Cheap e-book readers discussion

StumpyPumpy

Syman wrote: »

The main problem i can see with this is the lack of support for the major ebook formats, particularly EPUB, MOBI and LIT.

Or more precisely, that it only supports text format files. So there won't be much in the way of formatting.

Do you actually use this aria 21 ? does the small screen work for you (anyone else who has one)?

I don't use one, but the screen size at 6" is the same as a Kindle and plenty of people are happy with that:p (no idea of the resolution though)
There are various reviews of it that are, shall we say, less than favourable, but then they were written when it cost around £140. At that price I wouldn't touch it with a bargepole, but at £36 you are probably getting what you pay for.

aria21

StumpyPumpy wrote: »

Or more precisely, that it only supports text format files. So there won't be much in the way of formatting.

I don't use one, but the screen size at 6" is the same as a Kindle and plenty of people are happy with that:p (no idea of the resolution though)
There are various reviews of it that are, shall we say, less than favourable, but then they were written when it cost around £140. At that price I wouldn't touch it with a bargepole, but at £36 you are probably getting what you pay for.

I bought it for a friend who wants to pass it to his daughter. She is happy with it, i was told.
Like StumpyPumpy said, with such a price tag u cant be complaining much.;)

stphnstevey

Amazon's lack of support for other formats seems a no brainer to me - am I missing something?

Is this not like the iPhone and iTunes?

StumpyPumpy

Dreamnine wrote: »

I've never paid for an ebook and I never will {link removed}

Do you think encouraging piracy is a good or appropriate thing to be doing on MSE?

StumpyPumpy

stphnstevey wrote: »

Amazon's lack of support for other formats seems a no brainer to me - am I missing something?

Is this not like the iPhone and iTunes?

Locking you in to a specific supply stream makes sound business sense, and happens all over the place. It does have some advantages for the consumer: the price of the Kindle is kept artificially low because Amazon subsidize it from profits made selling eBooks. This brings down the price point of other readers because they have to compete or leave the market. Also, Amazon were able to put their considerable marketing might behind it knowing that it will drive future sales at their store thereby increasing consumer awareness of the device and effectively turning a niche product into a "must have" item. Amazon could probably afford to give Kindles away but obviously won't now they have found the price point at which consumers are willing to buy. Sony, for instance, would struggle to do this as they don't have the supply stream (bookstore) in the UK, so pretty much the only income they get from their devices comes at the time of purchase. Amazon get all the future book sales and, probably, replacement device sales as the owner becomes tied in with the books they own. If you want to be cynical about it, every feature on a Kindle, from the formats it supports to wireless and 3G is designed to encourage you to spend more money with Amazon. I bet their dream would be to have every Kindle owner subscribing to a daily newspaper or two through their services, I would like a piece of that action.

As you say Apple do it with the iStore, but they are not alone: Microsoft, Sony and Nintendo all subsidize their games hardware and recoup it from sales of the software, Phone companies "give" you the latest model to lock you into their expensive tariffs and supermarkets have been running loss leaders and discount coupons for as long as they have been around for exactly the same reason. Of course, the savvy buyer knows this and uses it to their advantage. I get great pleasure from spending exactly £10 on things I was going to buy anyway when I have a "Spend £10 or more and get £2 off" voucher.

If you are not minded to use the Amazon store, Kindles do read other formats but if you do want to use the store, you are restricted to using a Kindle as other devices don't read their format (hacking/cracking or otherwise messing around aside) I already had a number of eBooks, so my choice was based on the form factor of the device and the quality of the screen. If you need to be reading the latest blockbuster then you may need to consider which the best book sources are.

stphnstevey

StumpyPumpy wrote: »

Locking you in to a specific supply stream makes sound business sense, and happens all over the place. It does have some advantages for the consumer: the price of the Kindle is kept artificially low because Amazon subsidize it from profits made selling eBooks. This brings down the price point of other readers because they have to compete or leave the market. Also, Amazon were able to put their considerable marketing might behind it knowing that it will drive future sales at their store thereby increasing consumer awareness of the device and effectively turning a niche product into a "must have" item. Amazon could probably afford to give Kindles away but obviously won't now they have found the price point at which consumers are willing to buy. Sony, for instance, would struggle to do this as they don't have the supply stream (bookstore) in the UK, so pretty much the only income they get from their devices comes at the time of purchase. Amazon get all the future book sales and, probably, replacement device sales as the owner becomes tied in with the books they own. If you want to be cynical about it, every feature on a Kindle, from the formats it supports to wireless and 3G is designed to encourage you to spend more money with Amazon. I bet their dream would be to have every Kindle owner subscribing to a daily newspaper or two through their services, I would like a piece of that action.

As you say Apple do it with the iStore, but they are not alone: Microsoft, Sony and Nintendo all subsidize their games hardware and recoup it from sales of the software, Phone companies "give" you the latest model to lock you into their expensive tariffs and supermarkets have been running loss leaders and discount coupons for as long as they have been around for exactly the same reason. Of course, the savvy buyer knows this and uses it to their advantage. I get great pleasure from spending exactly £10 on things I was going to buy anyway when I have a "Spend £10 or more and get £2 off" voucher.

If you are not minded to use the Amazon store, Kindles do read other formats but if you do want to use the store, you are restricted to using a Kindle as other devices don't read their format (hacking/cracking or otherwise messing around aside) I already had a number of eBooks, so my choice was based on the form factor of the device and the quality of the screen. If you need to be reading the latest blockbuster then you may need to consider which the best book sources are.

Business sense for Amazon and not necessarily the consumer, Kindle doesn't seem that much less than others, just cause others do it is no excuse for a poor deal,support for the other formats does make it viable.

But to be honest, I know little about e-readers, so don't listen to me!

Trying not to get into the piracy issue too much, as this thread is not about that, untill JK Rowling needs a loan from me, I'll keep going

StumpyPumpy

stphnstevey wrote: »

Business sense for Amazon and not necessarily the consumer, Kindle doesn't seem that much less than others, just cause others do it is no excuse for a poor deal,support for the other formats does make it viable.

The point that I was trying to make was not that a Kindle was slightly cheaper than the competition but that the competition has to set its price in relation to the Kindle. To illustrate using arbitrary figures: Say the total cost and distribution of a basic Kindle to Amazon is £110 and they sell it at that; Sony have set their price point at around 25% more than the Kindle, so their basic model costs £140. If the Kindles sold with a standard 40% markup, it would cost £154, the Sony, would (I have no doubt) be selling at £190. you only need to look at the pre-Kindle market to confirm this and also to note the ereader manufacturers that have failed since Amazon dropped the prices. My contention is that the aggressive pricing of the Kindle has brought all the prices down, not just the Kindle itself.
But... from a consumer perspective I don't like the idea of one company dominating. Amazon's market share is currently 60% of all readers and 90% of ebooks sold in the US, so it might be too late.

And just one point: (and as a writer myself, I'll declare a personal interest) If everyone had followed your example and not paid for Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone, there would not have been any other Harry Potter books for you not to pay for and Jo would now be a teacher (if she manged to finance her PGCE) or maybe even still living off benefits. For every Brown, Meyer or Rowling, there are many more equally good, if not better, authors who would welcome your offer of a loan.

stphnstevey

StumpyPumpy wrote: »

And just one point: (and as a writer myself, I'll declare a personal interest) If everyone had followed your example and not paid for Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone, there would not have been any other Harry Potter books for you not to pay for and Jo would now be a teacher (if she manged to finance her PGCE) or maybe even still living off benefits. For every Brown, Meyer or Rowling, there are many more equally good, if not better, authors who would welcome your offer of a loan.

A successful book makes millions - even with piracy. They try to make out that they can't make ends meat with piracy, but they still seem to have million dollar homes and sports cars!

Bill Gates tried to stop selling Windows in Asia because of the huge amount of piracy - do you think he would have missed a few thousand?

If an Author was any good the world would buy their books and they won't need a loan, would they.

StumpyPumpy

stphnstevey wrote: »

A successful book makes millions - even with piracy. They try to make out that they can't make ends meat with piracy, but they still seem to have million dollar homes and sports cars!

Bill Gates tried to stop selling Windows in Asia because of the huge amount of piracy - do you think he would have missed a few thousand?

If an Author was any good the world would buy their books and they won't need a loan, would they.

Are you serious? Very few writers make a good living out of writing. On average the royalties paid to an author are 5% of the wholesale price though a very popular author can get up to 10%. Out of this still has to come things like agents fees. And you know those multimillion pound advances the authors get? Well, the three or four best selling authors get? It isn't a gift, it is an advance on future earnings, if the book doesn't sell, you have to pay back the difference.
In an ideal world, yes good authors would get all the money, but this is not an ideal world. The three authors I mentioned before are some of the most technically inferior writers currently selling books today. They just happen to have been caught up in a marketing blitz and become very popular (note: "popular" does not mean "good" - don't believe me? (Re)read Twilight and play the "Spot the Source" game: for every scene you can't work out which movie, TV series or book it is ripped off from you have to finish your drink. It's a good way to stay sober.) But then, I'm probably jealous. I'm not popular or, most probably, good and I don't write fiction so I'll never make a fortune out of it. I certainly do not disapprove of people reading these authors, if they like them, great, ultimately reading is all that matters. For what it is worth, I do have a sports car but it wasn't paid for out of royalties and is now 8 years old.

Bill Gates had left Microsoft by the time it tried to cut back on Asian piracy but no, he wouldn't have missed a few thousand then or now. But maybe the 90,000 people (yes ninety thousand people) that Microsoft employs would have. Not to mention all the shareholders that have a vested interest in Microsoft making money. When last I checked, Microsoft had not applied for charitable status.

Just out of interest, do you use the same logic when you need petrol? That is, do you just drive away without paying? Because what is 50 quid to BP or Shell: they make billions? If you you feel you can justify theft (and piracy is theft) You should at least be consistent in your behaviour. Did you see how much profit the supermarkets make? Have you considered just loading up a trolley and running out?

stphnstevey

StumpyPumpy wrote: »

Are you serious? Very few writers make a good living out of writing. On average the royalties paid to an author are 5% of the wholesale price though a very popular author can get up to 10%. Out of this still has to come things like agents fees. And you know those multimillion pound advances the authors get? Well, the three or four best selling authors get? It isn't a gift, it is an advance on future earnings, if the book doesn't sell, you have to pay back the difference.
In an ideal world, yes good authors would get all the money, but this is not an ideal world. The three authors I mentioned before are some of the most technically inferior writers currently selling books today. They just happen to have been caught up in a marketing blitz and become very popular (note: "popular" does not mean "good" - don't believe me? (Re)read Twilight and play the "Spot the Source" game: for every scene you can't work out which movie, TV series or book it is ripped off from you have to finish your drink. It's a good way to stay sober.) But then, I'm probably jealous. I'm not popular or, most probably, good and I don't write fiction so I'll never make a fortune out of it. I certainly do not disapprove of people reading these authors, if they like them, great, ultimately reading is all that matters. For what it is worth, I do have a sports car but it wasn't paid for out of royalties and is now 8 years old.

Bill Gates had left Microsoft by the time it tried to cut back on Asian piracy but no, he wouldn't have missed a few thousand then or now. But maybe the 90,000 people (yes ninety thousand people) that Microsoft employs would have. Not to mention all the shareholders that have a vested interest in Microsoft making money. When last I checked, Microsoft had not applied for charitable status.

Just out of interest, do you use the same logic when you need petrol? That is, do you just drive away without paying? Because what is 50 quid to BP or Shell: they make billions? If you you feel you can justify theft (and piracy is theft) You should at least be consistent in your behaviour. Did you see how much profit the supermarkets make? Have you considered just loading up a trolley and running out?

Those that are successful will make money, those that aren't are obviously not very good at it and won't. It's like any celebrity, they either make millions or nothing.

Piracy will be minimal for those writers that aren't successful and so insignificant for those that are, that it's not worth arguing about.

It's just greed and rather than the 10 million from a book and movie, they want the whole 11 million. Do you some how not thing 10 million is enough for one person?

Your analogue is flawed, if I could copy petrol and food like I can mp3's and documents, then yes I would.