In the 1880s, when the first practical “typewriting machine” was introduced (along with QWERTY), the word “typewriter” referred to the person using the machine. Only later did that word change meaning and it was necessary to invent the word “typist”.
Likewise, the word “computer” originally meant a professional who did calculations for physicists, astronomers, and the like, and only in the late ’40s did the word change to mean the machine (necessitating the invention of the word “nerd” to refer to the user. Just kidding.)
So we can’t have “reader” meaning both the machine and the person. Maybe “Kindle” will become generic, like “zipper”, “aspirin”, “cellophane”, and “granola” did. But whatever happened to “e-book”?
I have yet to find a “reader” that was as pleasing to my eyes, both in my hands and on my shelves, as an actual book. I, personally, will still demand dead-tree editions of anything I read. (Or dead cotton or dead hemp or dead kudzu or… whatever else they can make paper out of!)
On the other hand, I’ve now got several hundred books and stories loaded on my iPod Touch, and am finding it very nice, indeed. Nothing like reading the paper versions, I must admit, but a whole lot more handy. And while I’ve had extreme doubts about the ability of e-readers to approach paper’s quality, the Kindle 2 comes pretty close. The Kindle 3 should pretty much be there, except for the smell and feel of paper.
“The Kindle 3 should pretty much be there, except for the smell and feel of paper.”
They should have that down by Kindle 6.0. A little texture to the Kindle body and a changeable air freshener and there ya go!
I’m so sick of these whiny people who complain about cutting down trees to make paper. HELLO! All you have to do is plant trees to replace the ones you cut down! Trees, unlike oil, are a renewable resource!
pschearer Premium Member over 15 years ago
We are going to need a better word than “reader”.
In the 1880s, when the first practical “typewriting machine” was introduced (along with QWERTY), the word “typewriter” referred to the person using the machine. Only later did that word change meaning and it was necessary to invent the word “typist”.
Likewise, the word “computer” originally meant a professional who did calculations for physicists, astronomers, and the like, and only in the late ’40s did the word change to mean the machine (necessitating the invention of the word “nerd” to refer to the user. Just kidding.)
So we can’t have “reader” meaning both the machine and the person. Maybe “Kindle” will become generic, like “zipper”, “aspirin”, “cellophane”, and “granola” did. But whatever happened to “e-book”?
Digital Frog over 15 years ago
@pschearer - I think slavetofashion69 would prefer to think of them as ‘kindling’
VancouverRaven over 15 years ago
I have yet to find a “reader” that was as pleasing to my eyes, both in my hands and on my shelves, as an actual book. I, personally, will still demand dead-tree editions of anything I read. (Or dead cotton or dead hemp or dead kudzu or… whatever else they can make paper out of!)
farren over 15 years ago
On the other hand, I’ve now got several hundred books and stories loaded on my iPod Touch, and am finding it very nice, indeed. Nothing like reading the paper versions, I must admit, but a whole lot more handy. And while I’ve had extreme doubts about the ability of e-readers to approach paper’s quality, the Kindle 2 comes pretty close. The Kindle 3 should pretty much be there, except for the smell and feel of paper.
Khard12 over 15 years ago
“The Kindle 3 should pretty much be there, except for the smell and feel of paper.” They should have that down by Kindle 6.0. A little texture to the Kindle body and a changeable air freshener and there ya go!
stpatme over 15 years ago
I’m so sick of these whiny people who complain about cutting down trees to make paper. HELLO! All you have to do is plant trees to replace the ones you cut down! Trees, unlike oil, are a renewable resource!