When Amazon.com announced its Kindle electronic book reader, two large camps of people appeared out of the woodwork. One camp praised the device with for it's paper-styled screen and ease of use. And one camp started listing the problems with it, calling it outmoded and doomed to begin with.

Newsweek suggests that Kindle is part of The Future of Reading while Business Week calls it The IPOD of Books.

While I like the fact that the connect charges are free, the $400 price tag is too expensive a risk for me at this point. Most of the computers and related software I've bought over the years didn't take long to (a) come down in price, and (b) become outmoded.

So, I think I'll wait.

At first glance, Kindle appears to be a green solution. It will reduce the need to ship heavy books around the country while cutting down on paper consumption. But, what's Kindle's energy footprint compared to the savings? That is, like many hybrid cars, does it cost more and/or use more energy to produce than it actually saves?

One way or the other, I think we all knew it would come to this, the electronic book readers we saw on the various Star Trek series becoming our future as well. While I'm not a fan of e-books, especially for fiction, I think Kindle--in one form or another--represents the handwriting on the wall.

What do you think?
Are you willing to give up paper books yet?

-

While my mythic adventure novel The Sun Singer is not on Kindle, it makes a great gift for the readers on your Christmas list.

Still cheaper and longer lasting than a steak dinner at Outback!
__________________________