I don't think it will kill the Kindle for the time being anyway, since you'll have to pay to use the 3G network that's free with the Kindle. I guess time will tell.

I actually doubt you even cared when the original iPod announced...

To say the screen is too "harsh" for readers while admitting to have never seen one is also pretty idiotic..... what were you not invited or the baltimore sun to cheap to send you to the press event? Why make ridiculous critiques then?

Also, it is not an iTouch, it's an iPod Touch... by referring to it as an iTouch you make yourself sound even dumber and more out of touch.

Eric, thanks for pointing out the typo! My apologies. NK

I just love these guys who pass themselves off as experts - even after admitting that they haven't even seen the thing!
I have read several books on my iPhone. It's actually very nice. I can only imagine how much easier and pleasant to read it on the iPad with a much better screen.
Did the author of this article even consider the impact on the textbook industry? McGraw-Hill certainly has! This will revolutionize university textbook publishing. Student backpacks won't be stuffed full with 25 lbs of textbooks costing $150+ each!
Go to an Apple Store and try one of their products and educate yourself a bit. Maybe you'll understand after trying a device without a C> prompt!

Garland, perhaps I missed something. Is this an e-ink screen, or something comparable that isn't backlit? If not, it's going to give the same eye-strain that every other computer screen does. NK

It may not draw you away from your kindle and all the ebooks you've already purchased, but for others like my wife and I, that do not yet have something similar . . .it is definitely something to consider.

We have an old 4th gen iPod and were thinking of upgrading that, or we were thinking about getting a Kindle or a Nook with our tax return . . . and bam . . . along comes a device that can do all that we really wanted to, iPod Touch capabilities AND eReader (Kindle, Nook) capabilities.

We have tons of content through iTunes as we also have an Apple TV. This can play all that as well. Also, when we do get a chance to read, with 3 small kids, . . it's never for more than a half hour to an hour at most so e-ink isn't all that important to us either.

I think Apple has hit that certain sweet spot for users like us. Once we have the extra cash on hand . . ..

Yes, NK, The screen is rear-lighted. But it uses IPS technology which provides life-like quality color rendition. Rarely found on laptops due to the expense, but coveted by graphic professionals.
Eye strain is unlikely to be a problem for anyone unless your eyesight is poor.
E-ink is very pleasant to view but I prefer full-color capability to grey-scale.
As for Flash - it is a programming language which Apple worries can cause havoc with its OS and other programs. Video using the world-wide H264 standard makes much more sense and is free. That's what Apple pushes for. Flash is a memory hog, too.
I have used my iPhone for two years and surf the web a couple of hours - at least- per day since I got it. I rarely find a site with Flash content that I even want to visit. I don't think many people will pass up the iPad because of Farmville or Hulu! And as for Hulu, I understand that they are working on a non-Flash version.
Free internet on Kindle or Nook or whatever they are called is only for transfer of purchased content, too. $30/mo for unlimited full internet service on an iPad is a great deal. Again, especially for students! This is going to be a game-changer.

MacSheep are up in arms. Hey guys you have to admit the thing is pretty basic. Nothing new.

I have read four novels on my iPhone in th last six months and I can honestly say that the reading experience of the iPhone was much better than the kindle and nook that I have gotten my hands on. It's portability for one thing. However I am positive that the iPad will be the down fall of the kindle and all ereaders for the sheer reason that you can not multitask on them. Why would I carry a kindle when I have my iPad and it can do the sam thing and more. As for the screen brightness I have had no issues I have spent several hours stairing at the small screen and it does not adversely effect me. Reading on the iPhone made reading pleasureable again and it will do the same with the ipad.

Have these people ever used an e-ink reader?... I mean seriously, why is it being treated as some sort of 'inferior' technology? the iPad really shouldn't even be compared to the kindle, because the soul reason behind the kindle, and other such e-readers, is to have an OPTIMIZED reading experience, not to be some sort of flashy multimedia device... I really don't see how viewing the iPad along these lines puts it more in competition with the kindle, than with an average tablet pc; take this one by HP thats been out for ages as an example:
http://www.shopping.hp.com/series/category/noteboo ...
(I recall it being cheaper on some of the earlier models, but I digress) besides the lack of a physical keyboard/mouse and the subsequent 'thickness' factor as a result, how is the iPad more comparable to the kindle than to this? Furthermore, I've never seen many of these tablet pc's legitimately compared to the kindle, even though they kinda share more with it than the iPad does (i.e. the physical keyboard)... for the record, I own a Toshiba Portege M700 tablet PC, and it is awesome with its led back-lit display and everything, but I would never consider it a real contender to a dedicated e-reader like the nook/kindle/etc...

Just because Apple makes it, doesn't mean it has to be a 'Jesus' product like the iphone. Apple has always been about targeting niches, and I am pretty sure that e-reading is out of this device's niche (despite what Jobs says); claiming it to be so, is almost as bad as legitimately pinning the iphone up against the psp as a gaming device. Both the iphone and the ipad do theoretically perform some of the same tasks that the psp and kindle do (respectively), but they do so to such a casual extent that you really can't take such things too seriously... just because I can input text in photoshop doesn't mean that I should write up my essays in it...

I'm with you Nancy. I LOVE my Kindle. I found your post, and the comments it generated, very interesting.

Apple has given us what amounts to an oversized iPod Touch? Well then the follow up questions is, how great would an oversized iPod Touch be? I personally thought the iPod Touch was an awesome device, except for it's size! (I frankly thought the same about the iPhone, except it was a well, a phone.) I think an oversized iPod Touch (ala iPad) is a no brainer. It's fine to scratch out an email on your mini screen device when you're on the go, but give me some visual real estate and touch screen veg-on-the-couch convenience when I'm surfing the web, banging out a few emails, reading the Times, or just goofing off. I fully expect this will prove to be another huge hit product for Apple - as a portable video device, casual computing device, and eReader despite the non-eink display (I mean come off it with all this talk of eye strain. I've spent 8+ hours a day in front of a computer screen for 20+ years, but I need e-ink to read an ebook?) Lastly, just wait until the developers start releasing apps made to further take advantage of the screen size and device capabilities. The naysayers will disappear soon enough.

It feeling like a transparent marketing ploy like when they put soy milk in the refrigerator near the milk even though it doesn't need refrigeration. We'll take a tablet computer and market it as an ebook reader. I mean its need and as a visually impaired person it seems like it would be cool to have a giant ipod touch but that's all it is. It still doesn't solve the scaling problem that existing in the larger sizes for all the digital readers. When you scale up it ruins the page and type design and spacing. It causes these really bad rivers between words and is actually incredible distracting to read. IT would be great if they designed large print books for the ereaders instead of assuming that visually impaired people should just have to deal with bad type design that makes things a lot more unpleasant to read.