The name of the Kindle ebook reader

[fransways]

I have to say that Kindle didn't choose a very good name for their ebook reader.  the word Kindle means to burn or start a fire.  In this context is means burn your books and only rely on the electronic form available on line.  We all know that anything electronic can be made to say or read anything the programmer wants.  Who is to say that the ebook is exactly the same as the original paper book.  The paper is the source document and should always be around.  While the concept is OK, the name causes me concern.  No one wants people to go back to burning books.

[me3boyz]

I have to say that Kindle didn't choose a very good name for their ebook reader. the word Kindle means to burn or start a fire.  In this context is means burn your books and only rely on the electronic form available on line.

I respectfully disagree. Kindle can also mean to arouse interest or to bring into being. They're lighting a fire in you, the reader, not the books. And let me tell you, sure lit a fire under me! I've read so much more since I got my 1st Kindle for Christmas 2 years ago. I've also discovered authors that I wouldn't have had a chance to read because they were turned down by traditional publishing houses.

No one wants people to go back to burning books.

Sadly, books are still being burned. We've never left that behind. We just wish we had.

[dori chatelain]

kindle [kin-dl]  
verb (used with object)
1. to start (a fire); cause (a flame, blaze, etc.) to begin burning.
2. to set fire to or ignite (fuel or any combustible matter).
3. to excite; stir up or set going; animate; rouse; inflame: He kindled their hopes of victory.
4. to light up, illuminate, or make bright: Happiness kindled her eyes.

verb (used without object)
5. to begin to burn, as combustible matter, a light, fire, or flame.
6. to become aroused or animated.
7. to become lighted up, bright, or glowing, as the sky at dawn or the eyes with ardor.

I do believe that there are 7 meanings for "Kindle" I know that just because you have flame and you are burning somehting doesn't mean that the burning has to be a bad thing. I do know that the kindle has burned a flame in me. I have never been a reader Because of reading disability and difficulty. I Have awlays liked to read but I usually read magazines and or stuff on the internet because of the length of a book was difficult and when I got my kindle I could set it up so I could read easier and I have read more books in a year than I have in 30 years. and that is no lie. I myself think the name kindle is perfect for this ereader. I mean look at the defintions again and you will see that it is not meaning to burn the paper books.

yes you could burn paper books but why....

people said when computers came out that paper would disappear and 30 years later there is still paper being used for so many things. people even still write letters. I even write on paper still....

I will probably not be buying any more paper books for my self but I would buy them for other people. and there are some that I wouldn't want on my kindle....like a cookbook I bought a couple months ago. I do have cookbooks on my kindle fire..... and I have paper cookbooks and this one cookbook that I bought I wanted it for my collection of paper books.

I hope you burn a flame in you to read on the kindle and enjoy it. even if you enjoy it and still read paper books that would be your flame in you.....

god bless and happy reading....

[KayakerNC]

Who is to say that the ebook is exactly the same as the original paper book.  The paper is the source document and should always be around. 

Judging by the many, many versions of the Bible (for example), I don't think that paper books are immune.

[intinst]

Many ebooks have never been printed to paper, so no "source document" exists. I believe you are over thinking this.

[Todd Young]

The name's never worried me, but perhaps "Nook" is a better name for an ereader.

[intinst]

I'd rather be a Kindler than a Nookie, sorry.

[kindlegrl81]

kindle [kin-dl]  
verb (used with object)
1. to start (a fire); cause (a flame, blaze, etc.) to begin burning.
2. to set fire to or ignite (fuel or any combustible matter).
3. to excite; stir up or set going; animate; rouse; inflame: He kindled their hopes of victory.
4. to light up, illuminate, or make bright: Happiness kindled her eyes.

verb (used without object)
5. to begin to burn, as combustible matter, a light, fire, or flame.
6. to become aroused or animated.
7. to become lighted up, bright, or glowing, as the sky at dawn or the eyes with ardor.

I pretty sure Amazon was thinking of these definitions when they named the Kindle.  It is highly unlikely that they were trying to get people to burn books  , especially considering DTB's make up a large percentage of their sales.

[history_lover]

I have to say that Kindle didn't choose a very good name for their ebook reader. the word Kindle means to burn or start a fire.  In this context is means burn your books and only rely on the electronic form available on line. 

Other definitions for the word have already been pointed out. I think you're taking the word a little too literally. As mentioned, Amazon sells paper books too so why would they want people to rely only on ebooks?

We all know that anything electronic can be made to say or read anything the programmer wants.  Who is to say that the ebook is exactly the same as the original paper book. 

Because what would be the motive for that?

The paper is the source document and should always be around. 

No disagreement there.

While the concept is OK, the name causes me concern.  No one wants people to go back to burning books.

Again, you're only relying on one of the many definitions of the word and you're taking it far too literally. If the name is the only thing that causes you concern, try a Nook or a Sony eReader instead. There are other eInk eReaders out there and getting one doesn't mean you have to abandon paper books - you can enjoy the best of both worlds. But I get the feeling this isn't just about the name - you clearly have an agenda against ebook technology and you're just finding ridiculous ways to nickpick at them - like the name of an ereader model.

[Michael Cargill]

Maybe they used cheap batteries in the devices.  Within a couple of years they will leak and catch fire.

[valleycat1]

Most commercially published books are printed from a computer file, not from a hand-typed or hand-written piece of paper. So there is no 'paper source.'  Reading & writing are about sharing ideas, not the format.

And Amazon publishes the definition in their promo material (& on my keyboard kindle, it's on the first screensaver) as the v. definitions above at 3 & 4.

[teralpar]

I'd rather be a Kindler than a Nookie, sorry.

Me too!   

[DJRMel]

I must admit that when Amazon introduced the very first Kindle, I thought it was a terrible name for the same reason that OP states.  Also, as a hard core "Nothing can replace an actual book in my hands!" person, I thought Amazon was mocking  readers of paper books.  Yeah, I kind of over reacted. 

Now that I own one,  I get the whole Kindle as a verb concept - I'm reading more, trying new authors, buying more books.

[Ann in Arlington]

The early Kindles had, as one of the screen savers, a nicely rendered image showing the definition of Kindle that Bezos was thinking of: to arouse or inspire an emotion or feeling

Made it pretty clear.

[ProfCrash]

I think that is still there. At least, I remember seeing the kid under the tree reading on my DX and my K3. I assumed that the definition was still there

[Ann in Arlington]

I think that is still there. At least, I remember seeing the kid under the tree reading on my DX and my K3. I assumed that the definition was still there

Might be. . .but there's a whole different set of pictures on the new Basic Kindle and Touch.

[history_lover]

Might be. . .but there's a whole different set of pictures on the new Basic Kindle and Touch.

Yeah, it's not on the Kindle Touch.

[NightGoat]

I hear rumour that Amazon will be releasing a new Kindle in mid 2012, the new model will be the Kindle 451. 

[Ann in Arlington]

50 lashes with a wet noodle for the Goat.

[kindlegrl81]

[LaraAmber]

The paper is the source document and should always be around. 

The Library of Alexandria (destroyed by fire and war) would like to have a word with you, as would the Library of Baghdad (sacked by Mongols).  So would medieval monks who had to copy books by hand (introducing many errors) and transport them to other cities to prevent works from being lost in fire/flood/war/time.  It could take years to copy a single work.  Oh and all those lovely books that the Vatican has locked up so no one can ever see them.  We have lost many works because of there being only a handful of copies and paper being very, very fragile and NOT always around.  There is a reason our money is NOT made of paper but cotton.  With digital copies a work can reside all over the world without taking up much physical space and knowing it is exactly the same.  A government or religious authority can attempt to seize a work, but with people being able to fit files on a data storage device as small as my fingernail, good luck with being sure you got "all the copies".     

[NightGoat]

50 lashes with a wet noodle for the Goat.

Promise?

[Seleya]

Oh and all those lovely books that the Vatican has locked up so no one can ever see them.     

Actually the Vatican is scanning all those lovely books so that they'll be available to the public no matter where: http://www.romereports.com/palio/vatican%27s-library-begins-to-digitize-80000-of-its-manuscripts-with-nasa-technology-english-5590.html

[QuantumIguana]

Paper is a long-lasting format. We can read books written centuries ago. A file on a disk written a few decades ago? Maybe it will work, maybe it won't. The hardware might not be available, and even if it is, the data may be corrupted. The drive may simply languish on a junk pile with no one knowing what is on it. We may well lose works because they only exist on obsolete or broken electronic media. We use cotton for paper money because paper money gets used and abused far more than a book ever will.

If someone tries to rewrite books, a paper copy is pretty strong evidence what the original version was. An electronic copy, that's not so clear. Orwell's Memory Hole is much more practical with electronic copies than it ever was with paper copies. I have 20,000 e-books from Project Gutenberg sitting quietly on my hard drive. The more copies there are out there, the less the chance that anyone could ever attempt to implement the Memory Hole. In a way, I think Orwell was an optimist. He assumed that you had to get every single copy, because people would dig to find the original version. I don't think people will dig that hard.

Of course, e-books have real advantages. Just about anything you want at your fingertips, much of it free. No digging around to find a copy of some old obscure book, you can have it for free in a minute. And of course there are the advantages of being able to choose the font, and reading on an easy to read e-ink display instead of yellowed pages.

I do think that paper will be around, e-books will grow in popularity, but won't grow at this rate forever. Bibles alone will keep the presses running. Children's books will probably still be on paper, and paper is a probably a better format for prisons: in a prison, those e-readers probably aren't making it back in one piece.

[Sandpiper]

During an interview on some program, Jeff Bezos explained his / Amazon's choice of the word "kindle" as the name for their e-reader.  It may have been as long ago as October '08 on Oprah's show when the $50 discount was announced.  IIRC, it was generally to arouse / inspire interest.