TechCrunch presents a guest post from Ben Elowitz, who comes down very firmly on the Kindle-is-kaput side of the debate. Ben is co-founder and CEO of Wetpaint, a media company with an audience of 10 million monthly unique users; and author of the Digital Quartersblog,. Prior to Wetpaint, he co-founded Blue Nile (NILE), the largest online retailer of fine jewelry.
Top 10 Reasons Why Apple’s iPad Will Put Amazon’s Kindle Out of Business:
1) The multi-functional capability: It’s sooooo much more than a reader, it’s a whole-life device.
2) The screen: Full color, multi-touch screen, gestures, and more.
3) The compatibility: iPad supports ePub out of the box.
4) The iBookstore: Apple goes beyond Amazon to create a shopping experience.
5) The experience: Apple’s creation goes beyond, to make the experience fun and cool.
6) The economics: Publishers have been deeply concerned about price erosion with Amazon’s $9.99 pricing.
7) The apps: With iPad, ublishers can go beyond e-books, and create an app using one of the world’s most popular SDK platforms.
8) The marketplace: Sales of the iPad will mean exposure to so many more consumers than Kindle… Amazon won’t even release the number of Kindles sold, because the number of consumers buying its device pales next to Apple’s reach.
9) The price: For $10 more than a Kindle DX, consumers get an incredible ebook reader, and so much more with iPad.
10) The Apple factor (a.k.a. “sexy”): Amazon just doesn’t have that. As Jason Kottke says, “The iPad makes the Kindle look like it’s from the 1980’s.”
MacDailyNews Take: Make that the 1970s. As we’ve often said, the Kindle looks like something John Dykstra superglued together back in 1975. The Kindle didn’t need iPad’s help to look antiquated.
Full article here.
MacDailyNews Take: As regular readers know, we’re almost always right. 
Here’s how we reacted, spur of the moment, during our live coverage of Jobs’ iPad unveiling: “Amazon’s Kindle hardware, which wasn’t much to speak of in the first place, is dead.”
And here’s what we said on January 5, 2010: “When and if Apple’s tablet appears… well, let’s just say that Amazon should focus all of their attention on their Kindle software for Apple hardware than on Kindle hardware going forward.”
No, we never fell for Bezos’ Kindle B.S.
[Thanks to MacDailyNews Reader “Marvin P.” for the heads up.]
So why would a company choose a name for their product that rhymes with dwindle?
I think it’s funny that people thought the Kindle wanted to be alive in the first place.
Amazon will sell books in the epub format soon enough. Or are people expecting Amazon to start selling their own MP3 players, phones, and other equipment that competes with their vendors?
The Kindle fans are out in force on that site. Their claims are borderline hilarious. Specially if they really believe it.
“Let’s see if they’re honest enough to post it.”
Unfortunately, Amazon product reviews are added automatically when you post them. I wish there was a requirement, like keying in a product code or something, to weed out the fakes who don’t own and have never used the item they’re talking about.
Like many people, I often buy stuff through Amazon and read reviews to find out what folks who bought a product think about the value of their purchases. It’s inevitable that I have to wade through rants from non-owners who assign an item 1 star just so they can slam it.
People do this kind of juvenile stuff in fake “reviews” of Amazon’s listings for Apple’s computers, too. Why would anyone want to copy their immaturity?
@Randian,
when I was in school 20+ years ago, we also had color text books.
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”wink” style=”border:0;” />
Kindle is toast, regardless of how its fans want to spin it. Luckily Amazon took this into consideration and created the Kindle iPhone app.
@Galloway @theloniousMac
as an iPhone developer I can tell you the problem with running iPhone apps on a Mac is that iPhone apps are compiled for ARM processors and Macs use Intel processors. Sure they could come up with an emulator, but multitouch only really works when you can touch an object, not use a virtual touch pad like the trackpad/magic mouse.
so the iPad is an eBook Reader now?
From what I’ve read, Apple were obliged to announce the iPad before submitting it to the feds. So it’s possible that, come March, (or whenever this year) the final product will be not the one that Steve unveiled.
I doubt Amazon really need to worry since all they offer is an electronic book reader. The iPad is aiming for a different audience. I imagine the Kindle’s poor sales alone are all the reason to ‘kill’ its existence – but that would depend on how much Mr Bezos has personally invested in the device.
And, don’t forget, if the Kindle does flop Amazon still has the rest of its business to sustain it quite well
The ipad will never kill the Kindle. The Kindle is light weight and has a battery that lasts forever – we’re talking weeks not hours like the ipad. Plus I can use the Kindle outdoors in sunlight; you can’t with the ipad. Lastly, ever tried reading on an LCD or OLED screen for very long? You’ll get a whopper headache.
It amazes me that everyone is bitching about the screen before they have even seen it.
1) you haven’t seen it
2) I use an LCD ALL day for work and never get a headache
3) who reads for weeks at a time? a couple of hours maybe
4) Steve Jobs said to Walt Mossberg, 10 hours reading/video, over 140 hours music.
What we really need is Color e-Ink. e-ink is amazingly good on your eyes. It’s seriously like paper, folks. Looking at a screen for 10 hours a day is one thing… reading a book on an LCD screen? Ick.
@tbsteph
1. Price. The most popular Kindle costs $259.00
-That’s a little more than half the iPad entry model for about 1/20th of the functionality.
2. 3G Access. Free on the Kindle.
-To…do…what…with? Oh yea: buy books.
3. Screen. Kindle screen is much easier on the eyes.
-This is crap. First, I take it you haven’t handled the iPad, so there’s that. Second, if we assume that this is the EXACT same LCD screen that’s in a MacBook, I use mine 8 – 10 hours a day (as do I assume hundreds of thousands of other people) without so much as a headache. Also: how much can you read at one sitting? 10 hours? 12? The e-ink garbage was an attempt to electronically clone the reading experience of a dead system of interaction.
4. Battery. 10 hours for the iPad vs. 2 weeks for the Kindle.
-2 weeks is standby. iPad: a month. I should probably stop here, since this glaring an error probably warrants my spending no more time with this ludicrous list, but I’m stubborn that way.
5. Size. Kindle 2 much easier to transport.
-Uhhhhh. So you can fit a Kindle in your jeans pocket? And it weighs 14 oz less. You’re right: there’s no way the Kindle product line will be affected.
6. Weight. Kindle 2 weighs about 10oz vs. 24oz for the iPad
-Guess that’s what happens when you don’t have the heart to scroll down, for fear that the sheer retardary of the next line will make you throw up in your mouth.
7. Book Price Bestsellers $9.99 via Kindle vs. $14-$15 via iPad.
-I didn’t see $14-15 anywhere, but that could be me missing some announcement. SJ DID say in his interview with Mossberg that the pricing will be comparable.
8. Keyboard – Virtual on iPad vs. mechanical on Kindle.
We’ve all seen how the presence of a virtual keyboard vs. a hardware keyboard can destroy the adoption of a mobile device. Oh wait: the opposite of that. And what are you typing on a Kindle anyway?
The only thing Amazon can and will do to pull some last drops of milk from this quickly-drying udder is to slash the price on these dinosaurs. The Kindle is dead, dead, dead.
Some of you just don’t get it. The iPad was not made SPECIFICALLY for books. The Amazon Kindle was made only for that purpose. I want an iPad, but I am going to wait for the second or third update.
When I go to bed at night and want to read for a bit, the Kindle 2 is perfect for that purpose. Easy on the eyes and I can hold it with one hand. The iPad is way to big to hold in bed and be comfortable. Plus, the backlit screen would kill my eyes. I can read for hours on my Kindle without any eyestrain.
I can see the iPad cutting sales of the Kindle by 1/3. Maybe 1/2. Not much more, because there are folks for whom the pluses of the Kindle are important, and who already have a laptop and/or iPhone for their other needs.
Amazon will still make money even if the Kindle’s sales are halved, because there is no fixed-cost brick-and-mortar overhead that requires support from a high sales volume.
What Amazon must protect is its hegemony in e-book bookselling on the iPad, despite competition from other e-book sellers. That’s the real battle. We won’t see how that works out until months after the iPad’s release. In the meantime, maybe MDN could start a speculative thread on the topic, once an author somewhere lists reasons why he favors Amazon or its rivals.
The only reason Kindle may continue to exist is because of a few rabid fans of it (beginning with Oprah, unless she sees the iPad, brings it into her show and begins fawning over it).
The whole e-Ink argument is an incredibly successful marketing triumph by Amazon. There are indeed quite a few people out there who genuinely believe that this e-Ink display is “easier on the eyes” than a LED-backed LCD. There are no scientific studies to prove or disprove this, but there are no objective reasons this should be so. E-Ink display is certainly less bright than a back-lit LCD. Compared to iPad, kindle has somewhat sharper resolution (167 dpi, vs 132 dpi on iPad), and that is about the ONLY meaningful difference. Kindle display requires optimal light conditions in order to be comfortable for reading (i.e. adequate light), LED-backed LCDs can be read in ANY conditions COMFORTABLY.
All this is beside the point. Objectively, iPad display is beautiful. Nobody can contest that. If a person wants to buy an iPad, why on earth would then they want to buy a Kindle as well?
The final point is, iPad is going after the same people that were (and some of which still are) in the market for a Kindle, because they love to read. These people have enough money to buy the Kindle. When they see the iPad, they will add a few hundred bucks and buy a device that will doe EXACTLY what Kindle does, but will give them EVERYTHING else on top.
Now, this cannot be stressed enough, so I’ll repeat it:
Kindle requires OPTIMAL light; otherwise, it is EXTREMELY difficult and straining on the eyes.
If I want to read in bed at night (while my wife sleeps next to me), I have to use one of those book lights. As neat and practical as such light is, it is still very uncomfortable on my eyes, since it is very uneven, and under most positions, I get at least some degree of glare from some part of the page. So, I always end up getting my MacBook and reading from there (dialing down the brightness a bit, since my pupils are fully dilated in the dark).
There is ABSOLUTELY no way Kindle display can be more pleasing on the eyes than an iPod/iPad/iPhone, except maybe (and just maybe) in very bright sunlight (and I haven’t seen the iPad/iPod/iPhone in bright sunlight to verify this).
He makes a good point. But I’m hoping that the Ipad will serve to be a catalyst to create a momentum of technology from other companies in order to compete which is good for the consumer.
Hake
MediaXYZ said
“The cost of a book is based on the value of the intellectual property it contains, not the cost of printing and binding.”
Yeah, right. That’s why the hardcover edition of a book always costs the exact same as the paperback version. The have the exact same ‘intellectual property’.
OF COURSE the printing and binding factor in to the cost of books. A cost passed on to the consumer. OF COURSE the fact that Borders bookstore has to order the books, have them shipped (and books are heavy!), unpacked, sorted, cataloged, stored on shelves in a store COST MONEY, and this cost is passed on to the consumer.
How could the physical factor of a book NOT be related to the pricing of a book?? Are we supposed to believe that the $157 my wife just payed for a cheap, softcover book for a college class went solely to the ‘owner’ of its intellectual property?
This is why I cannot believe that the cost of an electronic version of a textbook or paperback should cost any where near the cost of the physical book.
Just my .03 cents worth.
@Galloway: “Given the emulator built into Xcode, obviously iPhone OS apps will run on Macs.”
It’s not an emulator, it’s a simulator. The difference being, it can’t run applications downloaded from the AppStore. Those applications are targeted for the ARM processor in the iPhone and will not run on an Intel based Mac.
“-2 weeks is standby. iPad: a month. I should probably stop here, since this glaring an error probably warrants my spending no more time with this ludicrous list, but I’m stubborn that way.”
I think I will stop here with that glaring error 😀
After reading all of the above posts, and about a hundred “reviews” elsewhere on the web, I’ve come to this undeniable (IMHO) conclusion:
The Kindle is a one-trick pony, pure and simple. (See http://www.electronista.com/articles/10/01/29/research.says.ipad.a.better.fit.than.kindle/)
If that is truly what you want (read that “luddite’)–and ONLY what you want–the Kindle is absolutely perfect for you. Buy it. Use it. Love it.
However, if you wants MORE than a mere gray-text book reader for practically the same money (talking the DX here, not the diminuitive 6″ model), the iPad is your only choice: Color. Blazing Speed. Games. Educational seminars (iTunesU). E-mail. Video. Music. Productivity applications (iWork, et al.). Backlighting. And yes BOOKS, priced absolutely equal to Amazon’s offerings.
Can’t wait for March/April!
With regard to the screen, it is interesting to see that opposite opinions are stated in a manner that implies strong preference.
Perhaps we should all restrain ourselves from stating that LCD or eINK is much easier on/better for the eyes. It seems that personal preference, which is often inexplicable, is the driver. Neither is inherently better or worse for the eyes.
“Neither is inherently better or worse for the eyes.”
You’re wrong. They invented eInk because LCD sucks.
@Randian:
Exactly. Kindle and iPad are for two completely different markets, although I suspect many will be migrating from the Kindle side.
No one who buys an iPad will go, “Gee, I really want a Kindle instead.”