Presumably contracts are for a certain length of time and not in-perpetuity - what happens when the big six publishers finally realise that Amazon has them in a headlock and they don't renew their contract? Presumably a lot of blank Kindles ????
I don't think it's that easy. It's the DRM that's the problem, not the Kindle. I think the point is that the DRM is driving sales of the Kindle over other devices as the DRM is kindle specific, rather than, for lack of a better word, open. So people get locked into the platform. Sort of like the way DRM on music used to work. But the same out exists for them- remove the DRM.
+1 for what @Carol Haynes says.
+1 for what @wraith808 link says.
The reason I say this is that the Kindle does not meet my criteria 3, 5, 6, 7a, 7b, 11 (see list below). In particular, the demonstrated capacity for Amazon to unilaterally and silently hack into your
Kindle and their ruthless (psychopathic) pursuit of DRM in so doing beggars belief. It could well end up as "an empty Kindle", and the customer would have little or no recourse for remediation/restitution under the contract. I would not be in my right mind if I purchased a Kindle for my use.
I am prone to being a bit of a technology junkie, but that doesn't necessarily mean that I lose my sense of self-control or reason over it. For me, it is really quite pragmatic - it's typically about the implementation and alignment of information management with general information theory. That includes/covers things such as, for example, PCs/laptops, cameras, scanners, printers, memory sticks, and software for these things, and even related processes and discussion forums (like this one).
I am very critical of the quality, design and purposes of most new technology. I tend towards a minimalist approach. The technology that I acquire usually has to meet some general benefit and function criteria. I usually put it through a PMI (Plus, Minus, Interesting - per De Bono) review before I acquire it. The PMI will cover these pretty basic requirements:
- #1: Input: Does it improve my current processes of data/information/knowledge gathering?
- #2: Processing (includes Output): Does it improve my current processing methods?
- #3: Storage/backup: Does it improve my current processes of storage or backup/recovery?
- #4: Quality: Is it technically sound, well-designed and well-made for its purpose?
- #5: Support: Is it likely to have some reasonable degree of continuing support?
- #6: Reliability: Can I trust the provider to be delivering something of reasonable quality and that he will not rip me off (i.e., make a victim of the customer)?
- #7a: Use - Ergonomics (and efficiency): Does it at least meet my current ergonomic requirements?
- #7b: Use - Control: Will I have full, free and unencumbered control over the technology, to use as I need/please?
- #8: Cost: What is the cost, and does it seem reasonable?
- #9: Change: Will the use of the technology effect/necessitate a change for the better in the way I do things?
- #10: Deficiencies: How is it deficient in light of the above criteria, or in any other way?
- #11: Trade-off/compromise: What deficiencies are worth accepting in order to realise the improvements/benefits of using this technology?