Joe Wikert's Publishing 2020 Blog

"iBookstore vs Kindle Bookstore" & "Which Device Wins?"

Here are two somewhat related questions I'm being asked a lot lately:

#1: Which bookstore experience do you prefer, Apple's iBookstore or Amazon's Kindle bookstore?

#2: Which e-reader device do you believe is going to "win"?

My answers to both of these might surprise you.

Regarding the first question, I thought when I bought my iPad I'd never buy another ebook from Amazon.  Boy, was I wrong!  I've owned an iPad for almost 5 months and all but one of my ebook purchases have been from Amazon.  And the one iBookstore purchase I made is one I'd like to take a mulligan on and buy from Amazon instead.

Why?  One (hyphenated) word: multi-platform.

Although I'm extremely down on Amazon's continued investment in the e-reader hardware space, I'm a huge fan of their ebook business.  (Well, all except for the crazy DRM they still implement...but that's more a problem with publishers than Amazon.)

Towards the end of my Kindle usage I was feeling pretty stupid for buying all those Kindle ebooks.  Now I'm glad I did.  Anything I bought from Amazon can be read on my iPad, my iPhone, my Mac, a Windows computer and pretty much any other piece of hardware I'm likely to use.  Has anyone seen Apple's iBooks app for Windows?  How about the iBooks app for the Blackberry?  Better yet, do you think there's a chance Apple will release an iBooks app for the Android platform?  No, none of these exist today and the likelihood of them ever coming about is slim to none.  Steve Jobs makes some awesome products but he's not a fan of cross-platform usage.

So although the iBooks app is nice, I refuse to paint myself into a corner and be limited to a single platform.  Gee, that sounds like what I used to say about the Kindle platform, which leads me to the second question...

I'm lumping all dedicated e-readers (e.g., Kindle) as well as multi-purpose devices (e.g., iPad) into my thinking.  Sure, eInk is great in the sun, but as I like to say, if it's a sunny day I'd rather be doing something other than sitting around reading!  With that in mind, my answer to the "which device wins" question is...Android.

Yep, that's right, I'm picking the Android platform.  And yes, I know there's no single Android "device" and as of today you can't even buy an Android tablet.  But when the Android tablets start rolling out, I'll be exploring them for my next purchase.

I have about 10 months left on my current AT&T/iPhone agreement, so next summer looks like the right time for me to make the platform jump to Android for both phone and tablet.  The Android app market is still pretty thin and that gives developers even more time to fill in all the holes.  Everyone I know who has already switched from iPhone to Android loves the latter.  I'll probably also be ready to buy a new tablet next summer and you can bet the Android prices will be attractive compared to the iPad ones.

Then there's the Google Editions release that always seems to be "a couple of months from now."  You can bet Editions will support all hardware platforms, which probably means when it hits I may need to reconsider my answer to question #1!

Why Are eReader Apps Stuck in the DOS Era?

Imagine only being able to open one window or application at a time on your laptop.  Work for a bit in Excel and when you need to switch to Word, you've got to closer the former before you open the latter.  Or what if you want to open two spreadsheets at the same time?  Imagine you had to close the first before you could open the second.

That's silly, right?  On a regular computer, yes, it is.  So why do we accept those sorts of restrictions on our ereader devices?  I can't open two books simultaneously on my old Kindle or my new iPad.  I have to close the first book before I can open the second.

I know what you're thinking...  When you use your Kindle, iPad or other device you're only interested in opening one book at a time.  That's fine, but what about being able to open that book in two different places?  You've always been hold a spot with your finger and flip to another location in a print book.  It's so easy we often do it without thinking.  That includes the index, btw.  How often do you hold your place in a print book, flip back to the index to look something up, then simultaneously open another page in the book without ever having to close the original page?  I do that pretty regularly in print.  Good luck doing it in an ereader app.

Here's another common scenario: you're using a cookbook or reading a how-to-guide with step-by-step instructions.  There are definitely times when it's handy to be able to flip back and forth between an illustration and the written steps, for example.  Again, easy to do in print but impossible with today's ereader apps.

Now let's go back to the "one open book at a time" problem I started out with.  What if you're a student and you've got an etextbook as well as another ebook on the same topic.  Why shouldn't you be able to open them both at the same time to compare related explanations, diagrams, code, etc.?

I'm amazed that with today's state-of-the-art ereaders, you can't do something as simple as have the screen split into two panes for different views into the same book, let alone having two different books open at the same time.

Why am I highlighting such a simple missing feature?  Because it shows just how far we still need to go to implement common print reading capabilities in today's ereader apps.  I'm still a huge advocate for richer content models that truly leverage the ereader device itself, but I'd love to see Amazon, Apple or anyone else who's paying attention to build more basic functionality into their apps.  As it currently stands, every time I open the Kindle or iBooks apps on my iPad I feel like I'm using a time machine, heading back to the late 80's when DOS was king, only one app at a time could be opened on my 80286 computer, the music was bad and the hair was big.

Living through the 80's once was painful enough.  eReader developers, please, oh please bring us into the modern era by adding some cool functionality into your apps, OK?

The Truth About Paid Models, by Matt Mitchell, Founder & CEO of MediaPass

The following is a guest blog post written by Matt Mitchell, Founder & CEO of MediaPass.  I love what he has to say about the importance of balancing free vs. paid content as well as making sure advertising is a component of the overall revenue picture:

The process of launching, running and attracting paid subscriptions isn't a competency that online publications generally have. This was one of our assumptions when we started MediaPass but we had no idea the extent to which it would prove correct. We also had no idea that some of the smartest publishers in the world would commit some of the most egregious subscription strategy offenses. So I've decided to point out a couple of the more basic mistakes being made and also discuss the way publishers should be thinking about paid subscriptions.

Please Tease Me!
One of the greatest myths about charging for online content is that a publication will lose traffic. This is not to say that declines in traffic aren't possible. There are actually many ways to lose visitors and the Times of London picked perhaps the best: they ignored the fact that users need to be drawn in by the actual content. Go to their site and click on one of their sections such as Business or Life. The site will immediately take you to a subscription wall before you even see if there's an article you’d like to read. I'm not kidding. Check it out. This is not a good conversation to have with your readers:

Times: "Please pay us."
Visitor: "Why?"
Times: "Because we're the Times."
Visitor: "What articles are behind your pay wall?"
Times: "Pay us and find out."

People generally buy a subscription because they are interested in a specific article. When you're at the airport shop deciding which magazine to buy, do you pick one because every article in the glossary is something that interests you? No, you pick a magazine that has one or two articles that grab your interest. You do this because you are guaranteed to like at least something in the suite of content you paid for – even if the rest of the magazine isn't so great.

"Switching" to a Paid Model
Whoever said that free and paid models had to be mutually exclusive? Publishers don't need to "switch" to a paid model. Subscription elements should simply be added to better monetize the website as a whole. The key for any publication is finding the optimal mix of free vs. paid content that is right for their site. And it's rarely 100% one or the other.

Why Remove Advertising?
Some sites are now offering a paid model where users won't be forced to see ads if they are a subscriber. There is no benefit – either financial or usage related – to doing this. The core reason why online ads don't monetize well is that people have evolved over the last 10 years to the point where their brain doesn't even see ads anymore. Unless the ad is incredibly intrusive, users don't mind it being on the page. By taking the ad-free route, publishers lose additional revenue and get little-to-nothing in return. Advertisers will also pay much more for subscribed users because they are more engaged. So, publications that do this are getting rid of ad real estate that has doubled in value.

Many publishers are surprised when we tell them not to abandon their advertising. We think of advertising as a "why not." Ad monetization is very low but every little bit helps. There are actually many good ad networks and other companies trying to improve the poor performance of advertising. We're glad they are continuing their efforts because we all have the same goal of improving publishers' revenue.

Ads to Oranges
Forgive me for the cheesy title, but initial subscription results can't be compared perfectly to advertising monetization. The reason is simply that subscription revenue builds on itself over time through renewals and ads don't. The WSJ.com had only a few thousand subscriptions when they launched a decade ago. They now have well over a million. Luckily for the WSJ and others starting to charge for content, subscription monetization is usually so much better that it beats the performance of ads even when handicapped in the first few months.

There is a lot of speculation and commentary on initial numbers of large sites like the Times. They've been making the mistake of giving their great content away for a long time now. Unfortunately for them, they don't get to simply press a button and immediately recapture all the money they lost. They have clearly made some subscription process mistakes but luckily they are all errors that can be fixed. They have at least made the right move this year by beginning to charge for content. Now it's time for them to refine their approach and grow their subscription base the way the WSJ has. And I think they will.

Matt Mitchell is Founder and CEO of MediaPass, a service which helps online publishers increase revenues through the use of customized subscription model.

Digital Publishing & POD: What's "Good Enough"?

Over the course of this summer I've read a couple of great Yankees books: Munson and The Bronx is Burning.  The former was read on my iPad and the latter, because it's not available digitally, was read from a dead tree.  After seeing countless references in both to another Yankee classic, The Bronx Zoo, I decided that should be on my reading list too.  Unfortunately for me, that's another book that's not available digitally.  I also was unable to find a copy at the local brick-and-mortars or even the second-hand bookstore, which got me thinking...

What's the definition of "good enough" in the digital and print-on-demand (POD) worlds?  Ideally, when I couldn't find The Bronx Zoo in my local bookstore they would have offered to create a POD copy for me while I sip a cup of coffee.  On-site POD solutions like the Espresso machine have been "a year or so away" and I'm starting to think they always will be.  Not only are they prohibitively expensive but I'm also told they require 24x7 on-site tech support; think of the copy machine guy who's frequently at your office, only worse.

Are we over-thinking this?  I don't need an offset-quality (or near offset-quality) copy of The Bronx Zoo to be happy.  I'd take a copy machine-quality one.  And with FedEx/Kinko's outlets everywhere, why hasn't a partnership between brick-and-mortar bookstores and Kinko's developed by now?  Borders doesn't have the book?  No problem.  Pay at the counter (or online) and pick up a copy machine-quality version as you pass Kinko's on your way home.  No time to stop at Kinko's?  They'll be glad to put your copy on a FedEx Ground truck that's heading to your neighborhood later today anyway; for an additional small fee they'll bring it to you, that same day.

Isn't this Amazon's worst nightmare?  Btw, yes, I know I could order the book on Amazon and have it tomorrow.  That's not my point.  I'm trying to address those situations where you're looking for instant gratification but the local brick-and-mortar stores can't help you...today.  Again, I've seen plenty of POD-produced boks and they're great, but they require a hefty investment in hardware.  So what about an option that creates something that's not quite as elegant?  It would still be bound with a cover, although that cover might just be one-color.

Then there's the "good enough" question in ebook readers.  Thanks to competitive pressure from B&N Amazon recently reduced the price on their Kindles.  And then they announced the $139 wifi-only Kindle.  I think Amazon realizes they can't compete with the flexibility of the iPad; there's only so far the monochrome, animation-free Kindle can go.  And a lot of people are interested in a one-trick pony like the Kindle, so perhaps they'll continue to have that niche...until Apple creates smaller and less expensive iPads.

Yes, the $139 wifi-only Kindle is sold out, but if Amazon really wants to create an ereader for the masses they should come out with a sub-$100 device with no connectivity other than a USB port.  Just about everyone on the planet now has a smartphone.  Why not let this bare bones Kindle tether to a smartphone (or computer) for content purchases?  Imagine how many $79 tethering Kindles Amazon could sell.  Heck, I'd buy one for each of my kids.

An ereader with built-in connectivity is nice; market dominance is nicer though.

P.S. -- Btw, Amazon, if eInk is still the production bottleneck, get that problem fixed before it's too late.  You've still got a chance to own what's left of the dedicated ereader market, but if you don't act soon Apple will completely clobber you.

Maybe Amazon Just Doesn't Want Us to Gift Kindle Books

This is stupid.  Just flat out stupid.  I'm talking about the fact that you can gift a print book to a friend on Amazon but not a Kindle book.  This article talks about the issue and suggests one workaround is to have all your friends in your Kindle network and share the books with them.  The key, of course, is that you're limited to 5 "friends", which means it's not much of a workaround for most folks.

Another workaround is to give your friend an Amazon gift card.  The popular spin is, "that way your friend can buy what they want, not what you pick."  Woo-hoo.  Aren't gift cards mostly intended for givers too lazy to think of (and shop for) a good gift?

Amazon undoubtedly loves gift cards though.  First of all, just like every other retailer offering gift cards, they get their money now, well before they ever receive an order against it.  Secondly, there's a good chance the recipient will never use the full value of the card.  That's a tiny profit on an individual basis but adds up quickly if you're talking about millions of partially-used cards.

So why is it that I can gift a Kindle itself but not a Kindle book? Speculate all you want about legal ramifications and DRM but what if it has nothing to do with any of that?  What if Amazon just doesn't want to encourage Kindle book gift-giving?

Someone receiving a gift card might buy something other than a Kindle book with it.  Don't forget that Amazon loses money when it sells many of those Kindle editions.  From a profitability point of view, Amazon is much happier selling you the print edition of that book than the Kindle edition.

Here's the problem with all this: Before too long one ebook retailer will decide that gifting is an important customer feature.  I forgot to include this in my list last week but I believe it's something every retailer will have to offer to remain competitive.

So, Amazon, why not take the lead on this?  Let everyone gift Kindle editions to their friends and family.  If you don't do it soon someone else will and you'll be perceived as a follower.

P.S. -- Kudos to Amazon on the dictionary feature they added to the latest version of their Kindle app for the iPad.  It's a much better service than the clumsy dictionary offered on my Kindle v1. 

How Will eBookstores Earn Your Loyalty?

Where I buy a print book often comes down to convenience (which store is closest), pricing, availability (is the book in stock?) and loyalty programs (e.g., member discounts).  The choice of a brick-and-mortar vs. an online store adds in the component of urgency; do you need the book today or can it wait till tomorrow?

I'm buying ebooks almost exclusively now.  In fact, I can't even recall the last print book I bought for myself.  Although I ditched my Kindle on day one with my iPad, I do most of my book reading in the Kindle app on the iPad.  Although Amazon has a major selection advantage of the iBookstore, Apple will catch up at some point.  Then there's B&N and Borders.  Both of them have iPad apps and ebook stores.  And don't forget about Google and their upcoming Editions program as well a host of other up-and-coming e-tailers.

So here's the question: With all these ebook retailers just a click away from each other, what must they do to earn your business on a repeat basis?  This is a critical question for all the e-tailers looking for loyal customers.  I've come up with a list of some of the items that affect my buying habits:

Reader Features -- I'm referring to the bells and whistles the vendor builds into their ereader apps.  Today they're all about the same but I believe this will be a critical point of distinction in the years ahead.  Integration of social networks (easily sending excerpts to your friends, tweeting them, etc.) is just a simple example.  I'm willing to bet the features we'll see in ereader apps in a year or two will make today's apps look pretty basic.

Sharable Content -- B&N took the first steps of this for the Nook but that's not going to cut it long term.  Customers need to be able to share their purchases with all their friends, one by one, of course, just like they can with a print book.  Which leads to...

Eliminating DRM -- Which major ebook retailer will be the first to feature nothing but DRM-free books?  We sell a lot of ebook bundles on oreilly.com and I believe one of the reasons why is because we've totally eliminated DRM from the transaction.  We trust our customers to do the right thing and they reward us by coming back and buying more.  This is a tough one though as it's the publishers who need to be convinced DRM is bad, not so much the retailers.  I was pleased to see that one of the larger, old-school publishers who was a huge advocate of DRM at our 2009 TOC conference became a convert by the time they attended our 2010 TOC show.  I figure if they can make the change, anyone can!

Price -- It's the obvious way of winning customers, but is it a legitimate, significant long-term advantage?  Probably not.  I compare the top e-tailers before I buy books for my iPad and I rarely find a price difference.  On top of that, I'd be willing to pay more for each book if the more expensive option offers me some of the other advantages I've listed in this post.

Loyalty Programs -- Here's one we really haven't seen tapped into yet.  When will I be able to take advantage of a "buy-2-get-1-free" ebook campaign?  We've done some experimentation like this on oreilly.com and it works.  What's nice about this model is that the e-tailer has easy access to your account, so you could accumulate buyer points, buy 1 book now and come back a week or two later to buy the 2nd book that gets you the 3rd one free.  Good luck trying that at your local brick-and-mortar store.  If I know that I'm one book away from getting a free one I'm much more likely to go back to that same store for my next purchase.

Non-book Content -- Up to now all I've been talking about is books.  What about magazines and newspapers though?  When I bought my Kindle v1 I thought it would be a way to always have my newspapers and magazines on the road.  Unfortunately for Amazon, the user experience for newspapers and magazines was awful, so I quickly dropped my subscriptions.  Although most of these publishers are trying to go direct to customers (e.g., iPad apps), there will also be subscriptions through larger e-tailers.  Part of this has to do with discovery, which is why print magazines/newspapers are still at your local convenience store.  How could e-tailers leverage these products to make their site/reader the most compelling one available?

Those are just a few ideas off the top of my head.  What have I missed?  What products and services can an e-tailer offer to earn your repeat business?  Or, with all these stores just a click away, are we less likely to remain loyal to only one or two of them?

When Will eBook Prices Start Going Up?

Amazon did us all a favor.  In late 2007, almost 3 years ago, they introduced the Kindle.  Although it didn't immediately make ebooks a mainstream phenomenon, the Kindle was the first major step towards significant momentum.  More importantly, Amazon looked to set the ebook pricing standard at $9.99.  It's widely known that Amazon lost money on most of those ebooks they sold, but they must have felt it was worthwhile to quickly build a presence, even at a loss (just like Amazon did initially with print books).  They also probably figured they made enough profit on the hardware to justify a loss on the books.

That hardware margin must be looking pretty thin right now.  Not only were they forced by B&N to lower the price of the Kindle, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that the iPad is cutting into dedicated reader sales right and left.

So how much longer can Amazon afford to subsidize the $9.99 ebook prices which, as Rupert Murdoch said earlier this year, "devalues books"?  I think the trend towards higher prices has already started but nobody seems to have noticed.

It's far from scientific but as I write this post I see 2 of the top 10 paid titles on Amazon's Kindle bestseller list are priced at $12.99.  The product pages for each, btw, include Amazon's not-so-gentle reminder to customers that "This price was set by the publisher."  I don't recall anything over $9.99 in the top 10 a year ago.  2 out of 10 is interesting, but 6 out of the top 15 and 8 of the top 20 are priced higher than $9.99.

FWIW, even I've become more willing to pay more than $9.99 for a Kindle or iBooks edition.  Two of my most recent purchases were $12.99, so even a tightwad like me is coming around.  And even though I'm no longer locked into $9.99 as a ceiling, I comparison shop to see who's got the best price.  More often than not they prices are identical, but every so often I find a difference and go with the lower one.

The Rapidly Shifting Ebook Retailer Landscape

As I re-read this recent NY Times article about Google's possible role in the ebook retailer world I started thinking more about how the whole marketplace could shake out.  It's important to note that Google Editions is a program that's been talked about for a couple of years but still hasn't materialized.  The latest rumor is it will launch very soon...pretty much the same rumor that's been around the last couple of years!  Nevertheless, at some point I'm convinced Google will produce an ebook retailing platform and it's sure to have an impact on our industry.

Google Editions is said to be cloud-based and hardware agnostic.  Great so far.  After all, I often worried about being locked into Amazon's Kindle platform each time I bought another $9.99 book for it.  To Amazon's credit though, they're heading away from their original locked-in hardware model where you had to own a Kindle to enjoy a Kindle ebook.  Most of the books I read on my iPad now are from the Kindle store, so kudos to Amazon.

The NY Times article linked to above talks about how Google could change the game by cozying up to the independent booksellers.  Interesting idea.  I've always thought the independents should have banded together years ago to create an uber virtual bookstore chain, both online and as brick-and-mortars.  Think of it as a federation of indies.  Networked together they'd stand a much better chance of competing with Amazon, B&N and Borders, for example.

Here's one way this could work: You search for a print book on an indie's website.  They don't have it but the indie two down street does.  In this new federation of independents, Google ties everything together on the back end as it helps them refine their sites and search results to show that book is available down the street at indie #2.  Indie #1 gets a finders fee on the resulting transaction.  Again, everything is handled with a state-of-the-art Google back-end system.

Extend that same thinking to a combined online presence, all backed by Google to do things like provide the best local information (depending on the customer's IP address or what's being searched for).  In other words, take what's always made the indie stores so attractive (extensive local knowledge and specialization) and bring it online, not individually as they are today, but as one super-sized independent.  Think of it as all these stores banding together with Google to create a large Amazon-like presence but with an indie personality, one that changes on the fly from one region to another based on where you are and what you're looking for.  That sounds like a compelling model to me.

So what does the ebook retailing landscape look like for the next couple of years?  First of all, the Kindle will continue to take on more meaning as a bookstore rather than a hardware device.  In fact, as I predicted last November, I believe Amazon will completely abandon the Kindle hardware space by late 2012.  The only adjustment I'd like to make to that prediction is that the iPad (and the upcoming flood of Android-based tablets) will cause it to happen even sooner.

Next, Google will probably cozy up with indies but Amazon's Kindle apps will help it expand onto all platforms.  Google, however, will be more aggressive on the advertising front and (finally!) give book publishers the option of selling different versions of their products (regular-priced ones without ads and lower-priced ones with ads, for example).  For all you anti-book ad people, please remember that there will still be versions without ads; nobody will force you to buy books with ads!  For cheapskates like me who have no problem with ads everywhere else, we'll save a few bucks along the way.

Meanwhile, Apple has to decide whether to create their own iBooks apps for Windows and Android devices.  That's the only way they'll truly be competitive with Amazon and Google.  If they stick with apps just for Apple products they'll really stunt their growth for the future.  I'm thinking this won't happen though.  After all, can you imagine how hard it would be for Steve Jobs to green-light development of an iBooks app for an Android phone?!

I Want One-Click eBook Sampling

I rarely buy print books these days but I still love visiting my local bookstore to browse the latest releases.  The scenario typically plays out like this: I find something interesting and I pull out my iPhone to see if it's available in the iBookstore or the Kindle store.  If it is, I press a few more buttons to have the sample sent to my iPad.

What's wrong with this picture?  First, you could argue I shouldn't be browsing in my local bookstore if my intent is to buy online.  That's an issue the brick-and-mortar stores need to figure out.  And when they solve that problem, I hope it's by embracing the online world, not asking everyone to leave their iPhones at the door!

Actually, what's wrong here is the fact that I have to go through so many steps to get an ebook sample.  Why don't the major bookstores have apps that let me take a picture, and with that one simple click, push the ebook's sample to my device?  Sampling is one of the key steps I take along the way to making an ebook purchase.  I've probably got a couple dozen ebook samples in my Kindle and iBooks apps on my iPad; I have yet to buy an ebook without sampling it first.

So here's a chance for any book retailer with a mobile app to dramatically extend their reach.  I might be shopping in Retailer A's store but I might be more loyal to Retailer B, so I use B's app for this one-click sampling.  Keep in mind the sampling decision doesn't have to be made in a bookstore though.  You might be sitting next to someone on the subway and they're reading an interesting looking book; if you're brave enough(!), snap a picture of it and know the sample will be waiting for you.  Or maybe you're at a friend's house and see a book on their coffee table.  They rave about it, so you take a quick picture and voila, the sample is heading your way.

At least 2 of the major players already have mobile apps with camera functionality built in, but it's not for what I'm describing.  These camera features are all about physical products, not ebooks, and definitely not ebook samples.  When will one of them take the next step and integrate a one-click ebook sampling feature like I'm describing?

P.S. -- They don't have to do this right away, but at some point I also hope the retailers build a social component into this.  I'd like to identify my friends and family members who also use the app and ask them to opt in so that I can see what products recently caught their eye as well.  Sure, you can see some of this via other networks like Facebook, but I'd prefer a service that's dedicated exclusively to ebooks; there's too much other noise from broad social networks and I believe an ebook-centric one would be very popular.

Where Are All the iOS Magazine Subscription Apps?

Sports Illustrated is the latest big-name magazine publisher to offer an iPad edition.  It's a nice looking product, btw.  The app itself is free and it includes a sample of what's to come.  It joins the likes of Time, Wired and Newsweek...but they all currently have the same limitation: You can only buy individual issues, not sign up for a one-year subscription.  Worse, most of them seem to think they can charge the full print cover price for each iPad edition.

I bought the initial Wired edition for $4.99 but I'm not buying the second one.  Over the weekend I realized I played around a bit with the Wired iPad edition but never finished reading it.  In fact, I'm more likely to read the print copy that's sitting on my desk than the iPad version.  And since I get the print version for $10/year, why in the world would I even think about paying $4.99 per iPad issue?

I'm certainly not the first to blog about this and I doubt I'll be the last.  What I can't understand though is why, after Apple made in-app subscriptions possible months ago, are none of the big guys selling their magazines that way?

Does it have to do with Apple's 30% cut?  Are they all trying to find a way to get around this and sell direct?  That's what Amazon does.  When you buy a Kindle edition via the iPad app you're actually just going direct through the browser, not buying through iTunes.  I'm assuming Amazon therefore doesn't have to pay Apple a cent on the transaction.  Why wouldn't magazine publishers want to do the same, especially on longer-term subscriptions?

Of course, with magazines and newspapers we're talking about publishers who aren't exactly on the cutting edge when it comes to technology solutions.  They're still clinging to their print models as much as possible.  Why else would I get at least 2-3 "please come back" snail mails from BusinessWeek every month?!  So all these magazine/newspaper publishers are probably operating independent of one other, each trying to come up with their own direct sales app/tool.  I wonder how much time and money is being wasted because they're not working together on this.

Here's a crazy idea: Maybe they should consider pushing it all through Amazon.  If Amazon were smart, they'd pull an end-around on Apple and tell the magazine/newspaper publishers, "hey, sell your subscriptions through us...we won't charge you 30% like Apple...how about 20%, or maybe even 10%?"  Amazon already has the infrastructure in place to push content to the iPad as well as a terrific customer service operation, so why shouldn't they leverage their platform for something like this?

One potential pitfall is that Apple might decide it was OK for Amazon to sell their books for the iPad without getting a percentage, but if they're going to be magazine/newspaper distributors for the platform they'll cut off Amazon's iPad access.  Let's hope not.  After all, if Amazon could take this on, it would create a very healthy competition with Apple, and that would likely be a good thing for consumers.

Why Bookstores Should Cozy Up to Apple

Have you seen the iPad display at your local bookstore?  I haven't either and it doesn't look like we will anytime soon.  The only places you can see an iPad on sale are at the Apple Store or your local BestBuy.

Meanwhile, B&N is still trying to make the Nook fly and Borders is hoping to make a splash with the Kobo.  I hate to break the news but I don't think either of those devices have much of a future ahead of them.  Borders is smart to play the price card, but the only way we'll see a mass market hit here is with a sub-$100 reader.  That means it's nothing more than an eInk display that gets new content by tethering to your smartphone's Internet connection.  I don't see anyone working on one of those and I'm not holding my breath waiting for one.

Even Amazon is obviously feeling the pain.  Remember way back when, as recently as a year ago, Amazon felt they didn't need a brick-and-mortar presence or any advertising other than on their own site?  Now, of course, the Kindle is carried by Target and, although I don't watch a lot of TV, a week never goes by when I don't see a Kindle ad.

Chalk it all up to the iPad.  But rather than trying to fight the iPad with these inferior devices, why not embrace it?  Why shouldn't all the brick-and-mortar bookstores sell iPads?  The big guys obviously want to sell their books on the iPad; that's why B&N and Borders released iPad reader apps weeks ago.  That was smart, now take the next step and become an iPad reseller.

Seriously, have you seen the "Nook specialist" at the front of B&N stores?  This poor employee has the unfortunate job of pulling you over to the Nook display with the hopes of wowing you with the device's many features.  It feels like the teenager serving orange chicken samples on toothpicks in the mall food court, only more awkward.  Imagine the buzz the store would generate if that employee was showing demos of the iPad, featuring the store's app and books.  I guarantee you it would drive a lot more interest than the Nook display (or the almost completely abandoned new media section at my local Borders store, where they try to sell Sony Readers).

And hey, you can keep selling your Nooks, Kobos and whatever other device you want to.  Give your customers a choice and may the best device win.  I'll bet it's the iPad though.

Most importantly, take all that money you're currently wasting to promote your eInk display readers and pour it into iPad app development.  As I recently suggested to Amazon, become known for offering the most amazing, feature-rich reader app on the Apple platform.  I can already choose from the iBookstore as well as Amazon's and B&N's for my iPad reading, but the reader apps are largely the same, so that means the best price generally wins for me.  More often than not, though, prices are identical across all the stores, so the reading experience becomes the distinguishing factor.  Why not make yours the best, the envy of the entire industry?

P.S. -- When is someone going to create an app that quickly tells me which ebookstore (for iPad reading) offers the best price on the book I'm considering?  Apple probably wouldn't let an app like that slip through, so why not create a website that looks good on the iPad and I'll put a shortcut to it on my home screen?

The Social Networking Potential for eContent

I recently finished reading Kiss It Good-Bye, another take on the Pittsburgh Pirates and their miraculous upset of the Yankees in the 1960 World Series.  (It's a pretty good book, btw, if you're a Pirates fan!)  I bought the Kindle edition and read it on my iPad.  That's when I discovered a feature Amazon slipped into the reader that I hadn't noticed before.  It's called "Popular Highlights" and you can see an example of it in the screen shot on the left (click on the thumbnail version for a larger view).

You'll notice a small pop-up bubble that says, "3 other people highlighted this part of the book."  The popular highlights have dotted underlines, setting them off from the rest of the book.  In fact, you can see another one at the very top of that same page.

The cool thing about this is I can see what other readers felt were the most interesting aspects of the book.  That's nice for a story about the 1960 Pirates but it becomes even more compelling when applied to how-to guides or textbooks.

What if a chemistry e-textbook included highlights from everyone else who used it in previous semesters?  That capability exists today and becomes more valuable the more the book is used and highlighted.  Take it a step further.  What if you add notes to that e-textbook?  Again, the more it's used the more valuable it becomes.

One problem here is that each e-reader platform (e.g., iBooks, Kindle, etc.) will implement their own versions of these highlighting and commenting features.  So, unfortunately, the comments/highlights added by Kindle readers won't show up when iBooks readers use the same book.

Nevertheless, this could easily grow into a very valuable feature.  So valuable, in fact, that I could see a model where it helps distinguish one retailer's version of the book from another: If the iBooks edition has more highlights and comments, it's a more attractive option than the Kindle one with fewer highlights/comments; that leads to more people buying the iBooks edition, adding their own highlights/comments and creating a snowball effect.  If ebook retailers are smart, they'll invest heavily in this functionality since it will help distinguish them from their competitors.

Btw, I'm sure somewhere deep in Amazon's end user license agreement (EULA) I allowed them to share my highlights with other readers.  OK, but wouldn't it be nice if publishers and authors could turn the tables and say, "sure, you can capture all this information, but when you do so with our products you need to share the results with us."  We'd learn more about what readers think of our products, which pieces they felt were most important and if we're smart, we'd use that knowledge to create better products (e.g., revisions, related titles and supporting materials).  That's wishful thinking on my part though, I'm afraid.  As a publisher, of course, I'd love to see the Amazon's and Apple's of the world simply share this information with their publisher partners, but I figure it's more likely they'll charge for it as they do other services.

Why does this feature have to begin and end with books though?  I think it could be even more useful for newspapers and magazines.  I can't keep up with all my news sources and I'd find it extremely helpful if I could just quickly glance at the key elements of a story, as highlighted by all those people who read it before me.  Sure, the newspaper sites offer commenting functionality today but they don't let readers highlight what they feel is most important.  Newspapers feel they're being ripped off by Google and other search engines?  They should make this highlighting feature a key element of their e-subscriptions, something that's not accessible through their free website.  Wouldn't it be cool if your local e-newspaper subscription showed up on your iPad each day with yellow highlighting of the key pieces of each story?  What we're really talking about here is convenience, time-savings and a service that's not accessible through the free access option of a website.  I'd pay for that!

eBook Indexes & User Interface Features

The more I talk to people about the uber index idea, the more I realize the significant effort required to create and implement it, particularly in the e-reader app.  I still believe it's a viable solution for rich content, but maybe it's not something we'll see in the short term.  So how about a few simple thing between now and then?

Let's start with a "back" button in the e-reader, to take you back to where you just came from.  Every time I've clicked on a link in an ebook and it takes me to an earlier/later spot, there's no easy way to go back.  (Note: Regarding the back button, I'm talking specifically about the iBooks reader on the iPad.)  Or how about when you're in the index and you click on an entry, hop to it but it's not what you were looking for?  You're stuck on that page and you have to manually find your spot back in the index again.  Imagine a web browser without a back button.  Pretty awful, right?  So why do we have to live with e-readers without back buttons?

How about pop-up windows?  Why are all the popular reading apps typically built with just a single window in mind?  Imagine how frustrated and less efficient your day would be if your computer only let you open one window!  In the index, if I press and hold an entry, show me a preview of where I'll be taken if I make that selection.  It's the same concept I use all the time in my Bing search results, so that I can preview where I'm heading before I leave the current page.

And how about similar functionality in the body of the book? Press and hold a word or phrase and you get a list of related entries and "see also's" from the index.  For example, let's say I'm reading the "Get Online" chapter of iPad: The Missing Manual and I see the term "3G".  If I press and hold it in my iPad ebook reader there should be a list of links to where 3G is first defined in the book.  But there should also be links to where related topics are covered, such as AT&T, cellular network and even wifi, so that I can understand the difference.

Next, similar to pop-ups, why not let me have a split view into the book, or, heaven forbid, allow me to have two books open at the same time, both visible on the screen, one using the top half and the other using the bottom; these are basic features we take for granted in apps like Word or Excel but they're nonexistent in the ebook app world.

The index is such a critical element of a print book and it could take on so much more functionality in ebooks.  Which reader app will be the first to enable these types of enhancements?  I'm not particularly loyal to any one of them, so I just hope at least one of them offers these features sooner rather than later.

Vook App: Reckless Road Guns N' Roses

I've mentioned before that I'm skeptical the road to rich content is as simple as integrating video with the written word.  So when I was approached to review a Vook app called Reckless Road (Guns N' Roses and the Making of Appetite for Destruction) I said I'd be happy to review it but I also explained my bias up front.  The fellow who requested the review was pretty convinced he's got a terrific product and still wanted my feedback, good or bad.  Now that I've had some time to read through Reckless Road and watch many of the videos included in it I can see the value of the Vook approach. It lends itself well to a product like this. Earlier Vook samples I looked at last year felt forced, as though there had to be a certain number of videos for every written piece; the result wasn't all that interesting to me.

With Reckless Road, however, I became more curious as I went along. This is probably due to the fact that I'm always fascinated by behind-the-scenes looks at things, especially rock bands.  It also helps that the author, Marc Canter, is a close friend of the band and collected all sorts of great photos and other memorabilia over the years.  That said, I was never much of a fan of Guns N' Roses, but reviewing this app makes me wish similar ones were available for the bands I followed back in the 70's. Remember that old VH1 series, Behind the Music (the original ones, back when they covered great bands like Thin Lizzy)? Canter's Vook app feels like a modern version of that approach, with the added benefit that you can hop around the story to your heart's content, without having to remember to record it on a VCR!

For $4.99 this is an app any Guns N' Roses fan would greatly appreciate.  I'm hoping the Vook folks can get insiders to create similar ones for Led Leppelin, Lynyrd Skynyrd and some of the other timeless bands from the greatest era in rock.

Wired's iPad App

One of my major disappointments with the iPad has been a lack of good magazines to choose from on it.  I used to gripe about this all the time on the Kindle and I never thought it could be worse on the iPad.  This is probably more of a timing issue than anything else though.  A few more magazines have trickled in with their own apps over the past few weeks and none had a bigger launch than Wired.

Shortly after their app arrived they announced they sold 24,000 copies in the first 24 hours.  Nice start.  So is this really worth the $4.99 price tag, especially since your five bucks only gets you one issue?  I don't think so.  I wonder how many people will go back and buy the next edition for $4.99.

First of all, there's no cut-and-paste functionality.  On top of that, there's no social media connectivity.  Wow.  How could they overlook these incredibly important features?  Seriously.  These guys cover all the latest and greatest technology developments and they can't implement features from the 90's in their initial app.  Truly amazing.

There are also so many missed link opportunities.  For example, DoubleTree's URL is shown at the bottom of their ad.  Wouldn't it be convenient to let readers touch it so that it takes them to DoubleTree's website, possibly featuring a special deal for Wired readers?  The magazine could get a finder's fee for any reservations made through that link.  Even something as simple and obvious as this was missed.  Btw, you'll find a mixed bag of ads with and without links in this issue.  My guess is some advertisers agreed to pay more for their ads to include links in the app edition.  Perhaps Wired thought this would be a good way to test ads with and without links. The result is a very confusing user experience for the reader as you don't know whether touching a URL will open Safari or do nothing at all.  Here's a simple rule they should follow: All URLs should open a link!

You may have also heard that Wired tried a new UI approach where you scroll horizontally from one article to the next but you scroll vertically within an article.  The mix of horizontal and vertical scrolling feels forced, like a gimmick that sounded interesting in theory but has no real value in practice.  And as others are starting to complain about, if everyone implements their own UI tweaks we'll never have standards and nothing will seem intuitive.  Apple really needs to get their arms around this.

Like many people, I'm not wowed by interactive ads.  I'm very much wowed by interactive content though, which is why I love The Elements.  The Wired app tries too hard to just create the "faster horse" that Henry Ford referred to rather than the next gen content app.  If Wired wants to draw readers into the ads they'll need to better integrate them with the content, not have them as standalone pages, separate from the content.  They're still thinking like magazine publishers and it's holding them back.  Build an integrated approach so that I discover the ads while I'm doing a deep dive in an article.

Bottom line: if this is as good as it gets I'll keep my print subscription. There's no need for me to fork over 5 bucks more for each pseudo-enhanced digital edition when I can get an entire year's worth in print for $10.

Amazon's iPad App(s)

I've been pretty critical of Amazon and their lack of innovation with the Kindle.  I've talked about those frustrations here and it's ultimately why I stopped posting on my Kindleville blog.  So when I see Amazon doing something good, particularly on someone else's platform, I feel compelled to call it out as well.  That's the case with the Amazon Mobile app for the iPad (iTunes link).

Amazon could have taken the easy way out and either (a) not created an iPad app, figuring customers can use Safari to get to amazon.com or (b) created an iPad app that's nothing more than a quick-and-dirty version of their website.  They went with option "c" though and produced an app that's highly engaging and makes you want to explore and discover more.  How many retailer apps can say that?!

What do I like about this one?  Let's start with the fact that it focuses on my interests.  Sure, most if not all of the personalized recommendations in the iPad app are accessible through amazon.com, but they're scattered all across the page, above and below the fold.  The app presents them in a way that really makes me want to see what's new.  In fact, I've done more deep dives into these lists via the app than I've ever done on Amazon's web site.

Next up, Amazon wasn't afraid to experiment with the user interface.  I totally love the product details pages.  (I've included a sample screen shot of one in the top left corner of this post; click on it for a larger view.)  Each of those three objects that look like sheets of paper (Details & Features, More to Explore... and Customer Reviews) can be tapped to enlarge, all without ever leaving the main product page itself.  It's a clever way of offering quick and easy access to a lot more content than can fit on the iPad's screen.  The result is a very clean UI; compare that to the extremely busy and cluttered product page on Amazon's website.  In fact, I'm hoping Amazon's website team considers implementing some of their iPad app's simplicity.

I like this app so much I've given it one of the precious slots on my iPad's home screen.  I open it almost every day, curious to know what's new and whether something is worth buying.  I'm sure that's music to Amazon's ears.

P.S. -- So if they can build a terrific retailing app, why are they unable to improve their Kindle app for the iPad?  As I've said before, Amazon needs to make an even bigger investment in the Kindle iPad app.  Apple's iBooks app is already better and will undoubtedly add more features in the future.

Amazon, your Whispersync technology is great.  The fact that Apple doesn't have an iBooks reader for the iPhone (yet!) means you've got an app availability advantage over them.  I love it that I can read part of a book on my iPad then switch to my iPhone and pick right up where I left off.  Wonderful.  But soon that feature will feel as old and unappreciated as Whispernet does today.  Don't make the same mistake you made with the Kindle hardware platform.  Be bold and invest in the Kindle readers on all the platforms.  Make them the envy of the rest of the industry.  You've got the resources, so stop letting these apps feel like an inferior reading experience to the Kindle itself, OK?

When Less is More

We live in an age of seemingly infinite choices.  Hundreds of thousands of new books are published each year.  Actually, the total is even larger when you add in all the self-published books.

So isn't it interesting that while the number of books published every year continues to climb, the biggest story in the technology world has to do with providing less, not more.  I'm talking about the iPad and a very insightful blog post by Forrester's Sarah Rotman Epps.  Sarah talks about limited content on the iPad platform and refers to it as "curated computing", which she defines as "a mode...where choice is constrained to deliver less complex, more relevant experiences."

The skeptic in me points out that the iPhone/iPad platform now has 200,000 apps and includes the Safari browser that let's you go anywhere you want (as long as your destination doesn't rely on Flash!).  Nevertheless, her point is relevant to everyone in publishing.  After all, isn't content curation the single most important service a publisher can provide?  When the choices are many it's the trusted brand (e.g., author or publisher) that's sought out.  The one who has built a reputation for curating content floats to the top.

That's always been the case and it always will be, regardless of the format.  Another key point here is that portable devices often lend themselves more to short form content than long form.  Get in and get out.

Remember that great quote about how "if I had more time I would have written you a shorter letter"?  That rule still applies, perhaps now more than ever.  With all the information coming at me each day I place a high value on filters and content curation.  I don't have time to read every technology article, so I often focus on the ones pointed out to me by people I trust.

Thanks to the low barriers to entry for content creation, content curation becomes even more important in the future.  I'm willing to pay for filtering services, but only if they truly save me time.  When you look at it this way, living in a world of limited choices isn't such a bad thing after all!

Reaching New Audiences

After 5 weeks of iPad use one thing has become crystal clear to me: Magazine, newspaper and book publishers are too focused on applying the same old, tired business rules.

Maintaining your current customer base is critical to any business, but the number of existing customers is generally a fraction of the total potential base.  We're somewhere in the midst of an inflection point in the content business.  This is a stage where existing models are challenged, new ones are created, leaders can be toppled and the proverbial "guy in a garage" can completely reinvent things.  So why are so many publishers trying to apply all the old rules?  Here are a few examples:

Magazines at $4.99 an issue.  This one's just too easy to pick on.  Are you kidding me?  The product is nothing more than a quick-and-dirty print-to-e conversion.  Were these guys not paying attention to the book industry when they saw nobody could sell their quickie p-to-e books at the print price? Curiosity is driving some sales now, but that's not a long-term strategy. Look at some of the comments about Time's app:

Only $260/year to get content freely available on the web or delivered to your door in print for a fifth of that.  Idiots.

If each issue was a dollar I'm sure more people would buy this mag.  $5 is silly.

Time notes that they're only selling single issues right now and that a subscription model is coming.  Fine, but in the mean time how about doing something more creative?  If not a dollar an issue how about giving me the last 5 issues for $5.  Just because you can sell print copies at a newsstand for $5 each doesn't mean you should charge the same for single digital issues, especially when there's little to no value added.

I really want these guys to succeed and I'm more than willing to pay a reasonable amount for an issue or a subscription.  They should use this opportunity to come up with models that help them reach new customers, not just squeeze the early adopters because they know they have more disposable income.

P.S. -- It seems so obvious but I can't help think these guys have forgotten that they make a good deal of money on advertising, so if they go with lower prices and expand their audience they'll increase their reach...without the cost of printing and mailing.

Newspapers are still asleep at the wheel.  The New York Times seems afraid to commit.  Their Editor's Choice iPad app is OK but it's more of a teaser than a viable, long-term product strategy.  As I mentioned in this earlier post, these guys are just training me to find workarounds to get the content I want.  And although I'd love to pay for a subscription they don't even offer one.

USA Today is doing a better job but only going half way to a total solution.  Their iPad app is nice and it's even free.  I only read USA Today when I'm on the road but I'm starting to read it more thanks to this app.  That said, they need a model that pushes the content to me every day, not one that forces me to open the app for updates.  Go ahead and charge...it's OK!

My local newspaper is more typical of the larger problem though.  We've been paying subscribers for almost 20 years and every month we're one step closer to canceling.  Want to know how they could keep me on board?  Offer an iPad app version of the paper for free with my print subscription.  And please, make sure it includes every bit of content that's in the print version.

The focus there is on customer retention, not reaching new ones.  To solve that problem, how about forging alliances with other newspapers so that the app provides much broader access?  So if I'm heading to Seattle today I can open my app on the flight west to catch up on all the local news.  Sure, you can accomplish all this in a browser for free...if you're willing to grab the pages in advance.  But we're talking about convenience, which often comes at a price.  And don't forget about the additional advertising reach for all those non-subscribers today who could become customers tomorrow.

Lemmings waiting for the next channel to open.  Why does it seem like publishers are all sitting around waiting for channel equilibrium to happen on its own?  I have two words for everyone: Go direct!  Sure, you'll want your products in iTunes, the iBookstore, etc., but why is everyone so leery of creating a direct relationship with their customers?  Yes, some existing accounts will complain, but if you're not building a direct strategy you'll lose in the long run.  Despite Apple's "closed" model it's remarkably easy to add epub books bought elsewhere to your iBooks library.  And look at Amazon.  Even though they have a Kindle app for the iPad, any purchases you make for it are untouched (and untaxed) by Apple.  Why wouldn't you want to capture 100% of the transaction by building a direct channel, especially since the choices aren't mutually exclusive?  The more storefronts your products are in, including a storefront of your own, the better!

Here's an example of how we should all be thinking: The Elements, from Touch Press.  Why would a tightwad like me spend $14 on a subject I dreaded in high school and has nothing to do with my job or personal interests?  Because it encourages discovery.  I don't know the difference between Dysprosium and Holmium but this crazy app makes me want to learn more about both.  So while most chemistry publishers would have done quick-and-dirty p-to-e conversions, these guys took the time to make the topic fun and interesting.  As a result, they're reaching far more new customers than a dusty old periodic table ever would have.

So if the periodic table can be completely rethought to encourage discovery and reach a totally new audience, what about the topics you specialize in?  How can The Elements inspire you to approach your business differently?

eReaders and Digital Bookstores

I recently came across a couple of great articles that are must-reads for anyone in the publishing industry.  The first one is a Gizmodo piece called How to Fix Today's Ebook Readers.  Much of the article talks about aesthetics like fonts and hyphenation.  Noteworthy, but not revolutionary.  Things get much more interesting with the headline The Greater Whole.  Here's an excerpt:

So consider this: 10,000 of us reading the same Kindle book, each of us highlighting and taking notes. Would the aggregate of this not be illuminating? If I want to publicly share my notes with fellow Kindle or iBooks readers, shouldn't there be a system in place to do this?

And check out the illustration that appears shortly after that excerpt.  Yeah, Id love to see that sort of heat map for some of the books I've read over the years.  Then there's the plea for Amazon to integrate social networking so excerpts can be tweeted.  Hey, Amazon patented one-click buying, so why not create a one-click tweet feature?

The other article I want to highlight is from Fast Company and it's called Amazon Slaps Penguin Across the Beak Over eBook Pricing.  Here's the key quote:

And if consumers buy into an e-reader platform that only supports one digital bookstore, then they might find themselves in tricky positions until the various business shenanigans have wound down to a conclusion.

That's one of the reasons I ditched my Kindle.  Sure, you can load content from sources other than Amazon, but there's really only one digital bookstore for the Kindle.  The iPad offers two advantages.  First, you can buy from Apple and Amazon, not just one.  And second, the iPad natively supports ePub files, which are closer to an industry standard than the Kindle's mobi format.

It's so easy to load an ePub file onto an iPad. I wonder how many iPad owners realize you can buy ePub products that look just as good in the iBook reader as the ones you buy from Apple.  Speaking of which, when are more publishers going to start selling these files right off their own websites?  I'm still amazed at the number of publishers who are so wedded to DRM that they can't imagine creating that direct relationship with their customers by selling non-DRM'd content on their own site.

How Magazines & Newspaper Publishers are Training Me

The iPad is now more than 3 weeks old and there are apparently 1,000+ apps available for it (plus the 180K or so iPhone apps you can run on it).  If there are a thousand iPad-specific apps out there I haven't discovered one tenth of them; I just keep seeing the same ones over and over again in iTunes.  Even with that many apps available there are two areas I feel are severely underrepresented: magazines and newspapers.

I've purposely avoided renewing all of my print magazines subscriptions for the past several months because I figured I'd switch them to iPad apps/subscriptions.  My plan hasn't worked so well.  I no longer get BusinessWeek, Fast Company or The New York Times, but none of them are available as apps either.  So what has this led to?

I now just bookmark all those magazine/newspaper web sites on my iPad and read pretty much everything I want for free.  The longer these publishers delay introducing an iPad app for their content, the greater the likelihood I will have moved on and won't ever buy it.  What a mistake.

The whole experience has also caused me to wonder if there's an opportunity for a whole new type of app.  Think of it as a combination of Fluent News and Offline Pages.  What I want is an app that automatically checks each of those magazine/newspaper sites and pushes me the full contents of the latest edition.  Without this sort of app I'm forced to do this manually, looking through nytimes.com, clicking on each article that's interesting and then hitting the "Save to Offline Pages" webmarklet that's installed on my browser.  Why make me go through all that effort?  Why not let me tell this new app what newspapers and magazines I want the latest from and deliver them to me?

Before you say that's what the RSS feeds are for think again.  Many of those feeds are partial.  They don't include the entire article or they make you click and go to their website to see their ads.  Fine, I'll look at the ads...but in the version that's cached in this new app I'm describing.

Isn't this ridiculous though?  These publishers are trying to control the flow and use of their content so they're forcing customers like me to come up with better ways of using it.  (Hey, that sounds a lot like the denial stage the music labels went through back in the Napster days.)  And btw, I'm a customer who is more than willing to pay for online access to this content, but by not providing apps these publishers won't let me!  These are the same publishers, at least on the newspaper side, who constantly complain that Google has stolen their IP.  Google hasn't stolen anything.  And if the publishers don't get wise to the rapidly growing iPad platform they'll probably see someone else swoop in and steal the app revenue opportunity they're currently ignoring.