As this article from wired points out Sony has signed a deal with Google to put the Google Books catalog onto the Sony e-Reader. Giving the e-Reader a 600,000 to 245,000 advantage over the Kindle.
From a practical standpoint the number of books available is pretty meaningless. I'm not going to read 245,000 books in my lifetime let alone 600,000. I've been keeping a fairly steady pace of 30-40 books a year; so I probably won't get a chance to read my 3000th book. Whether I read 1.2% or 0.5% of the books available makes little difference. Both systems have the 5000 or so books I'd like to read, and another 5000 that I would read if I got bored. I'm good on either system without any more books being published.
Of course humans don't make rational decisions. It's why we have sports cars, gambling and kindles in the first place (do not combine - you cannot drive your Corvette with a kindle no matter what the odds). So Sony's title count will convince some people to go Sony over Amazon.
That's not really a bad thing though.
The main difference between the two is size (e-reader) vs. convenience (kindle) - no one is hurt by buying one over the other. Both benefit when anyone starts reading digitally as it helps push publishers into publishing digitally. Neither system is anywhere close to being ready for academic use (page turning is too slow) so making 200,000 academic works available is nothing but pressure.
It's pressure on Amazon to embrace books with expired or open copyrights. It's pressure on both companies to open their platforms with 3rd party book stores (which I predicted in my last post. It's like I'm building an argument by successive use of a theme).
It's all slow, invisible hand of the markets stuff. With a little luck Sony and Amazon will engage in a price war until digital book readers are for sale in 7-11s and books cost $5 a piece (maybe more if the invisible hand shakes us down for more AIG bonus money).
To summarize:
Letting Sony get more books available then Kindle: kindle fail!
Forcing Sony to embrace open formats: success!
Forcing Sony to cut their prices to compete: success!
As meatloaf said - don't feel bad, cause 2 out of 3 ain't bad.
Thursday, March 19, 2009
Tuesday, March 17, 2009
Mobi-dicks
I'm very surprised by this post. All the moreso because I'm rewriting it.
I wrote a post railing against Amazon for shutting down a piece of software that would allow other companies to sell books, and then trick the kindle into thinking they came from Amazon. But by the time I got to the end, I realized that for the most part, I switched sides.
Briefly, as detailed at mobipocket, Amazon is trying to prevent anyone else from selling books for the kindle.
I am not a fan of the restrictions Amazon puts on kindle content, and I'm not a lawyer so I can't argue if the technicalities of the take down notice. But I am hugely surprised to find myself agreeing with the action in general.
Why am I suddenly agreeing with Amazon's attempt to keep other people from selling content for the kindle? Because it'll be Amazon's headache when things go wrong.
Bought a book from publisherX, but the kindle won't display the images? No one you can bug about that but Amazon.
Bought a book from publisherY, but it has encoding errors and bricked your kindle? No one you can bug about that but Amazon.
Bought a book from publisherZ and want your money back? You'd be amazed at how many people would bug Amazon about that too.
It's lots of hassle for Amazon, for no money, so I understand why they want it stopped in it's tracks.
What they should do is follow Apple's lead and open up their bookstore to publishers. Amazon validates the content, handles the money, takes a cut and passes the rest on. It would even be a hammer they can use against the pricing policies of the printing houses.
That validation I mentioned? Unlike music or video computers are really good at sorting text, by keeping control of distribution Amazon would be able to ensure no copyrights are broken.
I'm ambivalent about the take down notice, but I'm excited for the future self-publishing kindle store. I'm sure it will launch with kindle3.
kindle - success!
I wrote a post railing against Amazon for shutting down a piece of software that would allow other companies to sell books, and then trick the kindle into thinking they came from Amazon. But by the time I got to the end, I realized that for the most part, I switched sides.
Briefly, as detailed at mobipocket, Amazon is trying to prevent anyone else from selling books for the kindle.
I am not a fan of the restrictions Amazon puts on kindle content, and I'm not a lawyer so I can't argue if the technicalities of the take down notice. But I am hugely surprised to find myself agreeing with the action in general.
Why am I suddenly agreeing with Amazon's attempt to keep other people from selling content for the kindle? Because it'll be Amazon's headache when things go wrong.
Bought a book from publisherX, but the kindle won't display the images? No one you can bug about that but Amazon.
Bought a book from publisherY, but it has encoding errors and bricked your kindle? No one you can bug about that but Amazon.
Bought a book from publisherZ and want your money back? You'd be amazed at how many people would bug Amazon about that too.
It's lots of hassle for Amazon, for no money, so I understand why they want it stopped in it's tracks.
What they should do is follow Apple's lead and open up their bookstore to publishers. Amazon validates the content, handles the money, takes a cut and passes the rest on. It would even be a hammer they can use against the pricing policies of the printing houses.
That validation I mentioned? Unlike music or video computers are really good at sorting text, by keeping control of distribution Amazon would be able to ensure no copyrights are broken.
I'm ambivalent about the take down notice, but I'm excited for the future self-publishing kindle store. I'm sure it will launch with kindle3.
kindle - success!
Monday, March 16, 2009
Kindle RSS
Ah, the kindle daily post I mentioned earlier is available as an RSS feed.
It's all part of Amazon's Kindle Blog, which is the same as the kindle daily post.
The blog so nice, they had to name it twice. But whatever you call it:
You can't search for it.
kindle fail!
It's all part of Amazon's Kindle Blog, which is the same as the kindle daily post.
The blog so nice, they had to name it twice. But whatever you call it:
You can't search for it.
kindle fail!
Thursday, March 12, 2009
The problems with digital resale
One of the big problems with digital books is that you do not own them.
For readers this means I can't take my book and lend it to someone else (like my father), I cannot sell it, and I can't buy a used copy at a discount. I also can't modify or destroy it, but that's not a big issue for me (if I was disabled, Amazon's helping to erode my right to use text to speech software would be a big deal).
For authors it means they get paid for every copy of the book, unlike now where they do not get paid for used book sales. Unlike physical books, all of their work will be available at all times. However, authors lose out on word of mouth sales, since the restrictions will result in fewer people taking the risk of picking up and trying new authors. Will the free sample chapter be enough to offset the loss? I don't know.
Lets assume that Amazon and the Authors Guild want to respect reader's rights and would give us the ability to lend and sell if they could do so without it ending in a debacle like it did for the music industry with MP3s. How would a system like that work?
One interesting aspect of Kindle's system is that all devices capable of using Amazon's digital books (Kindles and now iPhones) are connected to the internet. Amazon already offers the ability to transfer your books from one kindle to another (so long as they are all registered to you). You can also read a book on your iPhone and Kindle at the same time.
Amazon has really shot themselves in the rhetorical foot with these features. The traditional argument against digital resale is that the seller can't know that I have really deleted the content when I sell it. There is no way to be sure that I have deleted an MP3 for instance.
On the other hand you can sell digital content tied to a physical object. There is a market for used CDs, DVDs, and video games.
Now that Amazon has admitted that they can control access to the books they sell, there's no technical reason they can't allow book resale. The only thing standing in the way of a legal used kindle bookstore, is Amazon.
Would such a market work? I imagine that almost every book will always be available 'used', since using a book would cause no damage and it would be no different from a new copy. Technically, it would be a new copy, with a used license. Within a month of publishing a stable quantity of used books would be available, and Amazon would never sell another new copy.
Sounds like an author's nightmare, but it doesn't have to be. If Amazon cuts a deal with the publisher to give them the same royalty, but cuts the used price to 2/3rds of the new, Amazon can still buy used books for 1/3 to 25% of the original price and make a healthy profit. Everyone will be happier, especially the authors who will now be getting paid for used books, without loosing the word of mouth benefits.
Just a thought, but over the long term a used digital book store in inevitable, so Amazon may as well get out in front of it.
For readers this means I can't take my book and lend it to someone else (like my father), I cannot sell it, and I can't buy a used copy at a discount. I also can't modify or destroy it, but that's not a big issue for me (if I was disabled, Amazon's helping to erode my right to use text to speech software would be a big deal).
For authors it means they get paid for every copy of the book, unlike now where they do not get paid for used book sales. Unlike physical books, all of their work will be available at all times. However, authors lose out on word of mouth sales, since the restrictions will result in fewer people taking the risk of picking up and trying new authors. Will the free sample chapter be enough to offset the loss? I don't know.
Lets assume that Amazon and the Authors Guild want to respect reader's rights and would give us the ability to lend and sell if they could do so without it ending in a debacle like it did for the music industry with MP3s. How would a system like that work?
One interesting aspect of Kindle's system is that all devices capable of using Amazon's digital books (Kindles and now iPhones) are connected to the internet. Amazon already offers the ability to transfer your books from one kindle to another (so long as they are all registered to you). You can also read a book on your iPhone and Kindle at the same time.
Amazon has really shot themselves in the rhetorical foot with these features. The traditional argument against digital resale is that the seller can't know that I have really deleted the content when I sell it. There is no way to be sure that I have deleted an MP3 for instance.
On the other hand you can sell digital content tied to a physical object. There is a market for used CDs, DVDs, and video games.
Now that Amazon has admitted that they can control access to the books they sell, there's no technical reason they can't allow book resale. The only thing standing in the way of a legal used kindle bookstore, is Amazon.
Would such a market work? I imagine that almost every book will always be available 'used', since using a book would cause no damage and it would be no different from a new copy. Technically, it would be a new copy, with a used license. Within a month of publishing a stable quantity of used books would be available, and Amazon would never sell another new copy.
Sounds like an author's nightmare, but it doesn't have to be. If Amazon cuts a deal with the publisher to give them the same royalty, but cuts the used price to 2/3rds of the new, Amazon can still buy used books for 1/3 to 25% of the original price and make a healthy profit. Everyone will be happier, especially the authors who will now be getting paid for used books, without loosing the word of mouth benefits.
Just a thought, but over the long term a used digital book store in inevitable, so Amazon may as well get out in front of it.
Tuesday, March 10, 2009
Monday, March 9, 2009
kindle's daily fail
I'm always looking for a deal, so imagine my surprise when a friend told me about all the great deals available on the 'kindle daily post'.
So I searched:
But, no 'kindle daily post'.
Its right there my friend insisted, just off the main screen.
Screen?
That's right, the 'kindle daily post' is only available through wireless. First you go to the home screen, then hit menu, then shop in kindle store, and it's right there.
Simple.
Like many kindle users, I generally leave the wireless on my kindle off.
In fact here is how I use my kindle:
To make this even more frustrating, the deals from the daily kindle post are available on the website
But you loose the context of the offer - in this case that Random House is making the book free until May 31st as a promotion. You just see that it's free. Since it's not advertised as free on the website, you'll only notice if you look up the book to purchase it.
In other words, if you use kindle's wireless you might download the book because of the promotion, if you use amazon.com you get a book you were going to pay for for free, and you won't know why.
All in all, not well thought out.
kindle fail!
So I searched:
But, no 'kindle daily post'.
Its right there my friend insisted, just off the main screen.
Screen?
That's right, the 'kindle daily post' is only available through wireless. First you go to the home screen, then hit menu, then shop in kindle store, and it's right there.
Simple.
Like many kindle users, I generally leave the wireless on my kindle off.
In fact here is how I use my kindle:
- purchase a book from amazon.com
- turn on wireless, wait for book to download
- turn off wireless
- read
To make this even more frustrating, the deals from the daily kindle post are available on the website
But you loose the context of the offer - in this case that Random House is making the book free until May 31st as a promotion. You just see that it's free. Since it's not advertised as free on the website, you'll only notice if you look up the book to purchase it.
In other words, if you use kindle's wireless you might download the book because of the promotion, if you use amazon.com you get a book you were going to pay for for free, and you won't know why.
All in all, not well thought out.
kindle fail!
Wednesday, March 4, 2009
Breaking out of story
I was reading a scifi book on my kindle today, and I had the thought: "My dad would really like this book."
My dad and I have been sharing scifi books for about 20 years now.
But the kindle won't let me do that.
Can't give my copy of the book to my dad.
Which means I can't discuss the book with my dad.
Which means he won't recommend it to his friends, etc, etc.
It made me so angry, I put down the book. I don't know if I will finish reading it, since now it makes me think about copyright instead of far off galactic empires. When I want to read about copyright, I read Lessig.
Thanks for killing my entertainment.
Now I have to stop and think 'would my dad like this book?' before I spend money to read it on the kindle. Guess what - if I think the answer is yes, I won't buy it on the kindle. I probably won't buy it at all. Why risk getting annoyed?
The upshot is that if your business model depends on making sure that fathers and sons can't share books, your business model is fucking wrong.
kindle fail!
My dad and I have been sharing scifi books for about 20 years now.
But the kindle won't let me do that.
Can't give my copy of the book to my dad.
Which means I can't discuss the book with my dad.
Which means he won't recommend it to his friends, etc, etc.
It made me so angry, I put down the book. I don't know if I will finish reading it, since now it makes me think about copyright instead of far off galactic empires. When I want to read about copyright, I read Lessig.
Thanks for killing my entertainment.
Now I have to stop and think 'would my dad like this book?' before I spend money to read it on the kindle. Guess what - if I think the answer is yes, I won't buy it on the kindle. I probably won't buy it at all. Why risk getting annoyed?
The upshot is that if your business model depends on making sure that fathers and sons can't share books, your business model is fucking wrong.
kindle fail!
Tuesday, March 3, 2009
Renting vs. Owning - Looking at cars
So, if I'm going to come up with a price for renting books, I need something to compare it with.
How about cars?
Not the most obvious choice, but if you want to think about renting something with lots of restrictions, car rents might be the ticket:
Conclusion -
While renting a car can be a great value, renting a book is a much less consumer friendly opportunity.
Kindle - FAIL
How about cars?
Not the most obvious choice, but if you want to think about renting something with lots of restrictions, car rents might be the ticket:
| Restriction | Rental Car | Kindle | Conclusion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharing restrictions | Only "Authorized Drivers" are allowed to drive a rental car. | Only a single "Authorized Kindle" is allowed to show a book at a time | Rental cars are less restrictive |
| Usage restrictions | You can do whatever you want with the car, so long as you don't damage it. | You can read the book, but apparently you can't use software to read the book out loud to you without permission. | Rental cars are less restrictive |
| Cost | Cars cost about $20,000 and rent for about $30/day (before insurance). | Books cost about $8 and rent for about $8. Insurance isn't offered. | Rental cars are a lot cheaper |
Conclusion -
While renting a car can be a great value, renting a book is a much less consumer friendly opportunity.
Kindle - FAIL
Sunday, March 1, 2009
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)