Thanks for all the comments on my Disposable Computing post. Alas, I’m beginning to see why sites like Daring Fireball don’t allow comments. Not that anyone was rude; it’s just that everyone missed the point. Every last one of you. (Well, except commenter “John”, who pointed out an inaccuracy in my post.) Here’s what that post was not about:
- How many iPhones I’ve had over the years
- The economics of owning an iPad vs. owning a Kindle
- How long any given Apple product lasted (yours or mine)
- How durable previous generations of Kindles are
- The inherent value of the iPhone 3GS or iPad 1
- The difference in quality between E-ink and LCD displays
Here’s what the post was about:
- Apple products tend to have great build quality and durability
- Marco Arment’s $79 Kindle review used the terms “cheap” and “disposable” to describe the Kindle.
- The last thing I want in my life is cheap and disposable objects
- I’d rather have objects that are more durable and likely to last
- So I’d rather have an iPad than a $79 Kindle.
That’s about it. I’ve never used a Kindle device, just the Kindle iOS app. I don’t know how crappy the new Kindle actually is. Maybe Marco’s wrong, and the $79 Kindle is actually incredibly well-built and durable and will last for years. I just know that if it appears to be cheap and non-durable, I don’t want it. And I think Marco is a pretty reliable source. So I don’t want a $79 Kindle.
Perhaps my analogy of the $79 Kindle to a Dixie cup was a wee bit overwrought. Sorry about that; it occurred to me as I was writing the piece and I felt that it captured what I wanted to day. Because, you know, I’d rather drink my coffee out of a Contigo thermal mug than out of a Starbucks paper cup. Maybe that’s not fair.
So how about this? The $79 Kindle is a Starbucks plastic mug. Not quite Dixie-cup disposable, and the advertising helps keep the price down.
Looking for the comments? Try the old layout.