Comments on: Imagine a Dual-Purpose Ereader for Research: Beats the Multipurpose Tablet, by John Miedema

By: Audrey Peters

Audrey Peters — Mon, 15 Mar 2010 01:42:07 +0000

Check out the survey and article here: http://www.htlounge.net/art/11639/about-27-percent-of-e-reader-owners-would-have-preferred-to-wait-for-ipad.html
“About 25 percent of those customers having bought an e-book reader would have preferred to buy an iPad. About 27 percent of the persons who owned an e-reader device as of February would have preferred to buy an Apple device instead. Less than half of them, i.e. 45 percent, would still have chosen the device they already bought.”

By: John

John — Mon, 15 Mar 2010 00:59:27 +0000

” … 27% … less than half … more than 40% …”

All these stats fall below half. Are most e-reader owners happy with their current device?

By: John

John — Mon, 15 Mar 2010 00:54:54 +0000

“A recent study by Changewave showed that 27% of e-reader owners would have preferred a Apple iPad instead” — it’s a curious stat, since the respondents would have made that choice without ever having read a book on an iPad, or had a chance to read reviews by others about the experience of reading on one. Predictions about reading and technology have been wrong for a generation now. We thought print books would disappear altogether, but they are still the preferred method of long-form reading. I too share a certain sense of enthusiasm for the iPad, and think it will do some things well, but I am doubtful that it will better serve long-form reading. As you say, wait and see.

By: Audrey Peters

Audrey Peters — Sun, 14 Mar 2010 20:02:24 +0000

I appreciate that everyone has their view, however as a marketing strategist and previous new products research manager going back to Compaq days, I say the market dictates. A recent study by Changewave showed that 27% of e-reader owners would have preferred a Apple iPad instead, and less than half of them would have still chosen the product they had purchased. Of those who intend to buy an e-book reader in the next 3 months, more than 40% want the iPad. It’s simply a better reading experience if that is all you want to do, but hey, it’s also nice to check your email or social network while it’s in your hands.

If that doesn’t indicate the iPad fulfills a new niche and will be a winner, I don’t know what does, other than wait and see!

By: John

John — Sun, 14 Mar 2010 19:48:14 +0000

Audrey, multipurpose devices are great if you’re trying to multi-task. Some kinds of reading — snippets, news — fit that information processing pattern, and can benefit from the tablet more than the Kindle. Other kinds of reading — sustained reading, research — may benefit more from another kind of device, like the single-purpose Kindle or the dual purpose Entourage Edge. That’s my view.

By: Audrey Peters

Audrey Peters — Sun, 14 Mar 2010 18:28:49 +0000

I have to completely disagree with this article. The iPad is a game changer just as the iPod and iPhone were. Already the consumer has spoken as Apple took 90,000 pre-orders within hours last Friday.

The consumer does indeed want a multi-purpose product to carry around.

That is the whole point of being mobile! There is no comparison to the Kindle’s 20th century looking device – no color screen is a big issue. The iPad creates the feeling of reading a book in just the way it flips the page. The iPad is a Kindle killer and Amazon is now desperately trying to catch up with the technology. For a full review, see this article: http://businessissuestoday.blogspot.com/2010_01_01_archive.html and many more reviews at http://businessissuestoday.blogspot.com/

By: John

John — Sat, 13 Mar 2010 19:52:05 +0000

astoir, have a look at this Entourage video, the user writes with a stylus on this dual purpose device. Nifty.

http://www.entourageedge.com/devices/entourage-edge.html.

It’s true there’s a tradeoff between single and general purpose devices, but people can sort these out for themselves over time.

In the eighties I owned a Smith Corona dedicated word processor, but I am quite satisfied with word processing on a general purpose computer these days.

I still prefer the single purpose print book for slow reading, but maybe a dual-purpose device is best for research. We’ll see.

By: asotir

asotir — Sat, 13 Mar 2010 19:13:10 +0000

I look at the illustration, and I wonder: How is he going to write on that thing? With his finger? With a stylus? With a bluetooth keyboard not included in the picture? With an onscreen software keyboard?

There does indeed seem to be a battle between the side that says, ‘One dedicated device solves this one problem better than a general-purpose device that takes a nod at this problem, kinda, sorta,’ and the side that says, ‘I don’t want to load up a bag with 12 different devices every time I go out the door.’

I’m hoping that both sides will be satisfied in the marketplace, but so far history has been on the side of the general-purpose device. Or did you go out this morning after loading up your pocket calculator, and your Palm Pilot or Dayplanner, and your phone, and your laptop? And when you got to work at your desk, did you dust off your dedicated Exxon wordprocessor?

— asotir

By: Gary Frost

Gary Frost — Sat, 13 Mar 2010 15:29:05 +0000

“As a hybrid of traditional books and digital technology, the ereader is ideally suited for the dual purposes of reading and writing.” John Miedema

This is the most generative suggestion I have ever encountered concerning the future of the book. We can add just one more logic, but these two come before. (1) screen based book reading is optimized by careful device dedication including synthesis of digital connectivity, search, and display with constraints of print (2) a natural interplay of writing and reading on the screen echoes a classical negotiation from manuscript to print, (3) going forward, there is an underlying interdependence between screen and paper.

By: John

John — Sat, 13 Mar 2010 14:58:21 +0000

Thanks Al. You are correct, the iPad does *not* have a camera. There is a camera connection kit, but this is just for importing pictures and videos to the iPad.

By: Al

Al — Sat, 13 Mar 2010 14:46:48 +0000

“take photos”
I was not aware that the iPad had a camera. I thought it was like a Touch, camera-less. If so, how can it take photos?