I can only assume you’re testing if anyone actually reads the full version of your posts. I could have sworn I just read that…
Yeah i noticed the double content for the post and i was confused for a split second. Also what i was originally going to say: Goddamn that OG Kindle is a blast from the past. Looking at it i’m reminded of those really awful 90’s electronic stylings that companies thought looked cool or modern. The fact that it’s not from the 90’s i’m not sure if that’s good or bad…
I really would love a Voyage or Paperwhite. Money isn’t in the cards for that and other extravagances i want to own. I think i might get a PS4 this xmas and maybe for my bday next year i’ll consider an e-reader. Or maybe i’ll hold out for a Voyage 2 in a year or two.
Bug in post layout fixed. Thanks!
I don’t have an e-reader, but I really should, as I have thousands of PDFs and text files. I like that the Kindle OG has actual buttons, but not the low-res screen. I’m probably going to get an iRiver so I can get buttons as well as a better screen.
Hmm… Did i read that right in that the newest kindle has touch/pressure-sensitive controls for page turning rather than clicky buttons? If so, are they mad? Sounds a huge regression there.
Even the kindle app on my android phone sensibly lets you use the the volume hardware buttons to click forwards and back through pages.
I do like the whole e-ink with backlight thing for nightime reading though, was the only thing that was really an issue with my now ex-kindle (the last model with the keyboard, now has a cracked display )
I just can’t believe that the Kindle and the iPhone came out in the same year. The original iPhone looks about 10 years newer than the Kindle!
It seems like the majority of reviews on the Voyage agree that the haptic buttons for page turning is sub-optimal. Not totally awful, but not very good either. Personally i don’t really care about physical buttons so i can ignore it but considering it’s been panned so far maybe Amazon will provide actual buttons on the next iteration of the Voyage… might take a year or two for a hardware refresh.
I think the same people that designed the Plymouth Aztek worked on the original Kindle
Lots of design snark about the OG! Anybody care to chime in on any specifics as to what they dislike about it?
Whoa. Déjà vu.
[Everyone freezes right in their tracks]
What did you just say?
Nothing. Just had a little déjà vu.
What did you see?
A black cat went past us, and then another that looked just like it.
How much like it? Was it the same cat?
It might have been. I’m not sure.
What is it?
A déjà vu is usually a glitch in the Matrix. It happens when they change something.
Not sure it’s fixed: I’m still seeing double!
Just as a reminder for those who didn’t use e-readers back when the Kindle first came out, the Kindle store was pretty much exclusively available via the device, and Amazon gave all devices free cellular connections. The keyboard was included so you could shop and browse the store without needing a computer at all, wherever you went.
It’s quaint now that a user can just whip out their phone and do the same thing, but at the time it was pretty neat.
Biggest design annoyance for me on the original was the audible page clicks. Sounds minor, but sitting next to my wife, that tiny “click” every 20-40 seconds was like water torture for her when she was trying to sleep in a dead-silent room, and I became self conscious about it myself.
When she finally got her own it was a paper white, and seeing how great it was I retired mine a week later. Kindles are wonderful–no fumbling with pages, no shifting to get better light, no tilting your head from one page to the other. Just reptilian silence and near-perfect stillness. Except for the occasional darting out of our tongues to lubricate our eyes you wouldn’t know we were alive.
Just like with consumer electronics in the 90s, in 2005 there were no established design rules about what an ereader should or shouldn’t look like.
Nowadays if you want to build an ereader, the only important design question is “Does it look like an iPad?” But back then there was no reference, so who knew what crazy stuff you’d end up with? Even though the designs are more ugly, I think they’re more exciting than modern ones.
What defines “ugly”? The article says the device had better overall haptic feel than the modern crapola designs. I consider that more important than how the thing looks.
(Unrelated pet peeve: silver frames on monitors. Whoever got that idea apparently never used one and apparently thought it is “pretty”. The screen edges reflect on the frame edges and it is distracting. Luckily nothing that a brief session with a screwdriver and matte-black masking paint from an army shop can’t solve.)
Minor? No, this would bug me out. I’d open mine and disconnect the clicker, which would be a hassle to do.
Mammals do tend to be extremely fidgety! They often do not even notice when they are moving around, or know why!
Which begs the question: “What does an iPad look like?”. IMO iPads just look like generic slabs - nice, but not revolutionary and not especially functional nor aesthetic. Maybe it’s just me. Also I just dislike touch screens, they remind me of some lame industrial PLC console, or some office building information kiosk.
My favorite e-reader was the FaxView. It looked like a flashlight or something, but projected the documents (faxes) directly onto the retina with reflective optics. Had excellent text definition. And since the image was in your eye, it didn’t matter much what the device looked like.
Could that one be adapted into an augmented-reality wearable display?
Not easily, the mechanical parts make the whole thing difficult to re-case. But the same company offered a general-purpose wearable display called the P4, aka “Private Eye” in lesser quantities. Unfortunately the company was bought out and the product disappeared before I could get one.