[6555]

I have to agree with this point as well. I like Kindle for iPhone, but maybe because 51yro, I find that I can't really read long stretches of time on the device, as I would with a regular book. However, that being said, I don't have experience with the Kindle itself, so I'm not sure it would be any better. I do think, however, that the price drop is great because the former one simply did not make sense for a device that only stores ebooks. Lastly, I would add that what keeps me attracted to the Kindle is that I can download the first few chapters of a book and preview it before purchase.

[pdmarsh]

I think it would be helpful if the Kindle ebooks on the iPhone AND the Kindle itself could sync to your preferences at Amazon, remembering where you left off reading a particular book. Then, you could enjoy your Kindle at home, and continue reading on your iPhone when on the road, without having to re-find your stopping place.
As an avid book reader, while I like the iPhone Kindle ebook reader, its small screen doesn't lend itself to jumping back to a previous page to refresh yourself about something you read earlier in the book to make sense of the current page. I'm frequently reading two or three books concurrently and sometimes have to check back on something I earlier read in the book to bring myself up to speed with the story. An electronic copy with search capabilities would mitigate this on a small screen.
The main thing that keeps me from plunging into electronic copies of books is the DRM issue. I keep my hard copy books forever and reread them as the mood strikes me. I don't want to have to rely on an online service being operational to be able to read purchased electronic books in the future. If I can save the downloaded books locally and continue to reread them forever when the service goes under, especially when the device I purchased it for (Kindle, iPhone) dies, then I'll reconsider the technology. The electronic format has to be portable to be used on another electronic device in the future. I'm OK with it requiring a password for that portability to assure that I, as the original purchaser, am the authorized reader, but not with it being in a proprietary format that demands the originating company to remain in business, or its hardware being available forever.

[Raymondo17]

For me, it's still too expensive a gizmo. $299 can buy a whole lot of regular books. To win over a wide audience, it's got to be a better reading experience than a regular book or at least inexpensive enough that folks are willing to give it a shot. Now, if they'd implement a light in the darn thing so I could silently read in bed next to my light-sleeper of a wife (page turning keeps her awake, oy vey!), then I might have to git me one of dem newfangled deeevices. But right now, they're simply not appealing enough, both in price and features, for the average Joe.

[macFanDave]

No, the Kindle 2 price plunge signals the death of the Kindle.

I'd get one if I liked reading books with dark-grey ink on light-grey paper. It's an Emperor With No Clothes Product. The screen could be 1-bit Black or White or it has to be color. 16 shades of grey is pathetic.

It's a one-trick pony and if you want to display to the world that you want them to think you are such a serious book-lover that can shell out big bucks for second-rate equipment, the Kindle is the way to go!

[GregoriusM]

I do not have a Kindle, so cannot comment on its viability.

I do have an iPod touch, and it has brought me back to reading, which I had left 30 years ago.

I have started with books from the Gutenberg Project, and find that Stanza is my reader of choice, although 3 or 4 others have a few features I'd like incororated in Stanza.

I do love the touch for the many things I can do with it, but am pleasantly surprised that it has brought me back to reading, and yes, for hours at a time.

It fits in the little holster on my belt, and I either read a few pages at a time, or read for 2 or 3 hours. I love it.

Would I like the Kindle or Sony readers better? Maybe. But I am one of those who won't take it with me, and the price prohibits me from buying one in the first place.

So, I'm extremely happy with my renewed interest in reading, and that is thanks to my iPod touch. If there is an "iPad" in the works, I'm thinking that will make the whole thing even that much better for a lot of people.

[bastion]

spim said:

on the other hand ... I have no problems reading on the iPhone

I've finished several titles and love having lots of information at arm's reach.
Of course, it's not the same as having a physical book in my hands, but I've had no qualms about the changed reading experience.

> Why settle for one device that does some things great, other things good and still others so-so?

because, for me (and apparently others), we prefer only carrying one device.

Certainly if you're carrying devices around I can understand the appeal of covnergence. I'm sure it would get very annoying carrying around a phone and a PDA and a music player and an ebook reader. I do sometimes wonder, though, if the compromises that come with that are really made up for by the convenience of not carrying, say, 2 things.

And that's serious musing in the "feel free to answer because I'm truly interested" vein, in that I generally carry zero devices. For me convergence in mobile devices is a thought experiment.

[patriotusa]

The argument that "convergence" is always the best solution to a technical problem because it requires fewer devices is not correct. If that were true it could be argued that dedicated cameras are passe since everyone has a camera built into their iPhone. I like having a camera on my iPhone, but it is no replacement for my DSLR, or even my everyday point and shoot, because the iPhone's optics and photo software can never compete with a dedicated photo imaging device. Sure, for some people the camera on the iPhone will be good enough for them, but for many it will never be. I think the same is true for e-readers. I like having e-reader apps on my iPhone, but I don't think they are a replacement for a real book or a dedicated e-reader device. I'm willing to carry a book in a messenger bag (along with my laptop which I don't plan on replacing with my iPhone either), so its not a matter of which device I'd rather carry but really is the e-reader good enough competition for a real book at its current price.

[tjloeb]

Several Point's
1. If you have purchased your Kindle 2 within 30 days of the price reduction you are eligible for price protection from Amazon for the full $60. A You do have to request it. I did and was given the credit immediately.
2. If you are reading a book book and wish to take it with you you have a second device with you. Since the Kindle 2 is smaller and lighter than 99% of the books and it can store 1,500 full length books directly and an unlimited number on Whisper Net your carry along requirements are greatly reduced.
3. While you can listen to MP3's on your computer I'd guess the majority of the audience uses an iPod of some kind. Another device? 
4. The Kindle 2 is a book not a computer. 
5. Prime View's purchase of EInk has more to do with the price reduction than any other factor.

[radarguy]

It seems people are forgetting the major thing that sets a dedicated ebook reader apart from other devices. It's the screen technology! Eink is vastly superior for reading than current lcd technology. Eink is so much easier to read for an extended time. No eye strain.

[bastion]

patriotusa said:

The argument that "convergence" is always the best solution to a technical problem because it requires fewer devices is not correct.

I wouldcertainly never argue otherwise. I'm not a big fan of it myself. One of the biggest problems with jamming everything into one device is that if one function fails, and it's important enough to need fixed/replaced, then you lose all the other for the duration of the repair/replacement. Of course, if the feature isn't that important, why do you have it in the device in the first place?

Quote

If that were true it could be argued that dedicated cameras are passe since everyone has a camera built into their iPhone.

But this is spurious, only partly for the reason you go on to cite. We're talking about consumer devices, and that context I think precludes discussion of whether the camera is good enough for a professional or hobbyist photographer. It's not, and it's not meant to be. But it is, by observation, acceptable for the vast majority of phone users who aren't photographers.

The other major flaw in the argument is that a random dedicated device can't be obsoleted by convergence into another device because not everyone has or wants that other device, and won't be willing to put up with the tradeoffs (battery life, size/weight, etc) inherent in accepting it as part of the deal.