Amazon, does have the data identifying the device on which their books are read. In fact, I believe that they can even identify what fraction of a book gets read over multiple devices if a customer does so (e.g., one might read 40% of a book on an iPhone while attending to activities outside the house, while the other 60% might be read on a Kindle device at home).

They may be waiting to have confidence in the stats they acquire before making a definitive decision regarding whether they want to profit from the razors or the blades.

I think this is meant to say that Amazon has 275,000 Kindle books for sale, but I read it as saying Amazon (“it”) has an catalog of 275,000 book titles (no matter what format) on its web site (“digital storefront”): That would be incorrect (it has millions of traditional books for sale).

Daveed

Like music, Apple wanted to offer via iTunes popular content, not (just) indie or long-tail content. That means accommodation with the studios in terms of availability window, price, HD version, (lack of) DVR, etc. Clearly Apple doesn’t have as strong a hand in negotiating with studios as it did with the labels for iTunes earlier. And allowing another company to dominate videos/movies would be detrimental to iTunes store in general, so a lot of negative factors coalesce here.

I don’t know their longer-rage plans for AppleTV, but it very much looks like an interim product, a hobby. :)

Correct me if I’m wrong but what Sony did wrong with their portable music strategy seems just like what Apple is currently doing with it’s video strategy (Apple TV). The device can only play MPEG-4/H.264 video content (yes, I know they’re open formats but wait for the next part) and can only buy/download video (protected) through the iTunes Store (besides YouTube). This seems like such an obvious mistake that I can’t believe Apple is making it blindly.

One of the main reasons the iPod was a success was that it allowed you to play content from various sources: ripping your already-owned CD’s, illegal MP3 downloading and buying from the iTunes Music Store. It allowed people to transition into an all-digital music collection. The Apple TV only allows the iTunes Store. Sure, you can rip your DVD’s and convert downloaded DivX files, but it’s a pain… who (beside the techie crowd) wants to go through all that work. The only “convenient” way to acquire video on the device is through iTunes.

Isn’t this exactly the mistake Sony made… trying to control both ends (hardware and content)? The iPod strategy worked so well because Apple was mostly concerned with making money on the hardware sales of the iPod. With the Apple TV, it seems like they are concerned with selling the hardware AND content through iTunes instead of the latter complimenting the former.

I’m interested in hearing people’s thoughts on this matter (perhaps a future Counternotions article???) Apple is smart and obviously knows that their strategy with the Apple TV is very different (I would say more limiting) than their iPod strategy…. is this a smart move or are they missing the opportunity of increased hardware sales and establishing a larger footprint in the living room market?

Apple’s micropayment capability for iPhone Apps – which will be able to run on the iPad – will allow content providers to write their own Apps and sell content. This would be great for books and newspapers.