Dad did get one and couldn't wait to show it to me. He loves it, having loaded it with classics for just a dollar or so each. The prices he told me were so ridiculously low, all of Dickens for eighty cents or so. Then he insisted I read whatever it was by Sir Walter Scott that he had been reading.
I hated it. Not the literature, but the Kindle, for so many reasons. The screen was tiny--it held about a sizable paragraph. I could read it all in one glance, then had to wait for the next page. When changing to the next page, the darned thing blinks--blinking lights will trigger vertigo for me. With the Kindle, you can't 'open' a book to a certain page, or thumb through stopping at favorite highlights; there is no heft to it; there is no smell of paper and dust to it. If I 'twittered,' which I don't, I expect it would be like reading a book on Twitter, a hundred forty words at a time. With the limited amount of visible text and the blinking light and the shiny shimmery insubstantiality of it, I felt like I was trying to read a New Age Big LIttle Book in a disco with worse than usual lighting.
Thumbs down on the Kindle. Emphatically, thumbs down. Both of them. If I had more thumbs, they would be down, too.
Okay, I can see some situations where it might be useful, but as I don't foresee being marooned on a desert island any time soon and have no plans to leave the planet, none of those situations apply to my life. If anything like a Lotto win were to come my way so that I could travel to the places on my Lotto list, I'd follow my old pattern of finding the densest, smallest print paperbacks I could to take with me. A few volumes from the Viking Portable LIbrary series would serve nicely. And besides, remember that amount of travel would be funded by the lottery--I would be able to afford the penalty cost of a second bag filled with books.
No Kindle for me, thanks, I'll stick with my books.