...this was clearly intended as a better/new/different version of the
magazine, and so it suffers the fatal flaw of having to carry a ton
of the baggage of the old medium into the new one.
I would bet that most of the executives around the table at Popular
Science were absolutely thrilled with this app. And that's the problem. I
have an informal filter on how interesting and innovative a new
content-related development or device is --
if a large number of people
from incumbent companies (especially big ones) are excited about it,
then it's not actually interesting or innovative enough to matter much,
because that means it's too similar to the current way of doing things. That's why the industry loves "enhanced ebooks" at the same time they're
totally missing opportunities to re-imagine the "job" their product
does for the customer. (In all fairness, we struggle with this a lot at
O'Reilly too!)
この記事の"iPad is more suited to the occasional reader than the avid one(iPadは熱心な読者よりもたまに読書する人に適している)"そして"It probably won't kill the Kindle"という意見は、先日の私のブログ記事とほぼ同様です。
先週金曜日(2/19/2010)、The International Digital Publishing Forum (IDPF)が、今年1月の電子書籍の卸売売上高を発表しました。teleread.orgの記事によると、1月だけで 31.9 millionドル(約29億円)と昨年の同時期と比較して 261%増だということです。
最近のコメント