Stephen wrote:
> I think that it is quite good and there have been few words that I could 
> not find an entry for. 

I'd say about 90% of the words I try to look up are in the Kindle 
dictionary. Of the 10% that aren't, I'm guessing at least half are made-up 
words (since I'm reading sci-fi). Most of the words I look up, I know what 
they mean, and I just don't know the definition.

The Kindle comes with the New Oxford American Dictionary, and you can buy 
others for some nominal fee.

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   Serving Suggestion:
     "Don't serve this any more. It's awful."

Post a reply to this message

Neeum Zawan wrote:
> If you use Firefox, I'm sure there's an extension for that.

I just type it into google. It's not frequent enough that I feel I have to 
streamline it from ten keystrokes down to two.

> Actually, I don't. My phone cost about $25. I'm not a cell phone
> guy. Good point, though.

Yeah, I have a document on my Kindle which is basically a calendar. If I 
want to take notes, I highlight the date and put in a "margin" note.

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   Serving Suggestion:
     "Don't serve this any more. It's awful."

Post a reply to this message

Stephen wrote:
> scince that is the only complaint I have, I’ll keep it to mysel
f.

Good job on that!

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   Serving Suggestion:
     "Don't serve this any more. It's awful."

Post a reply to this message

Invisible wrote:
> A CD-quality digital signal is 44,100 samples per second. That's only 
> about 5x higher. Are you seriously telling me it takes 5x the power to 
> do that?

In addition to what Andrel said, remember that when you're listening to 
music, you're almost constantly using the DAC. When you're talking on the 
phone, the output DAC is turned off while you're speaking, and the output DC 
is turned off between words.

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   Serving Suggestion:
     "Don't serve this any more. It's awful."

Post a reply to this message

scott wrote:
> Is it valid to use I/me to decide "x and I"/"x and me" correctness? 

Yes.
-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   Serving Suggestion:
     "Don't serve this any more. It's awful."

Post a reply to this message

Invisible wrote:
> It's not "arrogant". It's "product lock-in". It's a feature. ;-)

Actually, "mobi" is essentially the same as "prc", which is a Sony format. 
It's not lock-in, it's just an older standard.

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   Serving Suggestion:
     "Don't serve this any more. It's awful."

Post a reply to this message

On 18/01/2011 4:27 PM, Darren New wrote:
> Stephen wrote:
>> scince that is the only complaint I have, I’ll keep it to myself.
>
> Good job on that!
>

;-)

-- 
Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

>>> Obviously they're not doing this on purpose,
>>
>> why would the publishing bussiness act different than the music bussiness?
>
> Because with ebooks, it's easier to self publish than it is for
> musicians to do so.

I'm not sure I agree with that.

It's pretty easy to write a document and put it online somewhere. It's 
pretty easy to make some music and put it online somewhere. Either way, 
you don't really need a publisher.

If you want to earn money, and if you want publicity, you probably need 
a publisher.

I don't really see how ebooks are different from music, video, or 
anything else.

Post a reply to this message

On 18/01/2011 4:24 PM, Darren New wrote:
> I'm guessing at least half are made-up words (since I'm reading sci-fi).

That is a proble with SF.


-- 
Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On 18-1-2011 17:03, Neeum Zawan wrote:
> andrel<byt### [at] gmailcom>  writes:
>
>>>> Making customers have to re-buy material because they lost access would
>>>> be very poor customer service indeed.
>>>
>>> Obviously they're not doing this on purpose,
>>
>> why would the publishing bussiness act different than the music bussiness?
>
> Because with ebooks, it's easier to self publish than it is for
> musicians to do so.

It is easier to write a book than to record a demo or album, but the 
publishing is just as easy.

>
> Most of the reason we needed publishers was as a means to get our books
> into stores.

Just as you need the record company to get your record played on a 
radiostation. If it isn't played in general it won't reach the shops. 
Perhaps with the exception of established bands, but there won't be a 
chance to get established.

> According to a lot of people, all the marketing they do
> rarely helps sales.

That might be different indeed for a five minute multiple play and a 2 
days attention span (mostly) single play item.

> What does help is the ability to get bookstores to
> put your book in an accessible place. This whole ebooks thing is
> changing that.

Yes, as it is changing the access to the public for startup bands.

> The other benefit of publishers is editing, etc.

In short I see hardly a difference. Besides my remark was on the 
financial side. Those that own rights do their best to sell their IP as 
many times as possible. If that means selling it to the same person 
multiple times makes no difference. I have not heard of a record company 
that released a best of album and then said to a customer: I see you 
have already paid your dues for the IP for 80% of it, so you get a 
discount. In contrast what they will do is create a 'best off' with 1 or 
two unreleased songs so the fans will buy it anyway even if they own the 
rest. With books that is more difficult, but I think they do the same 
with collections of short stories if they can.

In both cases the main problem is reaching potential listeners/readers. 
When that is really solved publishers and record companies cease to 
exist. Until then they will use every trick, possibly with the exception 
of blackmail and bribery, to stop that from happening.

The second problem is getting the author/musician paid.

Post a reply to this message