Talk:Amazon Kindle

Sill international an US only versions?

From what I can see here Amazon is now only selling the international version of the Kindle 2 and DX. Maybe someone can confirm this and update the sections about it. cu AssetBurned (talk) 14:30, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

Content Sources

Is the content sources section in Content really necessary? There are numerous sources for e-books and the line referring to the sources could be shortened to stating that the Kindle can view certain types of e-book files from various online websites. St33med (talk) 01:58, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

RSS subscription line

I am removing this line in content:

Amazon charges monthly for RSS subscription to select blogs, even though users could use the experimental web browser to navigate to and read blogs or any other web pages free of charge.

Simply because it is stated before hand and it has negative implications on the feeds. This, however, could be moved to criticisms. St33med (talk) 01:45, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

Whispernet

Whispernet redirects to Kindle... I would like to request an article about Whipsernet. - (me: 4 Dec 2007) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.102.242.56 (talk) 01:54, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

I figured that since no one else responded, I shall. There was a Whispernet article, you can see the last version. There wasn't much to it, so it was decided to merger in. To the best of my knowledge Whispernet is simply a term for the use of the Sprint EVDO network (per whats written in the Kindle article). If at some later point more information becomes available - the article can be resurrected. --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 22:00, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Yes, Whispernet is just Sprint EVDO, with the added twist that the user does not pay any recurring fee for it. NuclearWinner (talk) 22:43, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Sane ELs to Kindle User's Guide and About Your Amazon Kindle?

Amazon.com does provide access the PDF versions of the Kindle's Getting Started and Reference guides from the product's page listing, which might be valuable external links (if not references). However, I cannot ascertain what an appropriate link to either may be (i.e. whether the URLs I see locally represent content cache locations to balance request loads). Thoughts on what may be appropriate here? D. Brodale (talk) 04:21, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Does it work in Finland/Europe?

Hi!

Someone should write whether or not this Kindle's EVDO/CDMA AnyDATA wireless modem work in Europe? How about the Whispernet? Does it work in Finland/Europe? Urvabara (talk) 13:35, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

WP isn't an FAQ, but I'll answer it here for you. The short answer is "No". So far from what I've read, amazon wont even sell it to other countries. Also, most of the world (including Europe) uses GSM, not CDMA. If I remember correctly, generally the only use of CDMA still is North America. --ShakataGaNai (talk) 19:19, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! Someone should add this info to the article. Urvabara (talk) 06:38, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

It actually already says that. More specifically it says "service launched in the United States" and "which uses the Sprint EVDO network". Short of flat out writing "No, this wont work anywhere other than the US", everything has been said. Its also arguable that the kindle is usable outside the US. Every key feature Amazon has included on the kindle uses the Cellular capabilities - but doesn't require it. So if you were to get a kindle outside the US - you could still purchase books and load them up over USB. --ShakataGaNai (talk) 07:00, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Ok. Urvabara 13:55, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Instead of saying 'someone' should do something, just go make the changes you think the article needs, be bold.Brianhe (talk) 07:05, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Ok, but someone already edited it... Urvabara 13:55, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Amazon's website says U.S. users can continue purchasing and otherwise managing their Kindle activities via their computer when abroad. Without mentioning this one gives the impression the device is completely dependant the domestic Whispernet when this is not so. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.197.244.81 (talk) 01:24, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Criticism section

The Criticism section is a wee bit dodgy! All of the points mentioned are probably valid and indeed easily found on the reviews on Amazon.com, but I'm not sure that's an acceptable source? Should the section just be wikified and merged into the general body of text?? Conor (talk) 16:30, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

WP:CRITICISM#Formatting criticism has some guidance on this. I prefer to retain the separate section. Amazon.com reviews seem weak as a citation because they're not really published as described in WP:NOTE, nor attributed to a real-world person. Brianhe (talk) 18:44, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

I removed everything lacking a verifiable source. There have been a couple of reviews published by credible sources so far, but things like "it costs as much as the iPhone but isn't as good" (paraphrased) are not useful. White 720 (talk) 00:01, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

The bit about justification without hyphenation is a good catch! I'm glad someone brought it up because it indeed is a bit of an oversight. On the bright side, I imagine it shouldn't be too hard to remedy with a wireless software upgrade, if Amazon so chooses. I hope they do. -cp 00:57, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Criticism should not be a part of this article, it is merely trolling. We should have a serious discussions about the merits of a criticism section this early in a product launch, and also what are the general grounds for adding a criticism section when there are no authoritative sources of criticism at this time. To make the issue clear, would the reverse section "positive benefits of Kindle" or some such section be appropriate? If not, then the "criticism" section should be removed. This article should, at the present time, only present the facts of the device and leave off troll bait criticism (and praise). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.86.253.144 (talk) 07:27, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

I think it would be very important to add a criticism section. They are using DRM to lock-in users. A souce for this is a site by the FSF http://www.defectivebydesign.org/KindleSwindle . I think it's a problem that there is NO mentioning on DRM in the article at the moment. --Stefon (talk) 17:19, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

I'm all for mentioning the capabilities of the Kindle in the article, including the "DRM" that is built into the device, but putting it under a 'criticism' section is disingenuous for many reasons and should not be in an encyclopedia. I could site a source of a major environmentalist group who endorses the Kindle for it's movement away from paper for newspapers and other traditional print media - but that does not warrent a whole section called "Positive effects of Kindle". We all know Richard Stallman and Co. are against DRM, but the fact is that does not belong in an Encyclopedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.86.253.144 (talk) 20:40, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

I believe in the fact that DRM is a negative thing. But I agree with you that wikipedia is not the right place to decide it. But mentioning the DRM system is an important (wether positive or negative) aspect of the system. Do you agree with adding it to the Technical specifications paragraph? --Stefon (talk) 21:05, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Details of the DRM employed should go in the article on AZW file format though its impact on the Kindle device & its users would be appropriate for this article. Brianhe (talk) 21:38, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Guys DRM is only negative if you are in favor of totally opensource digital content, but the fact is that there is a huge debate about the merits of that. Having intellectual property rights gives creators a benefit for the labor they put into creating it. DRM is a way of protecting the rights of authors, publishers and owners to get some money from people who wish to use their products. DRM is arguably a positive thing from the perspective of those who favor intellectual property rights. If you look at it from an international perspective, technologies like DRM favor America and Europe who are major producers of intellectual content from countries that don't believe such things deserve to be respected, such as China. But if you think about it, would it be fair if we could go online and download chinese goods and property for free illegally? Imagine if you could download chinese toys or electronic parts online instead of buying them, would that be fair to the chinese who design and build them? (No :-P) --Wmspareaccount (talk) 23:11, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

I'm not sure whether it belongs under 'Technical Specifications' or 'Content', but absolutely agree a mention of DRM should be made somewhere in the article. I'm leaning more towards the content section, since the only media actually DRM'd is the AZW files. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.86.253.144 (talk) 21:40, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Would you like to mention the DRM under the content section or should I add it? Btw. I think THIS external link ttp://kindlegeek.com/ is not really neutral... Or whats the difference between this and the FSF link?! --Stefon (talk) 12:12, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

I deleted the comment about the zooming around documents, you can't "zoom" in kindle, whoever wrote that clearly doesn't use it or maybe even own it. What you can do is change the text size, but whatever he was trying to say was clearly wrong. Kindle displays digital text, not an image as in a PDF document, so there is no way that you could "zoom" like you would an image in photoshop. It's not like the Illiad or other readers that can display PDFs as images. Kindle can display images but it's more like the images that show up on a word document or on project Gutenberg, not like the more flat, unalerable image that you'd see on a PDF. --Wmspareaccount (talk) 23:06, 4 January 2009 (UTC) I noticed that someone put it back up to day, but the fact that it's not even sourced should be a good indicator of how reliable that zooming coment is. There is no zooming in Kindle, so whoever put that in there is making it up.--Wmspareaccount (talk) 14:16, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

You can, indeed, "zoom" on the Kindle when it comes to images. From the user's guide for Kindle 2: "Increasing the Size of a Picture: If you’d like to see a larger size of a picture or image you encounter in your reading material, simply follow these steps to zoom temporarily on the image." 7 April 2009 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.7.198.226 (talk) 05:07, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

I have done a lot of editing on the criticisms, including commenting out the part which compares the Kindle's price to other devices unfairly. In my opinion, such criticisms should be moved to an entirely separate page unto itself. St33med (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 03:33, 28 November 2009 (UTC).

The use of the passive voice in the "Criticism" section (e.g., "There is concern," "Other criticisms involve") is substandard and should be fixed.

What Books Does it Have?

Though you can search Amazon.com for what books Kindle offers, There is no full list of the books. If you like reading more obscure books, what does Kindle offer? Why Does Amazon.com offer more books than the Kindle? Shouldn't it be the same? There are a ton of questions that need to be answered.24.250.59.55 (talk) 20:19, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Huh? There is a full list of books that Amazon offers for the kindle, Goto amazon's site and click Kindle books (linked for your ease of clicking). Right now it says "91,961 Results". Thats -every-single-book- amazon offers for the Kindle. There aren't any "hidden" books or equally "obscure" titles that hide out on the device. What the Kindle (Devices) accesses, is the their website, just slightly reformatted. Thats it. End of Story. As for "Why does amazon.com offer more books than the kindle?" by that I assume you mean "Why doesn't amazon offer every book on the Kindle" and the answer is simple - because their either don't have a license to sell it electronically, or no electronic version exists. --ShakataGaNai (talk) 20:26, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Not sure if ShakataGaNai is a native speaker of N.A. or RP English. "Obscure" doesn't mean hidden, it means less popular or not as widely known works. I've found some of these, like one of the novels by Dostoyevsky which I did not expect to find for Kindle. The Charlie Rose interview listed among the External Links will answer a lot of the questions people seem to have here. Bezos says that the figure 90,000 titles is roughly what a brick-and-mortar superstore would carry in terms of inventory. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.197.244.81 (talk) 01:31, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

I have added a summary of available content that I have been able to track down based on discussion forum threads. Some of these sites I have visited. I don't pretend that is is exhaustive, and I I others will add to this list as time goes on. --Knipfty (talk) 17:44, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

To be perfectly honest, I disagree with these additions, but I personally won't revert. The table goes against general principles, WP:NOT for not a directory, as these are indiscriminate links. And so it's clear where I stand, I've personally used many of these links myself to find free content, but that is not the purpose of the article. Yngvarr (t) (c) 18:48, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

I agree with Yngvarr... as useful as the table may be, it really doesn't fit on wikipedia. This is an encyclopedia not a directory. Perhaps the ones which are Kindle-specific could be added to the outside links section.Pstanton 20:32, 22 December 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pstanton (talk • contribs)

Maybe the table should be on a Kindle specific site, but this still answers the question of "What books does it have?". I am open to suggestions on where or how this could be better positioned. It took some time to put this together and it is a common question not just for the Kindle but all eReaders. For me, I am receiving mine on Christmas Day and have looked into this over the past month. I also plan on addressing content in more detail once I get more familiar with the Kindle. Namely, how to convert content. --Knipfty (talk) 21:39, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia

I've heard it allows access to Wikipedia articles. Does anyone know whether they're complying with the GFDL? Superm401 - Talk 02:22, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

I don't follow. Amazon is not copying, translating, modifying, aggregating, etc. but just displaying existing Wikipedia content, so how does the GFDL pertain? Brianhe (talk) 05:17, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

no it goes there on the web. also i am editing this on one right now. it is really a pain but works —Preceding unsigned comment added by 8.18.145.230 (talk) 17:14, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Introduction

"Amazon Kindle is an electronic book (e-book) service" I think that this should be amended to something like:

"The Amazon Kindle is an electronic book (e-book) which can provide the user with a service allowing easy content delivery.

If I were to purchase a Kindle and never turn the Whispernet on, there is no 'service' as such. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JayCeeEll (talk • contribs) 15:58, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

I agree, since Amazon themselves refers to the Kindle as a wireless reading device and an electronic reader. The wireless access is a feature. -Wikipedia XP (talk) 18:31, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Why is it called Kindle?

Such a weird name, but Wikipedia doe not like trivia sections, where such info would go. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.245.46.128 (talk) 21:04, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

I believe (and I could be wrong) it was called the Kindle because of what wiktionary:kindle means. Specifically "To start (a fire) or light (a torch).". Something about starting a fire under ebooks, or literacy, or the desire to read. --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 22:04, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Because that's the one thing you can do with real books but not the Kindle -V. Vecera, 04/2008 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.73.65.172 (talk) 17:49, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Actually, it's the second definition of kindle - "to excite; stir up or set going; animate; rouse; inflame: He kindled their hopes of victory." Amazon is trying to "kindle" interest in e-books and their wispernet system. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.189.82.18 (talk) 16:21, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Reception section?

Given the profile of the product, would it be appropriate to detail how it was received? If I recall correctly, there were reviews in both the New York Times and Wall Street Journal. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.69.118.1 (talk) 21:55, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

AZW file format Merger

I've proposed that the contents of AZW file format (all one sentence) be merged into this article. --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 21:57, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

I agree with this proposal. White 720 (talk) 00:22, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Agree also. I expected AZW file format to grow larger when details were available, but it doesn't look like this is happening. Brianhe (talk) 01:51, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Done. Everything that was in the AZW article is already here on the Kindle article so I did not copy and information. --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 02:20, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Self-referencing link

AZW redirects here, yet is included as a link in this article. Seems to me that an article about AZW needs to be created (by someone who knows what he's talking about, unlike me), or the link removed. 67.96.20.158 (talk) 15:47, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

hold on

No mention of how Amazon was deleting unflattering reviews of its product (on its own site, obviously) soon after the Kindle was released? How about the Amazon shills who went around criticising such reviews? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 138.163.0.42 (talk) 19:13, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

This is why user-generated content and reviews on online retail stores are not suitable for sourcing. In this case, if this reporting of this activity by reputable news sources, then it could be added. Flowanda | Talk 01:40, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure Amazon has a standing policy of deleting reviews that are clearly by people who havn't bought the product; this doesn't just apply to their own stuff. --81.158.148.64 (talk) 00:29, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Well, given that large parts of this Wikipedia article have a heavy whiff of corporate spin about them, it's hardly surprising that Amazon would do that on their own website. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.108.233.249 (talk) 19:18, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

I fail to see how accusations like this are worthy of an encyclopedic entry, unless there has been some sort of report by a reputable news source on this alleged activity. Until there is, I would suggest no mention of "deleting unflattering reviews" in this entry. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.7.198.226 (talk) 03:59, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Sales Numbers?

Anyone know how many of these things have been sold? Enough to call it a success yet? Paul, in Saudi (talk) 17:04, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Well Amazon is selling 10% of its books as kindle books, that's a significant indication of what they've achieved, they've also sold out, another good indication (or logistical miscalculation if you want to look at it that way).. --Wmspareaccount (talk) 23:25, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Amazon has fairly consistently refused to release sales numbers for the Kindle, despite it being widely considered a major success. No one really knows why, I myself would be interested in the actual number sold. Pstanton 03:17, 5 January 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pstanton (talk • contribs)

Editing wikipedia on the Kindle?

Amazon's product page indicates the Kindle has free access to Wikipedia, but it does not indicate if contributing to Wikipedia (editing articles, uploading content, etc) is possible. It would be nice to see this information in the article, if anyone has it. Gh5046 (talk) 21:20, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

i am doimg so now but i would not recommend it. it is hideously slow and painful. i would rather pull my nose hairs out —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.21.198.64 (talk) 17:56, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Added explanation of why statement of 4GB implied SDHC was removed

The mention of 4GB implying support for SDHC was removed, because 4GB does not imply SDHC. Non-SDHC SD cards can support 4GB. 24.26.128.185 (talk) 17:31, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Tech specs

The section Amazon Kindle#Technical specifications is redundant, as the infobox lists the specifications is a much more readable format. There is no text in the section which is not already listed in the infobox. Unless there is serious disagreement, I think that the section should be removed. Yngvarr (c) 11:13, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Backup?

If one's kindle is lost or damaged, does the user lose his entire library?Sylvain1972 (talk) 16:02, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

In a way, kinda sorta. All your Amazon Kindle purchases are stored on the Amazon website through your Amazon account ("Manage my Kindle"), so if you loose your library, you can re-download them (for free). You will loose bookmarks, annotations, etc; anything not an intrinsic part of the book. If you've downloaded free e-books (like from Gutenberg), you'll need to reinstall them (or store non-Amazon books on a memory card as a backup procedure). Yngvarr (t) (c) 16:07, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Why no kindle sales in Canada?

One GLARING deficiency in this wiki article is an explanation of the legalities around why Amazon can't, or won't, sell the Kindle to Canadians, or why you need to use a US-based credit card to buy the e-books to read on the Kindle.

On a related tangent, it's supposedly against the merchant agreement that vendors have with credit card companies to refuse a transaction based on the card holder's address or country of residence, yet it seems that Amazon (and possibly other merchants) get away with it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.12.201.85 (talk) 15:48, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

This is probably an intellectual property rights disagreement between either the US and Canada or Amazon and Canada. When something like an Ebook isn't sold in a country, it's because the seller is afraid the target country will not adequately protect their products. Puerto Rico for example is another place that gets screwed by these laws, there are many american products that you can not buy in Puerto Rico because Puerto Rico isn't considered a secure market for them, such as many Dell computers. --Wmspareaccount (talk) 23:22, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Ahhhh no. The reason the Kindle isn't sold outside the U.S. is because they don't have a contract for Whispernet service in Canada. Pstanton 20:24, 10 January 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pstanton (talk • contribs)

Even now that the international version has been released, the Kindle is still not available in Canada. However I haven't seen any explanation of why this is anywhere. TastyCakes (talk) 00:21, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

It's now (17Nov2009) to available in Canada, at least the original US version will ship to Canada although with reduced functionality (no web browsing). The delay seems to have been getting a favorable deal with Canada's limited choice of cell phone providers. 24.87.93.229 (talk) 21:30, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Use in various countries

I've added a note about UK availability, after finding nothing definite and needing to look up articles for myself.

I'm also interested to know if US purchasers of a Kindle can use it OK when in the UK etc. Do they still have everything they downloaded? Please add a note if you know.

--GwydionM (talk) 16:48, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

You can't use Whispernet, and aside from power conversion requirements, it'll still work. There's no "phone home". Yngvarr (t) (c) 16:51, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. Could you please add that to the main article? --GwydionM (talk) 15:30, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

With respect, I see no reason to put it in the article. The availability section already mentions that Whispernet is not available outside the United States. Yngvarr (t) (c) 00:26, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

Lead image needs to be updated to Kindle 2

Just FYI Gary King (talk) 21:46, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Unless someone is willing to post an NFCC image (I'm not), I probably wait until it's in people's hands, and then they can take an photograph of their own device. Yngvarr (t) (c) 22:14, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Yep, I'm just saying, it should be updated whenever a free one is available. Gary King (talk) 23:44, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Device Topic Split

Should the information about the device be split off into an article called "Amazon Kindle (Device)", and a second article created called "Amazon Kindle 2"? This article then becomes a repository for information about both devices, such as Whispernet and the store, etc., while the two articles about each device contain information about the hardware, such as battery life, display, etc. Billyoneal (talk) 16:29, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

what format are images in?

this would be good wiki worthy. the format of the images in the different e-book formats. Obviously .txt does not support images, but do the other formats? can we have a table that compares them? TY —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.125.28.119 (talk) 03:07, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Image and infobox

There is now a new image of the Kindle 2, but the infobox still reflects the original Kindle specs. Should the infobox be updated for the new Kindle 2? Yngvarr (t) (c) 22:39, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

It's mentioned on xkcd!

i don't know how to write these things properly, and so i just wanted to mention that xkcd mentioned it in the most recent thing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by RowanEvans (talk • contribs) 16:56, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

The XKCD reference demonstrates the enormous potential for Kindle, with a further sentence demonstating this it will add to the article.72.162.48.2 (talk) 19:10, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

I don't disagree with adding this. But whoever tagged the original xkcd refs as "vandalism" needs to review WP:VAND for a clear explanation of what vandalism is and is not. Anyways, I see it has been re-added. Yngvarr (t) (c)

Not everything needs to be documented as it has appeared in "popular culture." Source: another xkcd comic. White 720 (talk) 22:00, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Kindle vs Kindle 2

Does anyone think a side by side image of the two versions is a good idea?

How about this?

• 
  Original Kindle
• 
  Kindle 2

--T1980 (talk) 01:34, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

The sidebar has been updated such that it is a mish-mash of some specs from Kindle 1 and some from Kindle 2 so that it is correct for neither. This needs to be split in two, one for each version. Jlick (talk) 04:06, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

I don't think the infobox is a good solution at this point, it would just clutter up the article. Maybe a table? Yngvarr (t) (c) 10:06, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

I'd like to point out the picture of the Kindle 2 is awful. Can we please return to the Picture of Kindle 1? It would still be an article on the Kindle, but the Kindle 2 images are of appalling quality. --Pstanton (talk) 17:57, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Please add wikipedia capability to this page

Unless page is wrong, the Kindle still features wikipedia access. Shouldn't this be mentioned on the Kindle's wikipedia page? The Amazon Kindle page does not mention this at all!

Quote from ad page for Kindle:

Wireless Access to Wikipedia
Kindle also includes free built-in access to the world's most exhaustive and up-to-date encyclopedia--Wikipedia.org. With Kindle in hand, looking up people, places, events, and more has never been easier. It gives whole new meaning to the phrase walking encyclopedia.

Thanks! -Dutchwiki (talk) 03:05, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

You know, I bet Douglas Adams didn't expect THHG to be made reality this fast. Yet, here it is. Zazaban (talk) 03:52, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Editing wikipedia on the Kindle 2?

I have asked this question before concerning the first Kindle. Does the second one have the ability to edit Wikipedia, however unpleasant as it may be? This would be useful information for the article. gh5046 (talk) 23:31, 27 February 2009 (UTC) The Kindle 2 does have the ability to edit Wikipedia; however, as far as I can tell, you can't edit while logged in. I recently edited Treasure Island (disambiguation) with my Kindle (and then as a logged in user on my computer). The edit by 8.18.145.239 in the history is the Kindle edit. Mario777Zelda (talk) 00:17, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Storage (memory) capacity

According to Amazon's Kindle 2 page: "Storage: 2GB internal (approximately 1.4GB available for user content)."

According to Wikipedia's page (in the sidebar): "64 MB RAM, 256 MB (180 MB available) internal storage, SD expansion slot. Complete back up archive of all purchased material archived on Amazon Cloud."

Was this for the original Kindle? Can that be noted or can this info be updated?

I see no mention of an SD expansion slot in the Getting Started Guide or in the full User's Guide. Again I suspect that this information is old and from the original Kindle.

I realize that the information is correct in the main body of the article, but the side bar should also be clear for people who are using this page to get a quick reference. How will we differentiate between these two versions' technical details without confusing people coming for a quick reference? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fogus (talk • contribs) 23:15, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Images of kindle book text and copyright

The current main image image for the Kindle has the text blurred because it is a copyrighted work. Maybe we can replace the image with text from a public domain work such as Shakespeare or a John Donne poem.

The image I added to the page with the sample of large text is the opening lines to the novel Paul Clifford which was published in 1830 --T1980 (talk) 14:17, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Should The Kindle 2 Have Its Own Article?

Just thining that a new article should be made for the Kindle 2 instead of having the topic within the broader article, just to eliminate some confusion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Top2percent (talk • contribs) 17:45, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

In my opinion, the two devices are so similar and closely related that it's more helpful to keep them together in one article.JimC1946 (talk) 10:06, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Table of version comparisons

I was thinking of a table such as below, to help compare the different versions. Any comments? I don't have the Kindle 1 specs handy, so the text is just placeholders. I think something like this would be useful.

Comparison between versions

Model	CPU	Memory	Expansion
Kindle	CPU specs	Memory specs	Expansion specs
Kindle 2	Freescale ARM-11 532 MHz	2.0gb	No external memory

Yngvarr (t) (c) 21:23, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

If there are more than a few specs to compare on it maybe more appropriate to use the different models as columns rather than rows so as to prevent a very wide table. Also long and thin will allow for more detail in each cell.

E.g.

Comparison between Kindle versions

Spec	Kindle	Kindle 2
CPU	CPU specs	Freescale ARM-11 532 MHz
Memory	Memory specs	2.0gb
Expansion	Expansion specs	No external memory

--WebHamster 21:26, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

That looks fine. I think there are probably about five specs that are more useful to compare in this manner, so the table won't be too big. I'll let this stew a few days, just in case anyone else wants to comment. Yngvarr (t) (c) 22:16, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

The size of Kindle screen

On the right side there is a picture that only gives information on the size of Kindle screen in local American measuring units. It would be good to have some information in international measuring units (mm!).Crex1 (talk) 12:45, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Feel free to add them as a parenthetical stat, keeping in mind Wikipedia:Mos#Units_of_measurement. Yngvarr (t) (c) 12:56, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Checked Wikipedia:Mos#Units_of_measurement and as far as I see it so long as Kindle is only sold in The States it should indeed be imperial units. This would of course change if Kindle is ever sold outside the US - then SI would take preference. --Krischik ^T 12:42, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Changing structure of this article

This article as it currently stands is an odd mixture of device specification, platform description and so on - the info box is a prime example of this - do we plan to list every device in it? Maybe we need a platform article - that covers the platform and it's history and a device article that covers the hardware? --Cameron Scott (talk) 16:18, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

There's no reason why a custom infobox couldn't be created, one that fits the generic specs of the devices, since they're fairly similar. I'd break the "Kindle", "Kindle 2", etc, into 3rd level headings under "Revisions" or something. And TBH, I'd not sectionize the new DX. Other than a larger screen, it is basically a "special edition" of the Kindle 2, and isn't meant to replace the Kindle 2, like the K2 did to the original. Yngvarr (t) (c) 17:45, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Source code release

Are you sure Amazon released all the source code, or only that of the gpl applications involved? Amazon stated "Amazon is pleased to make available to you for download an archive file of the machine readable source code ("Source Code") corresponding to modified software packages used in the Kindle device. By downloading the Source Code, you agree to the following"- (Bolds ar mine). Package seems to contain only pre-existing free applications (but I am not sure). Inconexo (talk) 16:48, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Kindle considered a Vertical Marketing System (VMS) ...

I'd like to add a section noting that an Amazon Kindle is essentially a vertical marketing system (VMS), in that a Kindle (Amazon, actually) comprises a producer, wholesaler and retailer acting as a unified system. Anyone else see Kindles in that light? If you're not knowledgeable about Amazon's Digital Text Platform, that should also be included in the discussion. Thanks in advance for disagreement or agreement. :-)Seankinn (talk) 05:00, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

IMO, the Kindle system does not constitute a VMS because most book authors would not have anything to do with the distribution beyond their agreement with the publisher. Only Amazon and the publishers would be in a discussion of what goes into the Kindle, and indeed, on Amazon. Anyway, in the strictest definition of VMS, it would not apply because Amazon does not author books. In any case, I believe this information would not belong in the article on wikipedia. --Mizst (talk) 21:28, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Btw, I'd like to note that in the Digital Text Platform, the authors do not own Amazon and cannot change how it works for their mutual benefits. Furthermore, Amazon is effectively bypassing traditional publishers with this platform, thus competing at the publishers' expense. As members of the channel are competing with one another, it is not VMS. --Mizst (talk) 21:41, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Sales?

Has Amazon ever released any numbers on how many Kindles have been sold?JimC1946 (talk) 17:34, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

The Kindle is not available outside the US due to import/export laws and other restrictions.

I can not think of any law that restrict Amazon from selling Kindle the device outside US. The reference only points to the Amazon FAQ which can not be considered to be interdependent prove that there are laws involved. As far as I see it the quoted reference is just marketing talk to cover up an unpopular business strategy.

What might not have made headline news in the US it the fact that Amazon tried to sell in Germany and the deal did not fail because of laws but because of the cost for the OTA delivery.

I suggest to remove the "import/export laws" part and explain what the "other restrictions" relay are.--Krischik ^T 06:22, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Mysteriously removing books

Incorporate this into the page somewhere?

http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/07/17/amazoncom-plays-big-brother-with-a-famous-e-book/?ref=technology —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.204.95.59 (talk) 21:40, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Also this: "Amazon to World: We are Not Evil Totalitarians" by Derek Thompson of the Atlantic on Jul 20 2009 (link is to theatlantic.com). R. Baley (talk) 16:49, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Content sources

I just notice the "Content sources" and think they are over optimistic. For example I regularly follow the Mobipocket forums and I can say that only the demos are Kindle Kindle compatible - the actual books which you have to pay for are not. For a while a Kindle customer a day has asked for a refund (Now the forum is dead as customer service is done via E-Mail).

The notes too are misleading - yes Amazon owns Mobipocket so they can sell books in both shops - but that does not mean the user has more choice in books. I think Mobipocket should be removed.

Also the fictionwise notes should state that ony DRM-free books are suitable for Kindle

For me this does look like Amazon Advocates wanting an extra long list no matter what. --Krischik ^T 09:45, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

I merged that in from another page. That doesn't mean it needs to stay- please feel free to prune as necessary. tedder (talk) 15:15, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Dimensions?

What are the dimensions of this item? It says that the diagonal of the Kindle DX is 9.7 in. Does this only include the display area, or also the plastic around it? I've done some measurements with some papers, and found out that an A5 paper has a diagonal about 1 cm longer than the Kindle DX diagonal. Are the height/width quotient the same as for an A5 paper, or does it differ in some way? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.247.11.156 (talk) 14:51, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

Other Wikis

I've heard (and seen confirmed here) that Kindle has access to wikipedia. Q1: Does it have access to non-English wikipedias, or to wikitravel, wiktionary, other wikis part of the wikipedia project? Q2: Is there a list somewhere of all the sites/domains Kindle has access to? Q3: This access is free, same as the store access? Identity0 (talk) 23:59, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

The Kindle 2 (and presumably the original Kindle) has free access to the internet in general; however, some sites (e.g., YouTube) will not display normally due to the technical limitations of the Kindle. Mario777Zelda (talk) 04:19, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Links

I deleted an "external link" which was linked to the webcomic XKCD, apparently a strip with some tangential reference to the Kindle Device. I cannot in any way see how the webcomic entry was relevant just because it mentioned the device. Furthermore, I don't think linking to a comic-strip is meaningful for an encyclopedia entry on the device itself. If one wished to reference the device's cultural applicability or some such, then this might be a valid link. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.101.201.172 (talk) 04:31, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

iSlate comparison in the intro

To avoid an edit war, I thought it best to discuss the issue here... I think it's completely inappropriate to include mention of a rumoured device in the intro of another device. It is crystal balling at its most clear cut. Wikipedia articles are meant to be about what is - not what is rumoured to be. Nothing is known about the "iSlate" beyond rumour, even its name, and I think mentioning it in the article at all is a mistake, never mind the lede. TastyCakes (talk) 18:36, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Kindle Default Dictionaries

The Content section of the article contains an incorrect statement:

"The device is sold with electronic editions of its owner's manual and the New Oxford American Dictionary. Unfortunately, owners cannot use a dictionary in a language other than English as the 'default lookup dictionary'."

The Amazon website sells dictionaries in Spanish, French, and German that can be made the default dictionary. I have purchased the Spanish and French dictionaries, and have been able to use them as my default dictionaries.

In addition to these foreign languages, Amazon sells specialized English-language dictionaries (e.g., dictionary of medical terms, a dictionary of terms that appear in the Bible) that can be made the Kindle default dictionary. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Erodriguezcustodio (talk • contribs) 20:01, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Archiving

Does anyone object to me setting up automatic archiving for this page using MiszaBot? Unless otherwise agreed, I would set it to archive threads that have been inactive for 30 days and keep the last ten threads.--Oneiros (talk) 20:05, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Not me, it does seem to be getting too long and it doesn't look like anyone wants to go and manually archive this stuff.. TastyCakes (talk) 15:39, 28 January 2010 (UTC)