sick of authors blogging from ignorance...

[acroyear]

Those ranting against amazon's price-fixing (not the dropping of the macmillan titles, which was stupid, but the $9.99 price point that amazon wanted rather than letting the publishers have full control over the prices) are totally missing one key point: if amazon can't offer a cost difference between what they offer and what iTunes offers, then the fight between kindle and ipad will be strictly on the technology, and THEY WILL LOSE.

As PotC clearly stated:

"You know, I could beat you in a fair fight."

"Well, then, that doesn't exactly give me an incentive to fight fair."

Amazon has money, and some good developers, but if technically its device is behind the ipad, then it can only compete by lowering prices on the whole user experience. If the kindle and the ipad and all these others were ubiquitous, that would be one thing, but at this early stage, just like moving console game machines, until there is a killer title that sets the REAL price point, then controlling the costs of the games and keeping them low was how you entered the market until you had a comparable share, then you let the publishers go back to the standard price point.

the publishing industry is looking only at their books and making price models comparable to paper. this is *backwards thinking*. This ignores the hardware itself which is too much of both the user experience, and more importantly, the company's ability to even move the titles in the first place. the publishers in the bigger picture don't care about ebooks because they still have a market without them.

but to amazon, bn, and apple, they are having to play this out just like atari, coleco, mattell (intellivision), the zillions of 6502 platforms of the 80s, and the modern console world of xbox, ps2/3, and wii. until you have a killer app, a killer title, or some serious value-add, you don't move consoles where other consoles already exist if your total user experience price point (for the first year or so) is comparable to what is already in the market.

so amazon is competing against paper and it is competing against the ipad which has SERIOUS value-add: color, a 2 year history of 3rd party apps, and The Steve Jobs Reality Distortion Field. they only way to compete against that platform is to show a lower price for the user experience, and given that the kindle itself still has a minimum price point to make up for the r&d, that means cheaper titles.

this is what the publishing world, "the authors" don't get. They look at this like xbox/wii/ps3 AFTER the 3 years of competition and undercutting and who's got the killer app fights that got to this 30-30-30 world we have today, that got to the point of ubiquity. they think an ebook is an ebook because to them, it is. they see a game title run at the same price on all 3 platforms and think that's how they should control it.

they totally are ignoring history. the platform wars for ebooks are *just starting*. the devices aren't done, the market isn't anywhere close to having a set of ubiquitous platforms. controlling the prices is one key form of competition, especially where unlike SEGA in the early years, you can't really get away with exclusivity licensing contracts because the publisher always has that other outlet: paper.

authors know words. publishers know editing, books, and paper.

neither of them know a damn thing about the e-gadget world, and i'm getting sick of their rantings from ignorance.

Comments

[thatliardiego.livejournal.com]

Frankly, it's going to take at least a year of the iPads being on the market before the "killer book app" comes along, and it might be someone like a Stephen King or a John Grisham (or heaven forfend, a Dan Brown) who decides that they want their book solely distributed in an e-format. (This is something very much like something King would do, because he's wacky like that.)

Or, say—J.K. Rowling puts out some sort of addendum to the Harry Potter series that contains video content that is imbedded in an ebook. THAT could move a lot of product.

Other than that, it's gonna be a long hard slog before there's a winner.

[voltbang.livejournal.com]

Not being subject to the mac effect, I don't see the ipad as the clear winner. It does lots of stuff and all, but I'm not feeling it.

Either way, I can't see buying an e-book for more than a paper book.

[thelongshot.livejournal.com]

I scratch my head why you think the Kindle and the iPad are directly competing against each other. The iPad is going to be competing against Netbooks and other tablet computers (like forthcoming Android tablets), while the Kindle is primarily an eBook reader with some generic online access (free, BTW) and a non-LCD paper-like screen for about half the price. In my mind, they are in different markets competing with different customers.

Now, they might compete indirectly, since eBooks probably will appear in iTunes, but I doubt they will be cheaper in general to what Amazon is offering. To be honest, there is still a war out there as far as what to charge, and the publishing industry will keep protecting the print part of their industry with pricing and DRM. In my brief lookaround, they are looking at the typical bestsellers selling at $12.99 - $14.99 on iTunes.

[arseaboutface.livejournal.com]

I hate ebooks. THERE. I SAID IT. Call me old-fashioned, but give me real paper books that I can touch and smell and turn the pages of carefully while I'm reading over soulless plastic screens any day.

[acroyear70.livejournal.com]

in the ebook wars, it is amazon, bn, and apple, with google waiting to see if there's an opening. each has their ebook platform. that apple's happens to do more than just read ebooks is a technical advantage, and it means that apple to a degree is fighting a multi-front war, but they've got the money for it, and they have Steve Jobs, neither of which should be discounted.

just like microsoft had to look at xbox in competition with sega and ps2 (this was before nintendo got back into the game with wii) *without* any of its other technologies being involved, amazon has to look at this in a very limited manner: this is amazon vs itunes as the primary user's ebook storefront, and since each has only one platform it can sell on, that makes it kindle vs ipad. this is, to amazon, direct competition.

amazon's ebook people don't care about "different markets and different customers". when amazon started selling mp3s, they were in direct competition with itunes, and no other part of amazon cared or was involved. they were fighting for the same customers.

with apple's entry into ebooks and the ipad as the first reasonable apple platform to read them on, this IS competing for the same customer base.

[kmusser]

I agree, from many of the rants you'd think Amazon was the only bookstore/venue for e-books in existence.

[acroyear70.livejournal.com]

it took the music industry far too long to realize people wouldn't pay more for a music download than the would for the cd.

what really worries me is "out of print". when the music industry pulls a CD and declares it out of print, they also pull the mp3s and m4as from the online stores.

this is *stupid*.

this is totally failing to recognize the profits to be made by selling download-only to an audience that isn't large enough to warrant physical media. having an item for sale, that is bought, that costs nothing, is minting pure money, and the labels totally fail to see that piece of blunt obviousness.*

and it worries me that the book industry will do the same - pull the ebook when they pull the physical book. granted, in that particular case there are contracts involved with the author that reinforce the practice, but that's where, like the record industry, the publishers are going to continue to be a decade behind what is possible, and when the day comes that someone new enters the ebook publishing world *strictly* as an ebook publisher, they will be left behind.

and THEN watch the lawsuits fly, because that seems the only weapon left for the proprieters of obsolete technology.

* there is an exception to that: Disney has been using iTunes to sell some of its older film score albums, like The Black Hole and 20,000 Leagues, and I continue to support that.

beyond that, it only happens with independent artists directly selling "official bootlegs", like Marillion and Robert Fripp/King Crimson.

[acroyear70.livejournal.com]

besides, until Apple supports flash on that damned thing, it can not take the netbook platform away because nobody will use it (who hasn't already bought into Steve Jobs's world) if they can't get use it on "site x".

[acroyear70.livejournal.com]

really, it is time to move to print-on-demand. give me the ebook for $5-$15, and if I want to kill some trees for it, i make a request to do it and get the paper in a week. blurb and others show this is quite possible and affordable, and will be even more so under economies of scale.

AND it means less trees getting clobbered up front printing books that never sell, and less gas getting wasted shipping them, and less warehouse space, etc etc.

of course, it also means the end of bn and borders, as they both have already gutted their media section to make way for more paper, so if suddenly there's less paper books being printed, they will look depressingly emptier and emptier...

[arseaboutface.livejournal.com]

The idea of not being able to walk into a bookstore and surround myself in the smell of printed books makes me sad. It's a little froo-froo, but I really do think there's a special quality to print books that ebooks and ereaders lack.

Besides, what about libraries? Are we going to be able to rent ebooks? What about the equipment?

[thelongshot.livejournal.com]

You left out Sony in that list.

Anyways, I think you miss the point here. The publishing industry has had to be dragged into this kicking and screaming. Unlike the music industry, they don't have the threat of "file sharing". In fact, that is what makes them slow to enter the industry. They also know that there isn't a strong movement to go away from paper books. There is also a strong desire from them to protect the profits they make from hardback editions.

You talk about price advantage like Apple can get a different result from what Amazon was trying to do. Fact is, publishers want to charge MORE for eBooks than what Amazon draws the line there. I don't think Apple is going to have much special magic there, and I don't think they are going to make a big deal about it. (Steve Jobs has been quoted in the past about not really being all that interested in eBooks.)

BTW, Amazon does still have an advantage from that you can actually buy books on the device from anywhere. That is something that the iPad won't give you. (To get that, you'd need the 3G version and have to pay data rates for it.)

Personally, I think the real winner in the eBook retail war is going to be the retailer that finally convinces the publishers that DRM is holding them back and that we have a store that can sell to anyone no matter what the device. I don't see that happening any time soon, tho.

[thelongshot.livejournal.com]

Actually, you can check out ebooks from libraries. For example, here is the New York Public Library site:

http://ebooks.nypl.org/

[arseaboutface.livejournal.com]

Can you rent ereaders, though? If so, awesome. I will always crave the feel of a book in my hands, the smell of paper and ink, the quiet, anticipatory hum of a bookstore, but I will freely admit that I have no more rational objection than "but I LIKE books." But if you can't rent ereaders to read the ebooks, we still have a problem.

[acroyear70.livejournal.com]

802.11 is so ubiquitous, and increasingly free, that the kindle-sprint deal isn't all that important. ipad doesn't need 3G to be useful for making purchases - 3G is an add-on, and most cell packages these days have fixed-cost data rates with no limits.

DRM isn't really the hold-up - the absolute incompatibility of the formats is. its not like they're all embracing docbook or pdf the way that everybody embraced mp3. even after DRM is gone and books can "go anywhere", they won't because it'll still take some agreement on a middle format AND the willingness of the customer base to convert to that.

i convert my purchased itunes files to mp3, but i'm pretty sure i'm in the rarity for that.

then there's the "why go to X if you have to convert it to put it on Y" - why go to iTunes to buy a book if the same book is at amazon and i already have the kindle? if the price difference isn't there (and the publishers don't want there to be one), then again - the device decides the store and the store decides the device, and again, amazon is somewhat at the loss.

but just taking out DRM means nothing because the devices are too new for people to have "my old one died" complaints yet (except the geeks that have already been there with their ipods). this isn't like music or movies where you have 5 different things to use it on - this is one person with one dedicated device, so transfer isn't the issue.

[thelongshot.livejournal.com]

802.11 is so ubiquitous, and increasingly free, that the kindle-sprint deal isn't all that important. ipad doesn't need 3G to be useful for making purchases - 3G is an add-on, and most cell packages these days have fixed-cost data rates with no limits.

Not THAT ubiquitous. Given that I've been using my N900 without a data plan, it has sometimes been a struggle to find free wifi. Hell, I can't always get free wifi at Starbucks. I was only able to use the wifi at BWI because they were running a free holiday special.

DRM isn't really the hold-up - the absolute incompatibility of the formats is. its not like they're all embracing docbook or pdf the way that everybody embraced mp3. even after DRM is gone and books can "go anywhere", they won't because it'll still take some agreement on a middle format AND the willingness of the customer base to convert to that.

Now you are showing your ignorance. Converting eBooks is trivial with Calibre. As for a "middle format", there is one now: Adobe EPUB. Just about every eBook reader is working to support it. Sony recently moved all of their secure books from their proprietary format to EPUB, and my understanding is that BN is going to be doing the same thing. Both support DRM-free EPUB.

The only outlier right now is Amazon, which is sticking to their modified MobiPocket format. The irony is that their treatment of the format has effectively killed MobiPocket as a reader. They are trying too hard to sell Kindles that they missed out on trying to make the MobiPocket format ubiquitous.

[immer-nachoha.livejournal.com]

There's also the problem of who the hell says anyone has the right to specify what retailers sell their product for, the can set the price they sell to the retailers for, but then if said retailer wants to sell the item at a loss that's their buisness.

[mandrakan.livejournal.com]

Are they actually pulling them, or are they simply not doing the work to put their back-catalogues out electronically?

Because the former seems like a pretty dumb unforced error (although it might be required under existing IP contracts, which is likely to fade with time); while the latter is a defensible, even if ultimately incorrect, allocation of resources decision.

[mandrakan.livejournal.com]

It does seem to me that the display is going to me more of a significant decision point in the short term than price. I haven't used either yet, but if the iPad is an LCD screen, I have no interest in using it as my primary reader. Amazon's paper-like viewer seems more attractive, but so far I've only glanced at it on the subway.

[acroyear70.livejournal.com]

Converting eBooks is trivial with Calibre.

why should the typical user be forced to install yet another piece of software to read a book? asking the end-users to deal with file conversion is asking to be put out of business. it is bad enough the insane variety of codecs people have to deal with just to watch a movie these days. people will generally pick the platform that fits the store they go to and that's that.

I note that apple itself has never directly provided video conversion software to put DRM-free, non-m4v movies into their iPod, and doesn't consider iPod or iTunes sales to be down because of it.

thus my original point: the store front is the key to EVERYTHING, and if you give users a reason to go to another store front to populate your device, you've pretty much lost. So I think that Amazon's p.o.v. was that had they pushed MobiPocket as a file format, they could have raked in behind-the-scenes cash as a patent holder, but might have lost the chance for the storefront monopoly. In this I think they were wrong, and the fact that they're the top-selling mp3 market in the game because they support every format out there kinda supports that.

It seems Amazon's #1 problem in the larger picture was in trying to win a monopoly before the rules were even clear, forgetting that Steve Jobs makes up the rules as he goes.

EPUB (news to me, yes ;-) ) is great for initially free content (public domain books) and probably will be the literary "podcast" format - google will likely be the one to embrace that by having google reader able to translate blogs and news articles into it to assemble a "newspaper" for you of your fav readings (which, of course, scares the crap out of the news websites out there).

just because readers can read it doesn't mean it will be the preferred format of the store fronts. Apple's iTunes are DRM-free, but that in no way made Apple suddently decide to push mp3s instead of AAC files.

They are trying too hard to sell Kindles that they missed out on trying to make the MobiPocket format ubiquitous.

this sort of thing has been going on for years.

Sony has, the second Apple entered the market, already lost. BN still has a chance in the market (though their product isn't a big enough improvement over Amazons yet). But while Sony may have good technology, the storefront is the key and the lack of a storefront brand puts Sony increasingly dependent on the storefronts that can actually compete, and now that all 3 have their own devices, Sony is out of the game.

Jobs may not want to be in the ebook business, but really it is an easy win for Apple so others are doing it in his name. They're going at it backwards, and the world may follow. Where Amazon wanted the kindle to drive ebook sales, Apple's people are letting ebooks drive ipad sales by promoting the iTunes store ease-of-use and the fact that ebooks are just one of many things you can do with an ipad. Once the iPad has ubiquity, they can look at the market from the other direction again.

[acroyear70.livejournal.com]

there have been albums pulled from iTunes and Amazon once they were out of print. while this doesn't happen among mainstream pop artists, it is a major curse of the classical world with the mainstream labels, especially with conductors that have large back catalogues (Bernstein), or contemporary composers whose market is smaller than Beethoven's.

Sony in particular would rather keep making money off of Bernstein's record by reassembling his catalog into new packages, rather than just keeping a perpetual download feed of his entire 60s output available all at once. The trouble is that each subsequent re-packaging reduces the # of works available, to the point that a large chunk of his more obscure recordings (because they're mostly contemporary composers) doesn't exist. THAT is the stuff to put on download only, but as I said, the labels don't get it.

Well, two labels do: Naxos and Deutcsh Gramaphon.

[acroyear70.livejournal.com]

and i said 802.11 was "increasingly" free, not always free. hell, i just had free wifi in a run-down exxon station in chantilly (while waiting for my inspection) and then the nearby Dogfish Ale brewhouse. 4 lunchstops across the street all piggyback on the same network to provide free-for-all.

Starbucks has many of its stores still under exclusive contracts with T-Mobile, and can't switch to a free service until those expire.

[thelongshot.livejournal.com]

I guess you've never heard of MAP. It happens all the time.

http://consumerist.com/2007/09/what-is-minimum-advertised-price.html

[acroyear70.livejournal.com]

ah, but that depends on a contract that the two sides agree too, and usually is mostly set by the supplier as a "standard operating contract". I understand the rational from retailers - if X has permission to sell at near-cost, then nobody buys from me, therefore i won't even bother to sell. Meanwhile the rational from suppliers is that if something is exclusive to a particular store, without advertising it as such, it hurts the word-of-mouth sales channel. People sometimes need to see things in multiple places before they even think of buying.

On the other hand, if a MAP was never part of the ebook deal between Amazon and MacMillan, then really MacMillan (who was obviously going to put a MAP into the Apple deal) was in the wrong in this particular scenario.

[uncle-possum.livejournal.com]

Actually, libraries have been watching this issue for some time--you could argue since they started carrying 8 and 16 mm movies in the early 50s. The technology is a major issue (many libraries remember the Beta format and the 12inch videodisk) so libraries are holding out for the industry to come up with an agreed upon standard before getting into ebooks in a big way.

Currently many libraries do "check out" ebooks, with readers (Kindles are probably the most popular at the moment), but there is less user demand than one might think, notably compared with audiobooks (huge market for listening to books while working, driving, commuting, etc.)

The big issue is the licensing agreements: How many people can use the same thing at the same time? Often the deal allows only one person at a time to use a subscribed item, regardless of the technology. Once the industry comes to an agreement, the likelihood that the user will have a reader increases. (cf. what happened once cassette tapes, and later CDs were common--libraries no longer had to check out hardware, and nearly all libraries got into audiobooks).

And, while all the stuff discussed here is happening, there is also movement in the book-making machine (download the book, print on the spot in one step for a reasonable price). So, it may be possible to get the electronic book in print form if you want. And that opens up the question of, in that environment, what is the difference between libraries and bookstores? But that's another discussion.

(PS: At present, the quality of graphics in a high quality book is still generally better than that on most readers, including most computers. That will probably change at some point).

[thelongshot.livejournal.com]

why should the typical user be forced to install yet another piece of software to read a book?

You are ignoring my point in that converting formats is trivial and is a minor issue in comparison to DRM (which, unless you remove it, you can't convert it to another format.)

just because readers can read it doesn't mean it will be the preferred format of the store fronts. Apple's iTunes are DRM-free, but that in no way made Apple suddently decide to push mp3s instead of AAC files.

But, because it is DRM-free, you actually have the ability to convert it to MP3 (course, the issue from converting from one lossy format to another is a reason why I prefer to buy my MP3s at Amazon, when I do buy them. Course, this is much less of an issue with eBooks.)

Sony has, the second Apple entered the market, already lost. BN still has a chance in the market (though their product isn't a big enough improvement over Amazons yet). But while Sony may have good technology, the storefront is the key and the lack of a storefront brand puts Sony increasingly dependent on the storefronts that can actually compete, and now that all 3 have their own devices, Sony is out of the game.

Sony DOES have a storefront. I also think that Sony's product IS better than Amazon's. I find the Kindle too big and clunky looking. Sony's is more elegant.

I also disagree that Apple has a device, any more than they had a device with the iPod Touch or the iPhone. While all three can read eBooks, they are not eBook readers. The issues with non-eInk devices will remain on this (Eyestrain due to LCD screens, battery life)

The only real effect I could see this having is possibly on the large screen readers (Kindle DX, Sony Reader Daily Edition) and only for casual readers. It certainly will help with the proliferation of eBooks, but Apple isn't going to own the market on this.

[thelongshot.livejournal.com]

Oh, and apparently Apple will be using their own DRM on EPUB, so no compatibility with other readers there either.

http://blogs.adobe.com/digitaleditions/2010/01/epub_ipad_and_content_interope.html

[acroyear70.livejournal.com]

Apple isn't going to own the market on this

I agree with you on this, even to the point of thinking Apple isn't even going to have the majority.

I see this falling out just like the console games trend - 30,30,30, and everybody else scrapping for the last 10.

30 = Amazon, unless the bad press of the last week hurts them over a longer term

30 = Apple, because there are those who find multiple uses for their ipad of which the ebook reader is one of them. apple may also be using this as a market platform to researching alternative screen technologies that solve the LCD problem. Everything subsequent to the iPod has used an advantage gained by the previous product. iPod begat iTunes, iTunes begat iPhone, iPhone begat iTouch, iTouch begat iPad - the iPad has that initial advantage of so many iTouch-compatible apps already out there, some of which may be even more useful at decent screen resolution. one killer-app for "normal people" and the ebook stuff will follow.

Apple also has the advantage of being MUCH easier to update, since it is all software stored in flash-memory, rather than EPROM. Apple can come up with a 2nd generation reader interface and not have to make people get new devices to upgrade to it, where-as the kindle will eventually get hit by the lack of memory to support such an upgrade.

30 = BN or Sony, though I'm inclined to go with BN unless Borders throws its weight somewhere - right now they're pushing Sony (just looked i up) since Sony is the only one not directly competing with them in markets other than ebooks.

google's another odd-man-out in this, and may be waiting to produce the 3rd generation reader system (if we consider apple's platform as one that makes a 2nd generation even possible) once some of the standards are established. google's approach will be the opposite of the proprietary/download approach of the other readers: assume the network, centralize the books on a server (with device-side caching of chapters), and you get it on any machine anywhere (a-la Safari for O'Reilly). With sync-ups happening automatically when you get back to a live network port.

such a google approach would have the advantage of bookmarking without taking it with you - read it on your pad at home, then when you get to your computer, just pick up what you bookmarked right on your desktop.

THAT is the ideal world, the real future of all of this (in a way that makes Apple's approach meaningless)...and google can take its time to make it happen.

[acroyear70.livejournal.com]

the other thing that can happen, of course, is that the publishers finally realize that in some cases, they don't even need the retailers in order to operate, especially with items they never intend to also paper-sell.

[thelongshot.livejournal.com]

I give BN an outside shot because they at least have a store that supports multiple devices (Fictionwise), and that really is what it is going to take for someone to break out. Until then, they will be dependent on how many razors they can sell for their blade sales.

[thelongshot.livejournal.com]

You mean like Baen? They've been using that model successfully for years. Unfortunately, most publishers have been pretty skittish on that end.

Authors also have self-published stuff for a while too. I know Piers Anthony was one of the early ones, even investing in some eBook companies. There are plenty of authors who own the eBook rights to many of their stories and often find their own way to publish them.

[immer-nachoha.livejournal.com]

Yes, Minimum *advertised* price, still doesn't tell them what they must *sell* the item for. Even then it's something they've agreed to in advance.

[scaleslea.livejournal.com]

I hear this a lot, but I also hear about programmers having to completely rebuild the company site without flash because the CEO just got an iPhone.

Time will tell. Flash may go out of style, or something else may come along that will eat its lunch.

A number of people are betting that is HTML5.

Doc

[scaleslea.livejournal.com]

I still see one thing that Amazon has going for it that would seem to make the Kindle books the winner in the long run: Syncing. When you stop reading something on a Kindle, not only does it save your place, it tells all of your other Kindle devices what your place is. So even if the iPad or something else wins the hardware wars, Amazon may sell more Kindle books because there is a Kindle app that works on the iPhone, iPod Touch, and the iPad.

Now I'll admit that I haven't done a deep and serious look at the e-book market, but Amazon is the only one I've heard of who has implemented this kind of feature.

Doc

[acroyear70.livejournal.com]

Companies that redo their entire web page because of a mobile are either insanely rich, or stupid.

HTML5 has 2 things going against it:
1) how damn slow they are to actually nail the standard down.
2) Microsoft.

Considering how much crap they're getting with IE8 breaking a million sites, mostly because IE 8 breaks IE 7 (and 6 and 5.5, 'cause nothing ever changed for them for more than 7 years), AND it doesn't really implement the current standards as well as Firefox, if they also add html5 to the mix (and a partial implementation only, if past history is to be considered), they're just going to destroy the web forever.

seriously, I'd love to actually play with HTML5, but until the standard becomes real, the browsers are playing very careful on partial implementation, having learned the hard way how easy it is to break sites, are going to wait for really implementing it.

Flash has the problem of always getting to be ever so slightly too large for the platforms. It is a CPU hog (just as Java is a memory hog), and that's a battery burner in any portable platform.

[scaleslea.livejournal.com]

I'll agree that it is madness to re-do an entire site just because the CEO's latest gadget doesn't support your technology, but that doesn't say that it doesn't happen.

Not saying that Flash will go away tomorrow, just that some people are betting that it will go away.

And I'm not sure that Microsoft really stands in the way of HTML5. More like HTML5 stands in the way of Microsoft regaining browser dominance. Despite IE's inertia, the IE8 fiasco is bringing more users over to Firefox. If you don't need sites that use Active X, there's no good reason NOT to switch to Firefox. The more frustrating it gets, the more people will move.

Doc

[acroyear70.livejournal.com]

the corporate world still will not "embrace" firefox, in spite of the years of attention to IE's heritage as the source for most evil...and if your site won't work on IE, you block out all those corporate users, you "FAIL". I'm talking BIG companies, like AT&T and Sprint, that refuse to look at anything other than IE. The financial world is much the same.

So yes, IE really is a blocker to HTML5 because IE still dominates the business world that thinks having a big DJIA/NASDAQ corporate name behind something is better than actually having real developers out there really fixing things in a timely manner and making things better.