Years of Poems and Spirits

God gives life and Charles C. gives us Kindle. We received it as a surprise gift and love it from then on.

I was just thinking the other day after struggling with a hardcover book, “Five thousand years of human civilization later, is this the best reading experience we can come up with?” Here is a list of my problems:

• You can’t use ball pen to mark on a book while lying on the bed
• A beautifully bond book is the hardest one to keep open (to read, to write on, etc.)
• You don’t want to dog-ear or write on borrowed or rented books
• Books tend to have to small a margin
• You can underline, write all you want in a book, it is still a pain in the ass to look up anything you remembered as “somewhere in the book”.
• Books are heavy

The most important thing Kindle offers is a much superior reading experience: the book is light, you can order content at any time from almost anywhere (anywhere has a Sprint-competible wireless network, that is). The printing technology (the device is much more like a miniture printer behind a wipeable slate than a LCD display) make it very easy on the eyes. Another feature we like the most is that it allows you to send your content (in Word, text or HTML format only) to your Kindle.

Of course, there are things I would like in future versions, e.g. so far, all the contents are of the same font. It cannot handle the pictures embedded in a block of text in the original print. The device is super light yet not the most ergonomic to hold for a long time. So far, Kindle only supports 240K titles and many of the academic ones are not yet available.

But for $395, which includes all the wireless bills incurred forever, this is an incredible piece of machine that will change many people’s lifes, particularly those poor graduate students (I felt like someone just died before they came up with Penicilline). I am saying so with some confidence too. Bezos revealed on Charlie Rose that in the 14 month Kindle has been on the market, Amazon has sold 1/10 of the books on it already. WOW!

Recently, played with Amazon.com’s EC2 (Elastic Computing Cloud). Here is what I have learned:

1. EC2 is NOT Grid Computing. Many people are confused by the term “Cloud”, so was I. Bezos said it probably should be called “infrastructure cloud”.

2. Cost wise, EC2 is comparable to dedicated web hosting (EC2 cost calculator vs. my ISP’s dedicated server page). But has much stronger value prop.  It is particularly useful in a situation where temporary overflow traffic is concerned. In other words, If you are to add a new country or a new product line to your website, you may need to add a whole new server permanently.  However, if you are running a promotion, you almost want to rent a readily configured server for a day or two. That is where you need EC2 (where every machine is a software copy essentially).

3. MSFT has a competing product Azusa. It is very tightly integrated with their Visual Studio IDE. As someone said it so well, Azusa empowers developer whereas EC2 empowers operations. But how many companies who are in need of cloud computing would entrust operations to developers?

4. EC2, despite its strong value prop, is not the best for starters (e.g. small startup, ma-pa shop, or small community sites) cost-wise. If a dedicated server is “elastic” enough for your site’s peak traffic, you may not need EC2. Only if you need more than a dedicated server, you definitely want to consider EC2. 

5. EC2 is pretty easy to use. Still, the virtual machines do not persist, so you have to use another Amazon product EBS (block storage) for everything that changes. This is the small overhead for the easy scability.

Overall, EC2 has a very targetted audience. I imagine those who use it would love it wholeheartedly.