Reading on paper vs "screening" online and "screening" on a Kindle Screener
danbloom
Screener
I am curious to know if any other people here share my concerns about
the need for a new word in English, and other languages, too, for
READING ONLINE, to differentiate this activity from reading on paper,
which is a very different animal.
See two blogs I am on here: one in China, the other in USA:
http://www.36pr.com/2009/02/27/6-on-36-qa-with-taiwan-based-reporter-dan-bloom-on-screening/
AND in other languages, how does one different reading text on paper
surface to reading text on a screen online? Do tell.
Email me offline for any followups too.
danbloom AT gmail DOT com
Don Stauffer
medium. I read writing on billboards, movie screens, CRTs, or whatever.
I never could see why keyboarding was not typing :-(
Spamm Trappe
>
> I am curious to know if any other people here share my concerns about
> the need for a new word in English, and other languages, too, for
> READING ONLINE,
sigh... Another frickin' google groper.
I am curious *why you think this is On Topic in rec.photo.digital* !!
Rich
news:b89512dc-a146-4439...@d2g2000pra.googlegroups.com:
Kindle = overpriced piece of s---. Just another toy for Americans to buy
to get deeper into credit debt.
Ron Hunter
I do virtually all my reading from the computer screen. While the
Kindle is a step in the right direction, technologically, marketing-wise
it is unsupportable. The initial cost is outrageously high. If it is
possible to build, and sell, a laptop computer with HD and color screen,
and DVD drive, and Wi-Fi, and all the other features normally found in
them, including a keyboard, for $350, why is it that the Kindle sells
for the same price? If the people selling the Kindle would use the
Gillette marketing principle, and sell the Kindle for $89, and make
their money selling access to newly released novels, then they would
make more money, and printed books would be on their way into history.
As it is now, I don't have the least interest in one.
ASAAR
> I do virtually all my reading from the computer screen. While the
> Kindle is a step in the right direction, technologically, marketing-wise
> it is unsupportable. The initial cost is outrageously high. If it is
> possible to build, and sell, a laptop computer with HD and color screen,
> and DVD drive, and Wi-Fi, and all the other features normally found in
> them, including a keyboard, for $350, why is it that the Kindle sells
> for the same price?
When CD drives finally arrived (after what seemed like a decade of
hype) they cost more than most people could afford. A few years
later prices dropped from their stratospheric level and for only
several hundred dollars, I owned my first CD drive. I don't recall
if it was 1x or 2x. Another couple of years later I bought a very
nice external 3x NEC CD drive, also for several hundred dollars. As
more and more people bought the things, they became commodities and
prices plunged. Your memory must be declining rapidly if you don't
recall that early adopters almost always pay outrageously high
prices. The Kindle's price is on the low side of outrageous, but if
it catches on, it (and Sony's Reader) will eventually sell for well
under $100.
> If the people selling the Kindle would use the Gillette marketing
> principle, and sell the Kindle for $89, and make their money selling
> access to newly released novels, then they would make more money,
> and printed books would be on their way into history.
You aren't familiar with Kindle sales. The demand greatly exceeds
Amazon's ability to produce and sell them. Since they were
introduced most of those that bought them had to get on a waiting
list and wait several weeks to a month or two to get one. That's
the main reason why I haven't bought a Kindle. When I was tempted
last November, the chances of one arriving before Christmas seemed
pretty low. Many people (on Amazon's own Kindle "forum") told of
being quoted a 4 to 6 week wait, and a month after ordering one,
were told the wait would be at least another 4 to 6 weeks.
> As it is now, I don't have the least interest in one.
Amazon probably hasn't the least interest in selling you one. For
now. <g>
It's not only about reading novels. If you subscribe to many
newspapers and magazines, it takes only a couple of seconds to
download the latest copies each morning using the built-in (free)
wireless hardware. The just introduced new version (Kindle 2?) can
also save you the effort of reading, but its electronic voice sounds
pretty awful according to Jeff Bezos. That will also improve with
time if the Kindle survives. For now, I have little interest in
this feature, but many others with extremely poor vision probably
think differently.
Ray Fischer
>I do virtually all my reading from the computer screen. While the
>Kindle is a step in the right direction, technologically, marketing-wise
>it is unsupportable. The initial cost is outrageously high.
$360 is "outrageously high"?
How much did you pay for your camera?
> If it is
>possible to build, and sell, a laptop computer with HD and color screen,
>and DVD drive, and Wi-Fi, and all the other features normally found in
>them, including a keyboard, for $350, why is it that the Kindle sells
>for the same price?
It's NOT a computer. It's a book reader. The technonology is very different.
For example: How many days does a laptop battery last?
--
Ray Fischer
rfis...@sonic.net
J. Clarke
> Ron Hunter <rphu...@charter.net> wrote:
>> I do virtually all my reading from the computer screen. While the
>> Kindle is a step in the right direction, technologically,
>> marketing-wise it is unsupportable. The initial cost is
>> outrageously high.
>
> $360 is "outrageously high"?
>
> How much did you pay for your camera?
What difference does that make? That's like saying that the price of a
frying pan is not "outrageously high" because it doesn't cost more than
one's airplane. A Kindle is not a camera. It is a poor replacement for a
paperback book.
>> If it is
>> possible to build, and sell, a laptop computer with HD and color
>> screen, and DVD drive, and Wi-Fi, and all the other features
>> normally found in them, including a keyboard, for $350, why is it
>> that the Kindle sells for the same price?
>
> It's NOT a computer. It's a book reader. The technonology is very
> different. For example: How many days does a laptop battery last?
Well, actually it _is_ a computer. It's a crippled computer that doesn't do
anything but download and display books but it's a computer. As for the the
technology being "very different", no, it's not. It's digital electronics.
The battery life comes from using some kind of specialized display and
limiting both the available storage and the performance.
Amazon's problem with it is that (a) they don't seem to be able to get
production ramped up and (b) it's really something best suited to a
razor/blades marketing model.
Ray Fischer
>>> I do virtually all my reading from the computer screen. While the
>>> Kindle is a step in the right direction, technologically,
>>> marketing-wise it is unsupportable. The initial cost is
>>> outrageously high.
>>
>> $360 is "outrageously high"?
>>
>> How much did you pay for your camera?
>
>What difference does that make? That's like saying that the price of a
>frying pan is not "outrageously high" because it doesn't cost more than
>one's airplane. A Kindle is not a camera. It is a poor replacement for a
>paperback book.
Is it a "poor replacement" for a thousand paperback books,
several newspapers, and a bookstore?
>>> If it is
>>> possible to build, and sell, a laptop computer with HD and color
>>> screen, and DVD drive, and Wi-Fi, and all the other features
>>> normally found in them, including a keyboard, for $350, why is it
>>> that the Kindle sells for the same price?
>>
>> It's NOT a computer. It's a book reader. The technonology is very
>> different. For example: How many days does a laptop battery last?
>
>Well, actually it _is_ a computer.
Don't play word games with me. I don't have the patience.
> It's a crippled computer that doesn't do
>anything but download and display books but it's a computer.
Just like a microwave oven is a crippled computer than doesn't do
anything by heat food and act as a timer.
> As for the the
>technology being "very different", no, it's not.
How many days does your laptop battery last?
--
Ray Fischer
rfis...@sonic.net
ASAAR
> What difference does that make? That's like saying that the price of a
> frying pan is not "outrageously high" because it doesn't cost more than
> one's airplane. A Kindle is not a camera. It is a poor replacement for a
> paperback book.
It's not for everyone, but as a publisher mentioned several months
ago (during an interview on CSPAN's Book-TV) most people in the
industry now use Kindles and Sony Readers, which among other things
means that many of them no longer have to trudge from home to the
office and back with one or several dozen books. I don't recall the
exact percentage mentioned, but it was either 95% or 98%. This does
seem like an exaggeration, but that's what she said, and probably is
true at least in spirit.
As far as being a poor replacement for *any* kind of book is
concerned, I recall being frustrated years before the advent of
personal computers by not being able to easily find some phrases or
passages in books that I was reading. Being able to search is one
reasons why I almost exclusively go to my computer to read PDF
camera manuals instead of the paper variety (which often aren't
included). I've got all of my camera, flash, lens and other PDF
manuals on my Sony Reader, and it's about as portable as a single
thin, large format paperback.
>> It's NOT a computer. It's a book reader. The technonology is very
>> different. For example: How many days does a laptop battery last?
>
> Well, actually it _is_ a computer. It's a crippled computer that doesn't do
> anything but download and display books but it's a computer. As for the the
> technology being "very different", no, it's not. It's digital electronics.
> The battery life comes from using some kind of specialized display and
> limiting both the available storage and the performance.
That's almost totally wrong. Would you describe electronic
watches, coffee makers, toasters and other appliances, autos,
portable radios and TVs as being "crippled" computers? The built-in
memory can hold dozens of large novels, and by using expansion cards
(Sony's reader allows Memory Sticks and SDHC cards to be used
simultaneously) you can go much higher, up to thousands of books per
card. Of course there's a limit there, but it's more than most
people will read in a lifetime. The Kindle also uses cellular phone
technology, but unlike with the phones, there's no monthly or yearly
data subscription plan to buy. It's free, other than the cost of
the books, newspapers or magazines that you pay for. And you don't
have to even pay for any books if you'll be satisfied with DOC
files, unencrypted PDF files, text files and any of hundreds of
thousands of free/public domain ebooks.
The battery life is huge (at least for the Sony Readers) because
the battery usage is almost non-existent for anything but turning
pages. Battery life isn't measured in hours, days, weeks or months.
It's measure in "page turns", and the batteries are good for about
7,000 pages changes per charge. Whether you take 5 seconds or 5
minutes to read a page, the batteries won't really notice, unlike
most laptops and PDAs. To save battery power the reader CPU is
intentionally throttled, so turning a page can take a second or so.
That's certainly acceptable to me if the alternative would be faster
page turns but with only 1/2 the number of turned pages per charge.
The readers can also act as mp3 players (at increased battery
usage) and photo viewers, albeit with poor image quality and no
color, for now at least.
Dave Cohen
Another well thought out response from one often proffering such little
gems of bias.
I did some searching on the subject a while back but for me it would be
a luxury. I did conclude that if you are loading from the computer, the
Sony is the better choice. Be aware though that there is an outfit
developing a plastic display unit which would be less fragile than
current offerings.
As for overpriced toy, for college kids sporting a backbreaking load of
books, it could be rather an attractive toy if someone makes material
available.
Dave Cohen
Ron Hunter
If they are having trouble keeping up with the demand, it helps to
explain why the price is so high. They can charge whatever they want
when demand exceeds supply. When that changes, they will need to lower
the price. When it gets below $100, I will check it out again.
As for reading the newspaper, I already get it each morning on my
laptop, but I don't download it, as that takes too long (certainly more
than a few seconds, even at 5mbps). I like it online in some ways, but
find that many good features of the hardcopy, such as localized content,
and coupons, and the Sunday features are missing. Not sure if I will go
back to the print version, or hope they will improve the electronic
version. It seems to me that the environmentalists would jump on
everyone to promote online access, and work on companies to develop ways
to get coupons and other extras to work online. The savings in
pollution (paper making is very polluting), and millions of trees,
should be a thing to work toward.
Ron Hunter
not at this point. I waited from 1967 to 1981 for computers to reach my
specifications for buying one, so I am quite patient.
Maybe schools should become interested in it as a way to buy textbooks,
and reduce the outrageous load our children cart around in the backpacks
these days....
David J Taylor
[]
> Maybe schools should become interested in it as a way to buy
> textbooks, and reduce the outrageous load our children cart around in
> the backpacks these days....
Feel lucky the school-children can read. Many here cannot, despite
schooling, and probably even more cannot do simple maths. As for
operating a camera correctly....
David
ASAAR
>> The readers can also act as mp3 players (at increased battery
>> usage) and photo viewers, albeit with poor image quality and no
>> color, for now at least.
>
> When it can offer color, and a lower price, I might be interested, but
> not at this point. I waited from 1967 to 1981 for computers to reach my
> specifications for buying one, so I am quite patient.
>
> Maybe schools should become interested in it as a way to buy textbooks,
> and reduce the outrageous load our children cart around in the backpacks
> these days....
That's the best use I've heard for them so far. The only problem
is how to justify allowing a semester's worth of books that can fit
on a chip, that takes only minutes to download and charging the
credit card $500 to $1,000 for the lot. For textbook publishers and
their cronies in colleges and school boards to accept this there'll
have to be a lot of arm twisting. Or perhaps neck wringing. :)
J. Clarke
What textbooks can you get for it? And how resistant is it to being eaten
by dogs?
dj_nme
> On Sun, 01 Mar 2009 02:58:24 -0600, Ron Hunter wrote:
>
>>> The readers can also act as mp3 players (at increased battery
>>> usage) and photo viewers, albeit with poor image quality and no
>>> color, for now at least.
>> When it can offer color, and a lower price, I might be interested, but
>> not at this point. I waited from 1967 to 1981 for computers to reach my
>> specifications for buying one, so I am quite patient.
>>
>> Maybe schools should become interested in it as a way to buy textbooks,
>> and reduce the outrageous load our children cart around in the backpacks
>> these days....
>
> That's the best use I've heard for them so far. The only problem
> is how to justify allowing a semester's worth of books that can fit
> on a chip, that takes only minutes to download and charging the
> credit card $500 to $1,000 for the lot.
It would seem hard to justify the same price for a digital version as a
print version: no ink, paper, printing machines, nor physical
distribution is required.
There is the added "fun" of lecturers having an extra income stream by
selling there own textbook to their students, and just switching
chapters around so that last year's edition isn't easy to use.
Several courses that I've done have had lecturers/teacher notorious for
doing this.
> For textbook publishers and
> their cronies in colleges and school boards to accept this there'll
> have to be a lot of arm twisting. Or perhaps neck wringing. :)
Naming and shaming those who have a vested interest in keeping textbook
prices high might be a good start.
danbloom
Press wants to do a story on this topic, reading versus screening, and
is there a difference, and wonder if anyone here would be willing to
give a quote, pro or con, on this topic when he is ready to start his
reporting? Leave notes below or email me offline. -- Danny
One man, a poet in SF, told me today re this topic:
"Danny, That's right. The info comes in too fast, too easily and sans
"friction." IT DON'T STICK!"
AH
What's your take on this, pro or con?
DANNY
Tufts 1971, not a spammer
Ron Hunter
back-breaking load of books. I am a substitute teacher, mainly 5th and
6th grades, and the load some of these kids come to school with would
break down a camel, or pack mule.
It seems to me that issuing a CD for use at home would cover the need
for a printed book for most of them, and would save a LOT of trees, and
reduce cost for the schools.
A Kindle wouldn't really serve the need at this time, but the idea of a
general purpose reader certainly has merit.
Ron Hunter
they are updated only to increase profits, poorly edited for accuracy,
and often written to promote a political agenda, rather than to
accurately report the facts. History books are probably the worst, but
even math books often promote agendas by their example problems, and
their approach to teaching the subject.
David J Taylor
[]
> I didn't say they could read, only that they had to carry around a
> back-breaking load of books.
Touché!
> I am a substitute teacher, mainly 5th
> and 6th grades, and the load some of these kids come to school with
> would break down a camel, or pack mule.
I don't know your system - what age range?
I don't remember this as an issue at all back in the 1960s UK education.
I wonder whether there is far /too/ much information being crammed into
these pupils, rather than concentrating on the basics and teaching them
how to learn for themselves?
> It seems to me that issuing a CD for use at home would cover the need
> for a printed book for most of them, and would save a LOT of trees,
> and reduce cost for the schools.
.. and perhaps make it a slightly more attractive way to read the content,
not to mention search ability.
> A Kindle wouldn't really serve the need at this time, but the idea of
> a general purpose reader certainly has merit.
.. or, put the books up on the Web with password-controlled access?
When I went on my recent Major Trip - I took PDFs of all the manuals I
needed on the portable PC. Actually looked at two of them (the Nikon D60
and the radio scanner)! Convenient in the cabin, and no extra weight or
space, but not as nice as glancing at them on deck in the sunshine or
snow-shower!
Cheers,
David
Chris Malcolm
> Ron Hunter wrote:
>> I am a substitute teacher, mainly 5th
>> and 6th grades, and the load some of these kids come to school with
>> would break down a camel, or pack mule.
> I don't know your system - what age range?
> I don't remember this as an issue at all back in the 1960s UK education.
> I wonder whether there is far /too/ much information being crammed into
> these pupils, rather than concentrating on the basics and teaching them
> how to learn for themselves?
If the information was in the kid's brains they wouldn't have to carry
all those books around. The weight of the schoolbag is a measure of
the schoolkid's ignorance.
--
Chris Malcolm
Rich
news:gocll1$g2h$1...@news.motzarella.org:
> Rich wrote:
>> danbloom <danb...@gmail.com> wrote in
>> news:b89512dc-a146-4439...@d2g2000pra.googlegroups.com:
>>
>>> Reading on paper vs "screening" online and "screening" on a Kindle
>>> Screener
>>>
>>> I am curious to know if any other people here share my concerns
>>> about the need for a new word in English, and other languages, too,
>>> for READING ONLINE, to differentiate this activity from reading on
>>> paper, which is a very different animal.
>>>
>>> See two blogs I am on here: one in China, the other in USA:
>>>
>>> http://zippy1300.blogspot.com
>>>
>>> http://www.36pr.com/2009/02/27/6-on-36-qa-with-taiwan-based-reporter-
>>> da n-bloom-on-screening/
>>>
>>> AND in other languages, how does one different reading text on paper
>>> surface to reading text on a screen online? Do tell.
>>>
>>> Email me offline for any followups too.
>>>
>>> danbloom AT gmail DOT com
>>
>> Kindle = overpriced piece of s---. Just another toy for Americans to
>> buy to get deeper into credit debt.
>
> Another well thought out response from one often proffering such
> little gems of bias.
> I did some searching on the subject a while back but for me it would
> be a luxury. I did conclude that if you are loading from the computer,
> the Sony is the better choice. Be aware though that there is an outfit
> developing a plastic display unit which would be less fragile than
> current offerings.
> As for overpriced toy, for college kids sporting a backbreaking load
> of books, it could be rather an attractive toy if someone makes
> material available.
> Dave Cohen
>
For $350, you can get a small laptop (netbook) today. The Kindle is a
monochrome-screened file reader. A joke, really.
J. Clarke
Huh? The kid doesn't get to decide what books the school issues him, and if
his homework is "do exercises in all these books" and if if his teacher is
going to chalk him for not having the book in the classroom, then I don't
see how he has much choice about what books he's going to carry, even if he
knows the material cold.
tony cooper
Exactly. And, if the kid's school doesn't have locker space
available, he or she is required to tote the books back and forth.
--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
Kennedy McEwen
<c...@holyrood.ed.ac.uk> writes
>David J Taylor <david-...@blueyonder.neither-this-bit.nor-this.co.uk> wrote:
>> Ron Hunter wrote:
>
>>>the load some of these kids come to school with
>>> would break down a camel, or pack mule.
>
>all those books around. The weight of the schoolbag is a measure of
>the schoolkid's ignorance.
>
--
Kennedy
Yes, Socrates himself is particularly missed;
A lovely little thinker, but a bugger when he's pissed.
Python Philosophers (replace 'nospam' with 'kennedym' when replying)
Ron Hunter
> Ron Hunter wrote:
> []
>> I didn't say they could read, only that they had to carry around a
>> back-breaking load of books.
>
> Touché!
>
>> I am a substitute teacher, mainly 5th
>> and 6th grades, and the load some of these kids come to school with
>> would break down a camel, or pack mule.
>
> I don't know your system - what age range?
> I don't remember this as an issue at all back in the 1960s UK education.
>
Age range for 5th and 6th grade here is 10-12.
> I wonder whether there is far /too/ much information being crammed into
> these pupils, rather than concentrating on the basics and teaching them
> how to learn for themselves?
>
A lot of time and effort is spent trying to make sure the students pass
their standardized tests at each level. So much classroom time is spent
on this that there is little time to spend on the drill and practice
needed to permanently imprint on their brains the basic math facts.
VERY little time is spent on science, relative to things like history
and literature. Math consumes much time, but seems to do little good as
much time is wasted on preparation for the standardized tests.
>> It seems to me that issuing a CD for use at home would cover the need
>> for a printed book for most of them, and would save a LOT of trees,
>> and reduce cost for the schools.
>
> .. and perhaps make it a slightly more attractive way to read the content,
> not to mention search ability.
>
It odes appear that modern kids like to mix technology with their
learning, and that is fine.
>> A Kindle wouldn't really serve the need at this time, but the idea of
>> a general purpose reader certainly has merit.
>
> .. or, put the books up on the Web with password-controlled access?
>
That would be good for those who have computers, and fast internet
access. Sadly, the ones who most need the extra access are the ones who
are least likely to have that access.
Ron Hunter
classroom day is arranged. Elementary schools in my area rotate the
students through two to four classrooms for their various subjects.
This causes much movement, packing, unpacking, and can waste almost an
hour a day, and, since there is no opportunity to visit lockers during
these changes, they have to carry all their books, and supplies with
them all day. I know teachers would have to do a lot of adjusting, and
some things would need to be changed in the rooms, but moving the
teachers would be vastly more efficient. But try to convince the
teachers of that.....
David J Taylor
Ron,
I'm having difficulties relating what you are saying to my own experience.
Admittedly, that was some 50 years ago. Of course we had textbooks, but
we learnt a lot from what the teachers said as well. Our books were no
difficulty to carry, being A5 size (210 x 148mm) and perhaps 15-20mm
thick. We had a fixed "form" classroom, and moved to other classrooms for
particular subjects. Time lost was minimal, and you needed the exercise
in any case. We never had lockers (although space was provided for
clothes in changing rooms, but not locked space).
This was for secondary school - after age 11. Tests were at age 11
(secondary school selection), about 15 and about 17 (university
selection). Nothing on a national level in-between.
Different times, different country, different system!
Cheers,
David
Chris Malcolm
When I was a schoolkid I solved that problem by copying my homework
exercises into my homework exercise books before leaving school. So I
only had to take the exercise books home, not a whole pile of
textbooks as well.
--
Chris Malcolm
Tzortzakakis Dimitrios
Ο "Rich" <no...@nowhere.com> έγραψε στο μήνυμα
news:l-qdnaxEsec42THU...@giganews.com...
with vista home greek and cruise control.... Nothing against the Kindle, I
read the online versions of spiegel (www.spiegel.de), phantis
(www.phantis.gr) I'm also trying with lefigaro (www.lefigaro.fr) pravda
(www.pravda.ru) and yomiuri shinbun (www.yomiuri.co.jp - only in japanese)
--
Tzortzakakis Dimitrios
major in electrical engineering
mechanized infantry reservist
hordad AT otenet DOT gr
Ron Hunter
but most in the US move the students around 3 or 4 times during the day.
In secondary schools, this moving happens 7 to 9 times a day. In
'self-contained' one teacher usually teaches all the subjects. Not
feasible on the secondary level. I still think moving the teachers
makes more sense, but that has never been done in the US AFAIK. There
are a few teachers that roam around with everything on a cart and teach
their specialty, but those are rare.