Despite complaints and DRM, Kindle is a good value

scholjpgI’m starting to see signs that Amazon has successfully injected some major mojo behind its Kindle electronic book program. Dare we call them green shoots? This morning, publisher, blogger and Chris Anderson-fill-in Rex Hammock had a great post up about how his Kindle was aiding his effort to re-read David Foster Wallace’s massive novel Infinite Jest. I also came across a thought-provoking post about the Kindle by Kent Anderson over on the scholarly kitchen blog called “The Freedom of Not Owning Books.” Kent makes the argument that it’s worth buying a Kindle despite the DRM-imposed limits, pointing out the value of the wireless connection, the space saved by having virtual books, the ability to read and acquire new reading material on the go and so on. But he also crystallizes a more original factor at play:

Ownership isn’t a panacea, especially in an age of information abundance. Will I be concerned if the Kindle dies and books I’ve read on it become inaccessible on that platform? Not really. If I want to read them again, there will be plenty of alternative ways in the future. And my bookshelves long ago stopped being my collection of known facts and resources.

Joe Wikert points to a related post about how e-books still have room to evolve. I agree with the author’s points while noting that they’re already evolving in many ways. Two of my favorite old Sherlock Holmes collections are on my Kindle — for free. A copy of “Moby Dick” typeset especially for the Kindle also held sway for a while. From classics to current bestsellers, I can wirelessly get books for free and for less.

And I don’t have to own them.

It’s a fascinating point and one that is growing on me the more I ponder it. In fact, with Amazon keeping all my Kindle books alive in the cloud for instant access, I actually can go back and review a text from almost anywhere. A physical book sitting on a shelf at my house is out of reach if I’m not at home. And what about the Kindle’s indexing of every book you buy? It’s great that I own thousands of dead tree pulp books but if I can’t remember exactly which book contains the scrap of info I’m looking for, it can make for a long afternoon.

But, of course, this is the Internet so open the comments and queue the anti-Kindle-istas. In this case, the lead complainer was David Crotty, another member of the scholarly kitchen crew and the executive editor of an academic biology publication. Crotty wants to own his books, he doesn’t want any digital rights management software limiting what he does with his books and he is especially fearful that some day Amazon could take away his books.

I started arguing with Crotty in the comments but after a while, it started to feel disjointed. So, here’s why I agree with Kent: The Kindle is a good value if you are an avid reader, buy lots of new books and like to read when you’re on the go. It’s a good value despite the stupid DRM limitations, despite the fact that it costs hundreds of dollars and despite the fact that there’s a remote chance that Amazon will abandon it some day.

I do agree with Crotty that before you invest in any new technology, particularly one with a proprietary DRM involved, you need to make an assessment of the costs and benefits and the risks involved. Crotty cites examples like Microsoft killing its PlaysForSure music program or the defeat of HD-DVD at the hands of Blu-Ray as cautionary tales. One should wait until a DRM-free electronic book market opens before buying any ebooks, he argues. I guess that’s fine as far as it goes, but it’s not very far.

It’s obviously always better to buy without DRM but that’s not always an available choice. For example, see almost all major software programs with their horrendous activation schemes, current downloadable TV shows, movies, electronic books, downloadable video games, smart phone software etc. There is no way to buy electronic versions of current, popular books without DRM. There is no DRM-free substitute available. I wonder if Crotty buys any business software, video games or iPhone apps because they all have DRM? How long is he going to wait? In the meantime, the opportunity “cost” of not using software and playing games and using apps mounts. If anything software and computer game DRMs have been getting more annoying and restrictive over time, so he may be waiting forever.

Consider the PlaysForSure situation when Microsoft announced it back in 2004. The proper risk assessment strategy if you wanted current music back then was to go with the DRM that looked most likely to succeed. There wasn’t much DRM-free music at the time and CDs were priced well above the cost of digital albums (not to mention forcing you to buy 13 songs when you only wanted one). PlaysForSure was a steep, steep underdog to the already dominant iTunes/Apple DRM format. PFS was just one zig in Microsoft’s zigzagging, ever-changing, incoherent strategy that consistently failed to make any headway against Apple iTunes. It also only worked on a small subset of the total number of MP3 players out in the world (not ipods!). Buying into that DRM was a pretty obvious bad risk.

Not so for the Kindle today. Kindle is currently the dominant ebook format, Amazon is the leading ebook seller and the DRM works not just on the Kindle hardware but also on all iPhones and iPod Touches as well as more devices to come (Blackberry and Windows Mobile support coming soon, supposedly).

Right around here, Crotty turned to the last refuge of scoundrels in Kindle debates argument that despite all Amazon’s success it was just roadkill as soon as Apple decided to start selling ebooks in the iTunes store. I can’t face repeating all the reasons this Apple/ebook dominance meme is wrong so see my old blog post about why Apple won’t kill Amazon for more on that.

But Crotty does speculate that Apple would yank all competing ereaders from the app store — a new twist I hadn’t heard before. That seems far-fetched in the extreme. There’s no precedent for it, it wouldn’t pass antitrust scrutiny and it would infuriate literally millions of customers who have bought books in Scrollmotion, Kindle, eReader and other formats. Apple started out barring competing web browsers from the get-go — a far cry from banning an entire category of apps after they’ve already been available for a year. I have not heard of an example of Apple pulling an iPhone app because it launched its own version.

And after all of this, Crotty still has to assume that Amazon would kill the Kindle program in the face of tough competition from Apple. I just don’t see it. People buying a Kindle device now are already choosing to pay for something that they could do in part for free on an iPhone or iPod Touch. And still it’s selling out every few weeks and analysts are saying it’s a multi-billion dollar revenue stream for Amazon within three years.

So stick with it, Kindle fans, and don’t go mistaking Paradise for that home across the road.
(As an interesting aside, Kent’s post was sparked by Crotty’s post a day before pointing out two of the recently-discovered DRM limits in Kindle that I wrote about quite negatively on June 20. I guess Crotty and I agree that DRM stinks and that undisclosed DRM limits should be illegal but we differ on how much those problems diminish the value of the Kindle).

(As a second aside, Crotty is a fan of John Hodgman, so we also agree on the humourous side of life.)

Posted

in

, , , , , , , , , , , , ,

by

Aaron Pressman

Tags:

, , , ,

Comments

19 responses to “Despite complaints and DRM, Kindle is a good value”

  1. David Crotty Avatar
    David Crotty

    Hi Aaron,
    Glad to have pushed some buttons and stimulated some thought on your end. I've answered most of your arguments over in the comments at the Scholarly Kitchen and can repost a bit here. It's interesting to see the responses to Kent's post. Some like you absolutely love it. Others have gone so far as to call his reasoning “Orwellian”.

    I'm not arguing that Apple will dominate this market. Just that it's a possibility. You may be right on Apple not entering the market. So far, they're playing it smart and instead asking for a piece of everyone else's business rather than creating their own. But you can substitute many other companies in for Apple. Sony or Plastic Logic as just two examples. If the Kindle fails, Amazon will become a reseller for ebooks for those platforms, but your Kindle purchases will not be transferable.

    For the type of reading you and Kent do, perhaps the Kindle makes sense. I get the feeling that you each buy a lot of books, read them once and then never go back. I edit and publish scientific manuals, monographs and journals for a living. These are books one is going to keep for decades and refer back to constantly. The lack of color, the poor navigation and the unlikeliness of any Kindle file lasting ten years makes it a bad product for my needs and the needs of my customers. On a personal note, I just finished re-reading a paperback I had originally bought and read in 1992. I'm not sure that a Kindle book I buy today will be as readable in 2026. That paperback, however, will be.

    As you note, getting DRM-free e-books is difficult (although there are some out there, and lots in the public domain) and the Kindle is the market leader. But who really needs electronic books that badly? Yes, the instant gratification of buying is nice on occasion. The portability could possibly be helpful in certain circumstances, but for most people that's not worth an additional $350-500. Paper and ink books are a perfectly good format for my reading needs. I continued buying CDs instead of iTunes downloads until they dropped the DRM, which worked out well for me (I got higher quality tracks as a bonus and a hard copy as backup). Yes, perhaps the cost was a little higher, but then again, in this case, I'm saving $350 which offsets any higher book prices (and as noted, getting a higher quality product for my money). Or I could just buy used books (as I regularly bought used CDs) and pay even less than you do for your Kindle books. I also became a customer with eMusic, who offered a DRM-free alternative at even better prices than iTunes. And no, I don't buy any video games, all the iPhone apps I have so far are free apps. I do have some software that is restricted but I don't pay for that, my company does, and I go for the unencumbered programs when an equivalent is available (just like I'm doing with e-books). So far, this has not had any detrimental “opportunity costs”. Can you explain what you mean by this? What are the costs I'm incurring by not playing video games or buying paper books instead of e-books?

    My point is that if I can avoid it, I won't spend my money on a product that is offered to me on poor terms. Even worse, I won't buy anything where the terms can be changed at any given moment with no recourse on my part. Amazon is already enforcing secret restrictions on your purchase, things you can't discover until you've already paid. That's a pretty serious rip-off as far as I'm concerned. Who's to say they wont start putting in more and more of these restrictions? It's allowed under the EULA you agreed to when you bought your Kindle books. Amazon can decide you're a bad customer and wipe out your account. I want to know exactly what I'm buying when I'm buying it. I don't want to buy something and then later learn that I paid for less than I thought. e-Book buyers have already had their purchases disappear. Think Amazon is too big a company to do the same thing? I would have said the same about Microsoft, who are even bigger than Amazon.

    The other big issue is the vendor lock-in. If your library is on a Kindle, you can only buy books from Amazon, you can only buy e-book readers from Amazon. It doesn't matter if some other company comes out with a new technology that is 100X better than the Kindle. You're locked in. You will need to re-buy your entire library if you want to make the switch. And that's a bad deal for consumers.

    I'm waiting for the market to settle down, and to come together on an openly licensed format, one that is available to all manufacturers. I want the e-book equivalent of mp3 or AAC. I want to buy an e-Book from Barnes & Noble and use it on my Kindle, then transfer it to the new Plastic Logic reader that replaces it, and the next device after that. That means I can't be in a hurry, but that's okay. I'd rather wait than be ripped off.

  2. ampressman Avatar
    ampressman

    On and on. Right now, I just have time to highlight another important
    mistake in your facts about the Kindle. You said: If your library is
    on a Kindle, you can only buy books from Amazon, you can only buy e-
    book readers from Amazon.

    Not true – not remotely true. Right now, I can buy books from Amazon
    and read them on an iPhone or iPod Touch without buying any device
    from Amazon. Soon Blackberry and other platforms will be added, too. I
    can also buy ebooks from a variety of vendors like Fictionwise who
    sell them in Kindle format and compete with Amazon and read them on my
    Kindle.

  3. David Crotty Avatar
    David Crotty

    Great news on Fictionwise, thanks for letting me know. I was hoping to see that Amazon was licensing their file format and DRM to others, which would go a long way toward making their technology more acceptable, but this is not the case. Basically, Fictionwise seems to be offering only Kindle-compatible books where the publishers does not require DRM, which cuts out the vast majority of books. One could say the same about all the public domain books out there. Amazon is still using DRM for a lock-out for most books though, which is bad news for consumers.

    And yes, you could still read your Kindle books on your phone, assuming Amazon continues to make phone-compatible versions of their reading software. But that argues against buying a locked-down single-company device like the Kindle. Why not instead buy an iPhone or a Blackberry and not be tied to one store (and save $350 in the process)? The point stands though, if you buy a Kindle, then a Sony Reader, don't expect your Amazon purchases to transfer between them. If you want the quality reading experience that a dedicated reader offers over a tiny phone screen, right now you have to choose one company and commit for life.

    Oh, and the one thing I forgot to mention is the elephant in the room. Google Books may make all of this moot once they enter the e-book business. Which is a good thing as it will mean some serious competition for everyone in the market, and that's good for consumers. With more options, companies will have to make their products better and more user-friendly if they want us to choose their devices.

  4. ampressman Avatar
    ampressman

    I hope in the future you'll refrain from posting inaccurate
    generalizations about matters such as the Kindle publishing split,
    availability of non-Amazon ebooks sold for the Kindle and ability to
    read Kindle books on other platforms.

    You far-ranging speculations about what might happen continue to
    ramble on and on. Now it's Google that going to make Kindle worse?

  5. David Crotty Avatar
    David Crotty

    Wow, sorry for getting your knickers in a twist. If you're going to be offended by open debate, and a willingness to learn new things, I'll leave you alone. My statement on revenue was 100% accurate, and I'll stand by it. You read something into it that wasn't there. My statement on Amazon being the only source for books is accurate for the vast majority of books on the market. If you'd rather pick nits than answer the substantive parts of my argument, I'll leave you to it.

    Go re-read what I said. Google is going to make the Kindle vastly better. Competition is good for markets. Competition is good for consumers. If you want a better Kindle, you should welcome as many new companies as possible into the market. They'll push Amazon to be better.

    Enjoy your Kindle.

  6. ampressman Avatar
    ampressman

    Funny, I'm not at all offended. I'm just not a fan of posting misleading stuff all over the web about Kindle. Is it accurate to cite the 70/30 blogger split when you're making an argument about major book publishers and it's already out on the record over and over that the split for them is different? Is it it accurate to say Kindle users can “only buy books from Amazon”? Or “only buy e-book readers from Amazon”? No, it's just false.

    A thousand pardons if I misunderstood your Google reference.

    It's funny that you're worried about my picking nits. I've answered the substantive part of your argument over and over only to have you write another 500 words making a whole set of different arguments. That's fine, that's your right and it's the Internet so space for comments is endless.

    I wonder if more people are like me and Kent (“you each buy a lot of books, read them once and then never go back”) or like you (“I edit and publish scientific manuals, monographs and journals for a living. These are books one is going to keep for decades and refer back to constantly.”) Based on book sales, I think the answer is obvious. People who love opera had many legitimate complaints about the iTunes store for years. But they're just a small minority and the store has been a roaring success despite being unfriendly to the needs of opera lovers and almost entirely encumbered with by DRM until a few months ago.

    I'll go back to the main point: for many, many people the Kindle is a good value right now. And it's a good value for many, many people even if Amazon decides to close it down in a few years, an event I consider extremely unlikely. That group does not apparently include the editors of scientific monographs.

  7. David Crotty Avatar
    David Crotty

    I'll suggest that telling people what they are and are not allowed to say on the internet is not going to be met with much goodwill, at least until you are elected internet sheriff. I'd also suggest that if you're going to call someone a liar, you'd be well advised to doublecheck and make sure they actually said what you think they said. I challenge you to find any instance where I claimed anything about the profit split for book publishers. I was very careful in the language I used. The comment in question specifically says:

    Apple’s terms under the iTunes store (Apple keeps 30% of revenue) are a lot more favorable for authors and publishers than those being offered by Amazon in some areas (Amazon keeps 70% of blog or newspaper revenues)

    I'll expect your apology in your reply.

    You'll also note that twice you accused me of presenting a straw man argument while having no apparent understanding of what that term means. I did not call you a liar, and instead pointed you to more accurate information. You've done the same for me regarding Fictionwise and I appreciate it. I will in the future be careful to say that you are limited to one store for the vast majority of books, barring public domain works and a small number that are unlikely to be of interest to most readers.

    A thousand pardons if I misunderstood your Google reference.

    At least you didn't call me a liar.

    I've answered the substantive part of your argument over and over

    Really? Can you show me where you showed that DRM is good for consumers or that having a monopoly gatekeeper is good for artists or for audiences?

    I wonder if more people are like me and Kent (“you each buy a lot of books, read them once and then never go back”) or like you

    Most people are not like either of us. Most people don't read books. Of those that do, only a tiny minority are interested in purchasing e-books, let alone expensive e-book readers.

    I'll go back to the main point: for many, many people the Kindle is a good value right now. And it's a good value for many, many people even if Amazon decides to close it down in a few years, an event I consider extremely unlikely. That group does not apparently include the editors of scientific monographs.

    Or anyone interested in keeping a book for the long term. Or anyone interested in color figures. Or anyone who plans to regularly upgrade their hardware. Or anyone suspicious of DRM crippled files, etc., etc. If you're happy as a risk-taking early adopter, good for you.

  8. ampressman Avatar
    ampressman

    I'm afraid I didn't realize when I started engaging in this debate
    that you were one of those guys. The Enderle thing really should have
    been a clue but I ignored it.

    I didn't tell you what you're “allowed to say” on the Internet. I said
    I hoped you would refrain from posting inaccurate generalizations in
    the future. I can see now that my hopes were in vain. I will continue
    to maintain that you have posted inaccurate generalizations. I didn't
    “call someone a liar.” I'm tempted to post the wikipedia definition of
    a lie but I'll just remind you that a key element is intent to deceive
    and I don't know anything about your intent. You may be posting
    inaccurate generalizations due to ignorance, misinformation from
    another source etc.

    Regarding the revenue split, you brought this up to support your
    argument that Apple could dethrone Amazon from the dominant position
    in the ebook market, rather easily you seem to believe. Here's the
    complete context, in case you've forgotten:

    Me: Kindle is the dominant ebook format, Amazon is the leading
    ebook seller and the DRM works not just on the Kindle hardware but
    also on all iPhones and iPod Touches as well as more devices to come.

    You: I’m merely pointing out that there was a device that was the
    market leader for mp3 players before the iPod entered the fray, that
    Apple, given their current business practices, could easily pull all e-
    book reading apps from their store (their policy is not to allow any
    apps that duplicate the software Apple supplies themselves, so no
    alternative web browsers), and that Apple’s terms under the iTunes
    store (Apple keeps 30% of revenue) are a lot more favorable for
    authors and publishers than those being offered by Amazon in some
    areas (Amazon keeps 70% of blog or newspaper revenues). The risk may
    be greater than you think, and given the relatively low sales numbers
    of the Kindle, it’s not like a competitor would have much inertia to
    overcome.

    Amazon loses its dominant position in the ebook market if Apple sells
    more ebooks. This doesn't have to do with blogs or newspapers. This is
    a great example of not knowing your intent. Maybe you have not seen
    any of the many articles explaining Amazon's ebook revenue splits with
    major publishers or the terms and conditions for self-published ebooks
    so you're trying cite what is known. Maybe you don't know much about
    publishing and you don't understand how the split works. I have no
    idea. Nonetheless, if you're going to argue that Apple could beat
    Amazon in the ebook market because Amazon keeps too much of sales
    revenues, it is inaccurate and misleading then to cite the revenue
    split for “some areas” (a few other minor products) when the revenue
    split for ebooks that's directly relevant is known and could be cited
    (but that would weaken your argument).

    One of the most informative bits of your last response was when you
    responded to my charge that I've answered the substantive part of your
    argument over and over but you keep moving on to new arguments. You
    answer was:

    “Can you show me where you showed that DRM is good for consumers or
    that having a monopoly gatekeeper is good for artists or for audiences?”

    Perfect-o. I have agreed over and over that DRM is bad for consumers
    (I posted on my blog about the secret Amazon DRM limits three or four
    days before you did). And then you bring up yet another brand new
    strand about a “monopoly gatekeeper.” I'd agree that monopoly
    gatekeepers are generally bad for artists and audiences (though I
    don't consider Amazon/Kindle fits the term). BUT THE ACTUAL ARGUMENT
    is about whether all things considered the Kindle represents a good
    value, whether it's worth taking a flyer on this sort-of-new (20-month-
    old) format for people who buy and read a lot of books.

    You can offer all the speculative, unquantifiable subsets of people
    who won't want a Kindle. What can I say? There is a large and growing
    group of people buying a lot of Kindles and Kindle ebooks (Amazon says
    ebook sales make up 35% of sales for books available in both print and
    Kindle editions, the Kindle iPhone app is the #1 download in the books
    category, analyst estimates of total Kindle device sales are around
    half a million). The Kindle is a good deal for many people (never said
    “most” but not sure what that has to do with THE ACTUAL ARGUMENT).

    I'd like to descend into an argument about whether you used a straw
    man argument or not but I can't stop giggling.

  9. David Crotty Avatar
    David Crotty

    Nit pick, nit pick, nit pick. I should have known better than to get involved here. You obviously enjoy your Kindle, and feel it's a good value. Good for you. I disagree. I've already spent more time than I can afford arguing with someone who would rather pick nits than talk about bigger issues. If you think half a million devices sold is a lot, then you know very little about the electronics market. If you don't understand the phrase “monopoly gatekeepers” and how it's pretty much everything I've been saying all along, and how it affects the value you receive, then just keep on giggling. At least it'll help prevent you from using more big words you don't understand.

  10. ampressman Avatar
    ampressman

    Hey Crotty, quick, how many iPods sold in the first 18 months it was for sale?

    You do crack me up. I'm sorry. I don't know if you have the discipline of mind to step back from all this Kindle minutia and look at your comments here but it would be worth trying. When a guy posts the wikipedia definition of “straw man” and goes on about it for another three comments accuses you of nit picking, responds to the charge of constantly shifting his arguments by shifting his argument and wants to have all his paperbacks around in 2026, it's, well, never mind.

  11. ampressman Avatar
    ampressman

    Funny, I'm not at all offended. I'm just not a fan of posting misleading stuff all over the web about Kindle. Is it accurate to cite the 70/30 blogger split when you're making an argument about major book publishers and it's already out on the record over and over that the split for them is different? Is it it accurate to say Kindle users can “only buy books from Amazon”? Or “only buy e-book readers from Amazon”? No, it's just false.

    A thousand pardons if I misunderstood your Google reference.

    It's funny that you're worried about my picking nits. I've answered the substantive part of your argument over and over only to have you write another 500 words making a whole set of different arguments. That's fine, that's your right and it's the Internet so space for comments is endless.

    I wonder if more people are like me and Kent (“you each buy a lot of books, read them once and then never go back”) or like you (“I edit and publish scientific manuals, monographs and journals for a living. These are books one is going to keep for decades and refer back to constantly.”) Based on book sales, I think the answer is obvious. People who love opera had many legitimate complaints about the iTunes store for years. But they're just a small minority and the store has been a roaring success despite being unfriendly to the needs of opera lovers and almost entirely encumbered with by DRM until a few months ago.

    I'll go back to the main point: for many, many people the Kindle is a good value right now. And it's a good value for many, many people even if Amazon decides to close it down in a few years, an event I consider extremely unlikely. That group does not apparently include the editors of scientific monographs.

  12. David Crotty Avatar
    David Crotty

    I'll suggest that telling people what they are and are not allowed to say on the internet is not going to be met with much goodwill, at least until you are elected internet sheriff. I'd also suggest that if you're going to call someone a liar, you'd be well advised to doublecheck and make sure they actually said what you think they said. I challenge you to find any instance where I claimed anything about the profit split for book publishers. I was very careful in the language I used. The comment in question specifically says:

    Apple’s terms under the iTunes store (Apple keeps 30% of revenue) are a lot more favorable for authors and publishers than those being offered by Amazon in some areas (Amazon keeps 70% of blog or newspaper revenues)

    I'll expect your apology in your reply.

    You'll also note that twice you accused me of presenting a straw man argument while having no apparent understanding of what that term means. I did not call you a liar, and instead pointed you to more accurate information. You've done the same for me regarding Fictionwise and I appreciate it. I will in the future be careful to say that you are limited to one store for the vast majority of books, barring public domain works and a small number that are unlikely to be of interest to most readers.

    A thousand pardons if I misunderstood your Google reference.

    At least you didn't call me a liar.

    I've answered the substantive part of your argument over and over

    Really? Can you show me where you showed that DRM is good for consumers or that having a monopoly gatekeeper is good for artists or for audiences?

    I wonder if more people are like me and Kent (“you each buy a lot of books, read them once and then never go back”) or like you

    Most people are not like either of us. Most people don't read books. Of those that do, only a tiny minority are interested in purchasing e-books, let alone expensive e-book readers.

    I'll go back to the main point: for many, many people the Kindle is a good value right now. And it's a good value for many, many people even if Amazon decides to close it down in a few years, an event I consider extremely unlikely. That group does not apparently include the editors of scientific monographs.

    Or anyone interested in keeping a book for the long term. Or anyone interested in color figures. Or anyone who plans to regularly upgrade their hardware. Or anyone suspicious of DRM crippled files, etc., etc. If you're happy as a risk-taking early adopter, good for you.

  13. ampressman Avatar
    ampressman

    I'm afraid I didn't realize when I started engaging in this debate
    that you were one of those guys. The Enderle thing really should have
    been a clue but I ignored it.

    I didn't tell you what you're “allowed to say” on the Internet. I said
    I hoped you would refrain from posting inaccurate generalizations in
    the future. I can see now that my hopes were in vain. I will continue
    to maintain that you have posted inaccurate generalizations. I didn't
    “call someone a liar.” I'm tempted to post the wikipedia definition of
    a lie but I'll just remind you that a key element is intent to deceive
    and I don't know anything about your intent. You may be posting
    inaccurate generalizations due to ignorance, misinformation from
    another source etc.

    Regarding the revenue split, you brought this up to support your
    argument that Apple could dethrone Amazon from the dominant position
    in the ebook market, rather easily you seem to believe. Here's the
    complete context, in case you've forgotten:

    Me: Kindle is the dominant ebook format, Amazon is the leading
    ebook seller and the DRM works not just on the Kindle hardware but
    also on all iPhones and iPod Touches as well as more devices to come.

    You: I’m merely pointing out that there was a device that was the
    market leader for mp3 players before the iPod entered the fray, that
    Apple, given their current business practices, could easily pull all e-
    book reading apps from their store (their policy is not to allow any
    apps that duplicate the software Apple supplies themselves, so no
    alternative web browsers), and that Apple’s terms under the iTunes
    store (Apple keeps 30% of revenue) are a lot more favorable for
    authors and publishers than those being offered by Amazon in some
    areas (Amazon keeps 70% of blog or newspaper revenues). The risk may
    be greater than you think, and given the relatively low sales numbers
    of the Kindle, it’s not like a competitor would have much inertia to
    overcome.

    Amazon loses its dominant position in the ebook market if Apple sells
    more ebooks. This doesn't have to do with blogs or newspapers. This is
    a great example of not knowing your intent. Maybe you have not seen
    any of the many articles explaining Amazon's ebook revenue splits with
    major publishers or the terms and conditions for self-published ebooks
    so you're trying cite what is known. Maybe you don't know much about
    publishing and you don't understand how the split works. I have no
    idea. Nonetheless, if you're going to argue that Apple could beat
    Amazon in the ebook market because Amazon keeps too much of sales
    revenues, it is inaccurate and misleading then to cite the revenue
    split for “some areas” (a few other minor products) when the revenue
    split for ebooks that's directly relevant is known and could be cited
    (but that would weaken your argument).

    One of the most informative bits of your last response was when you
    responded to my charge that I've answered the substantive part of your
    argument over and over but you keep moving on to new arguments. You
    answer was:

    “Can you show me where you showed that DRM is good for consumers or
    that having a monopoly gatekeeper is good for artists or for audiences?”

    Perfect-o. I have agreed over and over that DRM is bad for consumers
    (I posted on my blog about the secret Amazon DRM limits three or four
    days before you did). And then you bring up yet another brand new
    strand about a “monopoly gatekeeper.” I'd agree that monopoly
    gatekeepers are generally bad for artists and audiences (though I
    don't consider Amazon/Kindle fits the term). BUT THE ACTUAL ARGUMENT
    is about whether all things considered the Kindle represents a good
    value, whether it's worth taking a flyer on this sort-of-new (20-month-
    old) format for people who buy and read a lot of books.

    You can offer all the speculative, unquantifiable subsets of people
    who won't want a Kindle. What can I say? There is a large and growing
    group of people buying a lot of Kindles and Kindle ebooks (Amazon says
    ebook sales make up 35% of sales for books available in both print and
    Kindle editions, the Kindle iPhone app is the #1 download in the books
    category, analyst estimates of total Kindle device sales are around
    half a million). The Kindle is a good deal for many people (never said
    “most” but not sure what that has to do with THE ACTUAL ARGUMENT).

    I'd like to descend into an argument about whether you used a straw
    man argument or not but I can't stop giggling.

  14. David Crotty Avatar
    David Crotty

    Nit pick, nit pick, nit pick. I should have known better than to get involved here. You obviously enjoy your Kindle, and feel it's a good value. Good for you. I disagree. I've already spent more time than I can afford arguing with someone who would rather pick nits than talk about bigger issues. If you think half a million devices sold is a lot, then you know very little about the electronics market. If you don't understand the phrase “monopoly gatekeepers” and how it's pretty much everything I've been saying all along, and how it affects the value you receive, then just keep on giggling. At least it'll help prevent you from using more big words you don't understand.

  15. ampressman Avatar
    ampressman

    Hey Crotty, quick, how many iPods sold in the first 18 months it was for sale?

    You do crack me up. I'm sorry. I don't know if you have the discipline of mind to step back from all this Kindle minutia and look at your comments here but it would be worth trying. When a guy posts the wikipedia definition of “straw man” and goes on about it for another three comments accuses you of nit picking, responds to the charge of constantly shifting his arguments by shifting his argument and wants to have all his paperbacks around in 2026, it's, well, never mind.

  16. Barnes & Noble eBook Store Great News For Consumers | Gravitational Pull

    […] fantastic development for people like me who like to read ebooks. I’m a big fan of my Kindle, as you may have heard. But I’ve also been alarmed by some of Amazon’s ham-handed moves in the ebook space, […]

  17. History and Uses of Amazon Kindle for People Living in Caves | Gravitational Pull

    […] Despite complaints and DRM, Kindle is a good value (6/30/09) […]

  18. Sony Reader adds some brilliant features, 3 years late | Gravitational Pull

    […] wireless Internet connection for accessing a wide array of other textual online resources. And, despite what some cranky luddites say, the Kindle’s been a huge success that’s caught the attention of a lot of other […]

  19. Kindle DX: Even better electronic book reader | Gravitational Pull

    […] secret that I’m a huge fan of Amazon’s Kindle electronic book reader. I’ve had one since Day 1 and read dozens of books and hundreds of […]

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *