I have read some very good (p)reviews on Amazon's new Kindle eBook device. The two comments that most succinctly explain why it is going to fail are from Jeff Jarvis (link Kindle?) and Mark Pilgrim (link A Future of Reading (A Play in Six Acts)). Jeff comments:
"I was approached to add BuzzMachine to the blog available for sale on the device but didn’t pursue it because I don’t see the sense in selling this blog when it’s available on the web for free. Oh, I’d love to think that I could sell it — nothing against money; though I’m often accused of it, I’m not arguing that content should be free but that it just is. But if this content is available here for free, why would and should someone buy it on a different device? Why shouldn’t that device just bring me the internet? The iPhone does."
Mark goes much, much deeper in philosophically pulling apart and evaluating all of the practical, legal and usability-related, reasons why the Kindle will fail. I believe Mark's arguments carry the greatest weight because in the end, people will decide that the locked-in nature of the Kindle will make them endure pain and suffering at the hand of Amazon that they would have avoided had they a) refused to buy the product and b) understood that Amazon has them by the proverbial 'nads if they decide to turn off the service. Mark references a portion of the Kindle Terms of Service:
"Your rights under this Agreement will automatically terminate without notice from Amazon if you fail to comply with any term of this Agreement. In case of such termination, you must cease all use of the Software and Amazon may immediately revoke your access to the Service or to Digital Content without notice to you and without refund of any fees."
I will add my own reservations. First off, however, I feel that there are too many commentaries out there relating to the device itself from people who haven't had it in their own hands. I'll wait to reserve judgement for the design aspects of the device until I get mine next week. (The 80's called and want their punk hairdo and beige brick based computers back.) At least Jeff and Mark are attacking it on the basis of philosophical ideology and this is why I respect their comments.
The Kindle will fail for me because I won't be able to use it outside of the US, nor in those many remote areas where Sprint's network does not offer coverage. The benefit of the device to someone like me is that I can use it to store books on the go. I've tried this in many forms and it has failed because the form-factor of the devices I've been dependent upon leave much to be desired, re Sony UX90 (not the PDA, but the mini laptop), HTC Advantage and many tablet PCs, including my favorite, the IBM ThinkPad X41 (now Lenovo). They are too heavy or do not fit well into your hand when reading in bed or on a beach chair. This makes is a big deal because part of the reason why the smallish paperbacks do so well is that their are easy to transport and relatively easy to hold while reading in awkward positions. In this sense, the Kindle will actually win our over the alternative if it actually is easy to hold. 10 oz. (284 g) is not that lightweight, yet doesn't compare to the 1.5+lbs. (680+ g) I am referring to above. In my opinion, if the Nokia N810 that just arrived had the ability to display eBooks from Amazon, eBooks.com, Mobipocket, etc., we would actually have a fantastic alternative. It isn't nearly as heavy as the other devices I've mentioned and the screen is better to view than the HTC Advantage.
Back to my above point: I want access to multiple books while on the road and in odd places where I really don't want to lug around a duffle bag full of books (that's why I started carrying my laptop and rely a lot these days on scanned documents and RSS feeds of sites I regularly visit) - and as Jeff mentions, this is why the iPhone is so damn powerful. In many ways, it can replace my laptop because of its digital document viewing abilities. (It is lacking in many other areas, but I won't pursue that here.) The Kindle won't have access to the "network" while I'm in Germany, nor will it work in the back woods of northern Wisconsin or the many other areas of the US that don't have adequate/good EVDO coverage from Sprint. I will have paid $400 for a device that won't work just when I need it.
The biggest issue is even simpler, however. When the lights go out - either for the device or Amazon (and they will some day - either for the service itself or DRM management that goes with this device) - I will no longer have access to all of the content I legitimately paid for. This is bad, bad, bad. In many respects, this is where Amazon is doing something ass-backwards and why this is no comparison to the iPod. With the original iPod, before the iTunes Music Store, we could take music we already owned and transfer it to the device. (With the iTunes Music Store this became much easier in that I just had to click, buy, download, and listen.) We weren't tied into whether or not a producer of the content allowed this (the RIAA and certain people still feel it is wrong for me to take content I already paid for and transfer it to a more convenient medium - but that's a different story, too, that I won't delve into), we were just able to do as we pleased. It was only after the success of this that the DRM based service (which is slowly moving towards a DRM-less service) came into existence. In the case of the Kindle, you have DRM and lock-me-to-your-whims first and someday, if we're lucky (HA!), we'll be allowed access to this wonderful content without DRM. Ass backwards, I say. I can't even view a friggin' PDF!
So what is so wrong with me that I'm still going to pay for this wasteful electronic brick? I can't find a better alternative. Period. I am willing to double spend on books. Period. Wasteful in the financial sense? Yes. Convenient for me in the short run (right when I need it)? Yes. The only two things that will make me send it back are readability issues (is the book I bought readable or not) and weight (can I use it while lying in bed). I learned when I first started buying eBooks that if I want control over what I've purchased, I'll simply have to purchase the physical item, too. There are many a book that I could care less whether or not I ever see them again and like a physical newspaper, they end up lining the bottom of a bird cage or go in the fire.* Those that I want to collect and hold onto are bought in physical form at the same time I purchase the electronic version. My experience with MobiPocket disappearing some months back was a reminder as to why I do this. Hopefully my money won't be blown entirely out the window and some of it will actually go to the author's whose work I am double purchasing. Hopefully the money Amazon receives from this will help develop the real iPod of the digital book world. This certainly isn't it and because of my feelings (despite what my actions may indicate to some) I hope to make clear to Amazon, as a paying customer, that this will fail unless they make radical changes to what they have introduced, legally and philosophically.
I look at the Kindle as a very short term solution to a long term problem that will only be solved by removing DRM from eBooks altogether. Lawrence Lessig has done it and perhaps, while not as "rich" as he might have been had he not copyrighted his works under a Creative Commons license, it worked and his book has actually sold (perhaps CC isn't the only way to go, but he definitely is on to something). Radiohead has proven we aren't all leeches and put value in the things we see others work hard to produce. Intellectual property simply isn't the same as physical property and the rules we apply to it can't be shoehorned into that market. The failure in DRM to work and satisfy people's needs/buying habits is proof of this.
One other point before I sign off: I understand the costs Amazon is applying to newspapers and blogs. That didn't come out right... I understand why they are charging to read that additional content. They are going to owe Sprint money for the bandwidth they use. I can't see any other way around this dilemma and one thing is for sure: had this been another subscription based service, I wouldn't have even thought about biting. I think the limitations as to which blogs and newspapers are available (and the pricing of some of the newspapers is ridiculous - $14/mo for FaZ that is free online???? Maybe $5... maybe...) are going to hinder the popularity of this device too. I could care less that TechCrunch agreed to allow it's content to be sold to Kindle users. I care that I'm limited to it and whatever the other chosen ones are and are going to be. So, although the Kindle potentially offers a fantastic platform to revive the art of printed materials (e.g. books), they are blowing it on access to weblogs, online newspapers, magazines, etc. RSS and free access to it is where the market is headed. You can't get me, the overspending idiot consumer I am, to shell out another $20+/mo to receive access to what is FREE on another device! So, I understand. Again, execution thereof, ass backwards. I'll stick to using it for books. If it fails at that, Amazon has wasted a lot of time and money.
It is so ironic. The roadmap as to what makes a successful digital product is there. The iPod is only one stellar example (even with its limitations). All you have to do is copy it. Obviously the publishing industry doesn't believe this and Amazon didn't use its clout to make it happen. So sad for the average consumer.
*No, I don't actually throw books away or burn them. Some of the science fiction trash I read, however, isn't worth wasting the gas on driving it over to the local Goodwill store, so unless someone comes over and takes it from my house, the book usually sits in the basement, rotting.
