Everyone in the market for a Louis Vuitton bag is always bummed when they realize they can't afford the $5,000 bag in the window. But once they're in the store, the $500 bag in the back ends up looking like a great deal in comparison.

Talking about college students spending $500 for this is radically premature. There's no way that by August that a significant number of universities will be all-digital on the book front, and they aren't going to switch for the spring term, either.

So, the soonest case where any fraction of college students might be Kindle-only is August-ish, 2010. Any guesses on what this will cost by then? Probably ~$200 or less, for something a generation or two more advanced. (Perhaps not color by then, but higher res, I bet.)

And frankly, even in 2010 the colleges that have an all-digital option will still be the exception. I would expect it'd be at least 2012 before a student might reasonably choose this option.

The real question is "will anybody buy it today and subsidize further development?" And the Kindle 1 sales seem to say yes. I don't really know because AFAIK Amazon has not released sales numbers, but they are certainly acting as if these things are selling fast.

It's not all about books. The inclusion of a PDF reader makes this a big deal. In many schools, everything you need to know for a class is in the instructor's PDFs.

I'd spend ~$500 a semester on books while in college. If ebooks are cheaper (as they should be) by, say 50%, I'd save the money in a year.

They're not cheaper, sadly.

Sigh. They just don't get it. http://thepiratebay.org/

When the first iPod was released, everyone complained it was too expensive ($400), and we all know how that story ended.

I don't think this is a great comparison. iPods were going up against portable CD players and hard-to-use/lower capacity mp3 players. And, people could convert their CD collections for nothing or buy a single song at a time.

If you were a student (or if you are a student) would you buy a $500 Kindle to read textbooks, plus a lot more to download digital versions of the texts? Unless there's a slam-dunk cost benefit that students can see, I don't think this is going to make a huge impact on the textbook market at this price point.

As for magazines and newspapers, I don't think most people can justify a $500 expense to read magazines and papers that they can get for much cheaper in print or free on the Web. I subscribe to the WSJ for $90 a year and read the NYT for free on my iPod Touch and Web browser. Even if the NYT started charging $50 for the Touch and Web versions, it would still be just a fraction of the investment required for reading it on the Kindle.

The new Kindle can read PDF files. Just like the iPod did for songs, suddenly you can have any book for free, if you're willing infringe copyright. That's a big selling point in the student market (there are a number of textbook-dedicated torrent sites). Imagine, $500 for a semester's worth of books, or $500 for a kindle and copy the books from your friend.

But notebooks can already read PDFs -- and they let students take notes. Why get a second $500 device that can only do one of these functions?

I mean, couldn't you argue that your notebook could already play MP3's, why get an iPod?

It's the e-ink, the portability, the battery life, the weight of the device.

Everyone I know that has a Kindle loves it.

Because laptops don't fit in your pocket.

I am sure that Kindle owners love the devices, for the reasons that you stated. The problem I have is the price. Students and newspaper readers will have a tough time justifying a $500 purchase, especially in this economy.

For reading PDFs, the key differentiator is battery life. Also, the aspect ratio of the display on the Kindle is better for reading a document. If the laptop is always plugged in, then the battery life argument goes away. But, reading a document formatted for 8.5 x 11 on a wide screen display is not the ideal experience.

I would also dispute the effectiveness of taking notes on a laptop. As soon as you want to write anything other than text (e.g. diagram or equation), you'll slow to a crawl. (At least, I would slow to a crawl.)

I agree that $500 is a steep up front investment given the similarity in price point to a low end laptop.

Because the difference in readability between an e-ink screen and an LCD is absurd. Yes, technically you can read PDFs on a netbook/laptop, but once you pass 20 minutes of reading, you start wishing you had a paper copy.

I wish Wacom had more competition and that touchscreen laptops were cheaper. I believe a lot could be done with them if they could be brought down to the general consumer's price level.

I would rather spend $350-$400 more on a touchscreen for a new laptop.

I might not have bought one myself, but I could have probably convinced my parents to buy it for me.

What did people expect? The existing small Kindle costs $360. Large-screen ebook readers from other companies cost even more than the Kindle DX. How exactly did anyone expect that Amazon would get a larger e-ink display without raising the price?