yes, once you (re?)pay for stuff you get it wirelessly

now that several media outlets have discussed the kindle 2, i have to take a moment to jot down my initial thoughts. at first i thought 'horrible price for something that makes me look like a nerd and really is only good for reading books...which cost extra.' then i thought 'isn't this what people would have said about the ipod?' i was so wrong to doubt myself like that.

the original ipod was a monumental achievement. the kindle is a rio - a trailblazer, not a masterpiece. when i first heard about mp3 players, i thought the idea seemed cool, but i didn't feel any need to buy one. i'd used macamp already and thought mp3 technology was cool, but the rio couldn't hold any more music than my cd player. the ipod changed that, and not just the capacity angle. i wasn't dying to get my hands on a nomad either. when the mp3 category really arrived, it was clear; i wanted an ipod from the moment it was announced.

a secondary issue is simply the cost of the media. it's easy to say 'an ipod can hold all these songs but they'd cost me a ton of money at the itunes store,' but the ipod allowed you to get all your music off your cds and into your pocket. if the kindle, at its current price point, allowed you to somehow just have all the books you already owned transferred to kindle format, it becomes a far more compelling product. let's say even just the books you'd purchased in the past 20 years. or 15 years even, the point is, i've seen one person use a kindle in public and i was snickering in my head about it. an expensive product that requires further expenditure to use is basically half baked if that's the reaction it provokes in others. the kindle's distribution model is nice, but it's a media company's dream, not a consumer's. it's a fancy new toy that will encourage some people to pay up again for content they already own in the old format.