[bookport] Re: new unit proposal
- From: "Gary King" <w4wkz@xxxxxxxx>
- To: <bookport@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2005 15:27:51 -0500
Walt,
Name at least one of those less expensive and better designed MP3 players
that come out of the box telling you what MP3 file you are playing. I am
hoping that my Iriver 120 will be talking by the end of the year if the Rock
Box folks get their act together, but I'm taking a chance loading
third-party firmware onto my unit.
Gary, w4wkz@xxxxxxxx
----- Original Message -----
From: "Walt Smith" <ka3agm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <bookport@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, September 15, 2005 2:25 PM
Subject: [bookport] Re: new unit proposal
> I agree totally with Jerry and resent the implication that this makes
anyone
> who does some kind of reactionary, anti-technology Luddite. The Book Port
is
> a reading device, first and foremost, and that is precisely what it should
> remain. If people want truly full-function MP3 players, that's perfectly
> fine, but I do not want, just for example, any MP3-related innovations to
> get in the way of the device's being the finest _reading_ device ever
> designed up to today. The real problem is that some people still insist on
> confusing change with progress and improvement and this is simply not
always
> the case. It would not improve the BP as a reading system to integrate a
> radio into it; it would not improve the device's ability to read books to
> include a shuffle mode. These are just two examples out of many that
simply
> don't improve the Book Port as a _reading_ technology. On the other hand;
> and note the qualification; if a shuffle mode, for instance, could be
> incorporated without in any way limiting the potential improvement of
> strictly reading-related features, I don't necessarily oppose it. However,
> if the code would take up space that might be used for some future reading
> functionality, it should not be included. The fact that the BP happens to
> play MP3 files as an incidental side effect of its being a reading device
> does not mean that significant time should be put into turning it into an
> MP3 player for persone who have little or no desire to use it as a reading
> system. There are less expensive and better-designed MP3 players already
on
> the market.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Rick and Pauline" <daltontwo@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: <bookport@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Thursday, September 15, 2005 12:03 AM
> Subject: [bookport] Re: new unit proposal
>
>
> Hi Jerry,
>
> What do you have against progress and innovation? With this sort of
> thinking we would have never replaced the horse and buggy. It seems to me
> that you are too easily satisfied and are not thinking outside the box.
>
> Rick
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Jerry Weinger
> To: bookport@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2005 11:29 PM
> Subject: [bookport] Re: new unit proposal
>
>
> Tom and List,
> My hope is that the Book Port evolves based upon its ability to read
> books, its small size, and its reasonable cost.
>
>
>
> Here is why I bought the Book Port
>
> 1. I can read a book, in all of the formats, with a device that fits
into
> my pocket. And I can have 100 more books on hand, in my other pocket.
Doing
> this with a CD player would require a larger CD player, and a stack of
CDs.
>
>
>
> 2. The Book Port uses inexpensive off the shelf batteries, which I can
> replace myself.
>
>
>
> 3. I had no further expectations for the Book Port; any more than I
would
> expect a hammer to do the job of a drill.
>
>
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Jerry Weinger
>
>
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
> From: bookport-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:bookport-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> On Behalf Of tom hawkins
> Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2005 8:29 PM
> To: Book Port
> Subject: [bookport] new unit proposal
>
>
> Any consideration of a new unit should include a wide, thick rubber
> edge to protect the unit from accidental falls from tables and pockets
etc.
>
>
>
>
> --
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
> Version: 7.0.344 / Virus Database: 267.10.25/102 - Release Date: 9/14/05
>
>
Other related posts:
