The Blind Demand Return of Kindle's Text-to-Speech

[JMcEntegart]

When the new version of Amazon’s Kindle launched users were pleased to note that it had a text-to-speech function.

The Blind Demand Return of Kindle's Text-to-Speech : Read more

 

[Spanky Deluxe]

Has anyone ever tried listening to a computer reading something?? Its not the most pleasurable experience. It hardly compares to an audiobook. Honestly, I really don't think they would see any loss in sales of audiobooks due to people using text-to-speech software. You can buy eBooks and you can use software to read them to you on your computer, you've been able to do this since the advent of eBooks. So, have they seen a loss in sales of audiobooks with the advent of eBooks?? I doubt it!
The people that will actually use this feature are the people that need it. Very very few fully sighted people would use this. A visually impaired person, however, currently has to either wait for a book to be reprinted in braille or wait for it to be made into an audiobook - which can cost ten times the cost of the original book. Plus, only a very small number of books even get made into unabridged audiobooks. Visually impaired people don't care about how natural the computer voice sounds since its all they have - they're happy using such computer voices to use computers in general already.

 

[Guest]

if i was really insenstive i would make some comment about their voices going unheard

 

[solymnar]

Spanky nailed this.

You're average user is not going to use the text to speech option because the difference in a well done audio book is not even comparable. Its like watching a movie poorly recorded off of someone's cheap vid cam in a theater vs. watching it in HD with surround.

If its your only choice then its a usable feature but it hardly replaces audiobooks. The book publisher's response to this is a bit absurd and not at all in touch with reality. The average reader will likely use the kindle to...read. Its faster and provides a more in depth experience since for most of us we no longer notice we're reading and just get sucked inside the book. Much harder to get that experience with text to speech.

But if you're blind...its a nice perk.

 

[mforce2]

[citation][nom]spanky deluxe[/nom]Has anyone ever tried listening to a computer reading something?? Its not the most pleasurable experience. It hardly compares to an audiobook. Honestly, I really don't think they would see any loss in sales of audiobooks due to people using text-to-speech software. [/citation]
Yeah but still if there's one more buck to be made by screwing your customers why not ? I bought a book from Amazon and was surprised it had an "offer" for the ebook. Only 10$ more. Give me a break , I bought the real thing , the text and all , paid 35 $ doesn't that mean I get the ebook for free , after all it's the same damn thing. Guess it's the same as with the music industry where they'd have you buy the track for you PC and again for you media player.
The thing is people who want to find ways around this. I just downloaded the ebook from P2P. Kindle is not the only ereader in town, and maybe Kindle can be hacked and so on ....

 

[Guest]

That is very interesting... So if you ask someone to read a book for you, you are violating authors' copyrights? That is exactly what Kindle 2 does (ok, not so good..). People who make audio books should work together with Amazon to create and offer a new format standard that could allow Kindle 2 or other readers to read the books better. That is the future.

 

[Guest]

So, why haven't the blind gone the legal route and started a lawsuit against both Amazon and the AG under the ADA law?

 

[dfusco]

No way a disability should trump profits
Perhaps in this tax happy environment we should tax the blind for the inconvience that cause and give the money to the publishing companies. (no I am NOT serious)

 

[WyomingKnott]

[citation][nom]Juca Bala[/nom]That is very interesting... So if you ask someone to read a book for you, you are violating authors' copyrights? [/citation]

Sorry, kid. No more reading bedtime stories!

 

[MagicPants]

ipreferlisteningtotexttospeechoveranaudiobookbecauseitismucheasiertolistento.

 

[MagicPants]

ipreferlisteningtotexttospeechoveranaudiobookbecauseitismucheasiertolistento.

 

[Guest]

I am dyslexic and the text to speech function is one thing that made me sit up and pay attention to ebook readers. I find it VERY hard to read a novel, which leaves me the choice of either an audiobook or spend six months, 2 hours a day just to get through a book. I do love books which makes this such a shame. Audiobooks tend not to come with the text, which I would like to read along with. Also can help save my place easier.

The biggest help from this would be Factual books! I love reading up on history and all sorts else. This feature would really make it viable for me.

I am kind of holding out for kindle 3 really anyway though. One reason is price, other is I want to be able to change background colour to a dark pink, as I read off of that with twice the speed in regards to intake of information.

 

[Guest]

Not all business models work out to be good business models. The guy who raised big horses for farming was probably not all that excited about the advancement of tractors. As computers and software become more productive it is not in the best interest of users or society to limit that use just because it interferes with some body’s business model. If computers can read text to a user and the user is satisfied with the results then they should be able to do it. If they paid for the text then it is their right to use it in any personal way they choose, including having a computer read it to them.

 

[megamanx00]

That's so dumb. You can't compare something like a text to speach on Dan Browns Angels and Demons, or Digital Fortress and say it will cannibalize sales of those same books. It's not an audio recording, but a bland translation for the visually impared. If you're reading something, but you get onto a bus and get motion sickness, it's better for the author if you can continue by listening to it with some ear buds and then finish reading it later. IF PEOPLE READ IT FASTER AND LIKE IT THEY MAY JUST BUY ANOTHER BOOK SOONER!! This is just so dumb.

*sigh*

The Authors guild is acting foolishly for they are afraid of a new medium. They should instead be figuring out how to squeeze every penny from the consumer through this new medium rather than fighting it, like any good little capitalist ^_^.

 

[Guest]

I put a piece of red cellophane over my kindle screen and I can read much faster that way.

This really is insane, we visually impaired people buy a ton of ebooks *because* of the text to speak function, we obviously don't buy normal books, and the range of audiobooks is highly limited.
So as a publisher you would cut out a sector of your market, or make us jump through hoops to prove we are blind?

Having text to speech won't hurt audio book sales, not having it *will* hurt ebook sales. I really find this quite unbelievable.

 

[jawshoeaw]

It may be foolhardy but it's the author's right - audio books make money for authors, most of whom are not exactly getting rich. I have my doubts however that any extra money you pay for audio finds its way back to the authors. Eventually text to speech will be as good as a human voice - it's not far now. I think the authors guild is looking forward, not backward in securing their rights.

A good compromise would be a small surcharge paid back as royalty to the author - say 25 cents or so - for Kindle to read to you. Another good idea would be for people to stop pirating ebooks.

 

[BKD]

The Opera browser has this feature and I use it all the time. I can read, but I often don't feel like it. Instead of just skipping the information, I have Opera read it and I take a rest. Works very nice for emails too.

I think this book industry is stupid because the more functional the material is the more it's going to sell. It's not a choice, either this or that. It's about value. This is like an argument between divisions inside a companyy and it should be able the market/people/service. You're going deny service to 99% of your customers to protect sales distribution in your divisions? It's this level of stupidity that leads to slavery because how else can you feed yourself when your that stupid?

Be real, be sober.