the ipad/other LED tablets can't figure out a way to beat the e-ink display for reading.

 

[Brian1976]

Originally Posted by holymadness

You act as if I have never heard of an e-reader before. Problem is we've moved on. I don't see a long term future for the kindle in a future filled with tablets. $200 is already too much to spend for something that can only fulfill one of the dozens of functions of an iPad or other slate.

Actually I was not making any assumptions about your knowledge or lack of knowledge on e-readers. I was simply digging a bit more to find out about your "I was unimpressed" statement because I was curious what you were expecting or looking to be impressed by with such a device.

Personally I cant agree with the "we've moved on" statement because the current devices still lack in many areas. Because of this, I see the $200 Kindle as a bridge to get me through until the $600-$800 tablets are more evolved and less expensive, which I am hoping is not more than 2 years away.

 

[Brian1976]

Originally Posted by rjakapeanut

they've sold millions of these devices.

Excellent point. I purchased mine at Staple's and had to have them search for one in their system at another store because they were sold out along with 2 other stores that they checked first.

 

[holymadness]

Originally Posted by Brian1976

Actually I was not making any assumptions about your knowledge or lack of knowledge on e-readers. I was simply digging a bit more to find out about your "I was unimpressed" statement because I was curious what you were expecting or looking to be impressed by with such a device. Personally I cant agree with the "we've moved on" statement because the current devices still lack in many areas. Because of this, I see the $200 Kindle as a bridge to get me through until the $600-$800 tablets are more evolved and less expensive, which I am hoping is not more than 2 years away.
I disliked using it. The contrast ratio between the background and the text was very low and made the words more difficult to pick out than when using a tablet. In fact, the sickly grey colour of the background is just plain ugly. The lack of colour is also a major drawback when reading a text that contains photos or maps where colour can be important; for example, you could never read a book about art history or photography on a Kindle. There would be no point. I also disliked the slight lag and the black flash every time you turn the page; it's jarring and disrupts the reading experience. The menus were unsophisticated and slow to navigate compared to something with a touchscreen interface. And while the Kindle may be the best device to use in broad daylight, in anything other than ideal reading conditions it suffers from all the same limitations of the paper it seeks to replace; I do most of my reading at night next to my partner, who is asleep. That would be impossible with a Kindle. Other than all that, I am not a big believer in gadgets that only do one thing. A few months ago someone invented a tablet which can only consult wikipedia, nothing else. It's absurd if you think about it, but no less absurd than a tablet that only allows you to read books.

 

[otc]

Originally Posted by holymadness

You act as if I have never heard of an e-reader before. Problem is we've moved on. I don't see a long term future for the kindle in a future filled with tablets. $200 is already too much to spend for something that can only fulfill one of the dozens of functions of an iPad or other slate.

Kindles can go a very very long time on a set of batteries....I could treat it just like a paperback. Throw it in my bag, read it on the bus too and from work and never worry about it until I have finished a book or two. If I was reading on an ipad, I would have to pull it out and charge it every day or I could forget it at home in the morning since I was using it to do other things where as the single purpose device can stay in my bag just like my ipod nano (which is another single purpose device whose battery lasts far longer than trying to combine it with a phone and I can always have it in my bag)

I actually like the way the kindle screens look...high contrast is hard on your eyes. Sure it makes the screen sparkle and looks good with some content, but it is not best for reading. As for art and photography books...the kindle isn't meant for this kind of content but neither is the ipad...art books are printed on high quality presses with far better color reproduction than some crappy tablet screen


Disclaimer: I don't own one (I buy discounted/used books off amazon or use a library so while I like them, I can't yet get behind paying for the device and then paying more per book than I already pay)

 

[rjakapeanut]

these people who think that an LED tablet like the ipad will ever replace a device like the kindle for extensive bookreading purposes are insane. enjoy your blindness, lol.

 

[holymadness]

Originally Posted by rjakapeanut

these people who think that an LED tablet like the ipad will ever replace a device like the kindle for extensive bookreading purposes are insane. enjoy your blindness, lol.
Do you have a desk job? Do you stare at a computer all day? Have you gone blind yet? If not, congratulations, you are our derp derp champion!

 

[Brian1976]

Originally Posted by holymadness

I disliked using it. The contrast ratio between the background and the text was very low and made the words more difficult to pick out than when using a tablet. In fact, the sickly grey colour of the background is just plain ugly. The lack of colour is also a major drawback when reading a text that contains photos or maps where colour can be important; for example, you could never read a book about art history or photography on a Kindle. There would be no point. I also disliked the slight lag and the black flash every time you turn the page; it's jarring and disrupts the reading experience. The menus were unsophisticated and slow to navigate compared to something with a touchscreen interface. And while the Kindle may be the best device to use in broad daylight, in anything other than ideal reading conditions it suffers from all the same limitations of the paper it seeks to replace; I do most of my reading at night next to my partner, who is asleep. That would be impossible with a Kindle. Other than all that, I am not a big believer in gadgets that only do one thing. A few months ago someone invented a tablet which can only consult Wikipedia, nothing else. It's absurd if you think about it, but no less absurd than a tablet that only allows you to read books.
I agree on the contrast, I feel like it could stand to be slightly more drastic, however I don't find it to make the screen difficult to read. I also agree on the photography or any graphic heavy book. As for the page turn, personally I don't notice that now, it bothered me for the first 20 minutes or so of reading but now it is a non-issue. The lighting issue is a little bit annoying because the only solution is one of the clip on type LED lights which would eliminate the issue for anyone sleeping next to you since led lighting is more focused. I don't understand why they didn't build a small retractable light at the top like you find on laptop screens. Also, I'd be curious to know what impact tablet has on the lighting in the room if you are worried about the person next to you. I know that even just the light from my Blackberry does a good job of lighting up a room, I would assume a tablet that is multiple times that size would be quite bright. The Wikipedia tablet IS absurd, but much different than the Kindle. Id buy your comparison if the Kindle was only capable of downloading one book or maybe books from one author.

Originally Posted by holymadness

Do you have a desk job? Do you stare at a computer all day? Have you gone blind yet? If not, congratulations, you are our derp derp champion!
I am not an expert on the materials used to build displays nor am I an eye doctor, but I do notice that most laptop and computer monitors have a soft thin plastic covering with a very dull finish, as opposed to most tablets and phones which have very thick and highly glossy glass. I believe that is what would probably make a difference between reading from a computer display all day vs. a tablet screen all day. Just my two cents on those issues, I still dont think either the Kindle or any tablet is the ideal solution for reading.

 

[rjakapeanut]

Originally Posted by holymadness

Do you have a desk job? Do you stare at a computer all day? Have you gone blind yet?

If not, congratulations, you are our derp derp champion!

do you think that a computer monitor is the same as an LED tablet screen? do you have any idea what the differences are between those two technologies? do you understand the difference between working at a computer for long periods of time and reading text from an LED tablet for long periods of time?

HURRR DURRRR

 

[holymadness]

lol last I checked my laptop has an LED-backlit monitor, but feel free to point out how this differs from a tablet screen, boy genius.

 

[rjakapeanut]

Originally Posted by holymadness

lol last I checked my laptop has an LED-backlit monitor, but feel free to point out how this differs from a tablet screen, boy genius.
maybe your laptop has an LED backlit monitor but that's not the same thing as an ipad or similar tablet. and people who have deskjobs don't use laptops, they used desktops. monitors with high refresh rates and/or response. even if these technologies were all the same (and they're absolutely not the same) you also must consider how differently they're used when trying to assess potential dangers. do a little research. i'm no boy genius -- i'm just using my common sense. try it, you may like it.

 

[holymadness]

You are very convincing, especially with that tidbit about refresh rates. I especially enjoyed the part where you admitted that even if you were wrong, you were still right (because people don't read text on computer monitors for long periods of time, I guess?). Meanwhile, back in the real world, I have a paper from the American Optometric Association on the subject in front of me; if you can tell me its conclusion you get a cookie.

 

[rjakapeanut]

there is no "even if i am wrong". i am right. but i am saying that even in some alternate reality where all of the technology is the same you still have to consider the difference in sitting in a cubicle/office/desk looking at a computer screen, looking away, reading some papers, looking back at the computer screen and actually sitting 8" from a 9 inch ultrabright LED with low response reading tiny lettering for 4 hours straight.

 

[Xericx]

bought the Kindle wifi + 3g. finally. i was wiating around but i figured even if were to get the ipad 2 I'd get too distracted with web + email. wanted a dedicated reader.