Thursday, August 12, 2010

E-readers

I have to admit that I'm of two minds about e-book readers. I like being able to copy, paste, and post. But, I love the feel of a hard book. I also tend to read more quickly, with better comprehension and retention with a "real" book. That's not just anecdotal, either; the studies agree with me.

I saw this post today, by a bookseller in North Carolina, giving five good reasons not to get a Kindle™. Enjoy!

1) You read slower on a Kindle...

2) You almost certainly read stupider on a Kindle...

3) The Kindle flunked out of Princeton...

4) Amazon can play Big Brother with your books...


5) Governments can play Big Brother with your books...

They back up each statement with evidence; go there to see it. Great stuff—or scary stuff depending on your viewpoint.

3 comments:

Andrew Vogel said...

I'd love an ereader for my own content (journals, websites), but I really don't trust Amazon and I really don't want to double-pay for books that I may not be able to keep.

Carl W. Conrad said...

I haven't read the article to which you refer, but I've been using a Kindle since December; I am reading more than ever before -- much of what I'm reading being free books, and those I pay for being much cheaper than print versions. I can and do transfer articles and even blog entries I want to keep onto my Kindle for reference. There are one or two drawbacks but those are so overbalanced by the advantages that I have never looked back; my library of classics is gradually being transferred to the public library, replaced by e-texts that are costless. I can and do put Unicode Greek texts on my Kindle. I love it. Maybe it's made me stupider, but I'm too stupid to realize that.

jps said...

Carl,

If you are stupider, it sure ain't showing :)

I think my biggest complaint about the Kindle is that Amazon can wipe it from a distance. Naive I may be, but I like to think I own something that I bought.

James