I have a slightly different question here: When practically EVERYONE seems to have rubbished the product, and when it's shortcomings are SO obvious, why would anyone greenlight this project? Why did they think this will work? Either there's some real deep insight which we all are overlooking, or there's some massive management disaster that went shockingly unnoticed.
What really happened here?
imglab
· 1 month ago
YES. Only if there are large friendly letter 'Don't Panic' printed on its back.
pranman
· 1 month ago
Absolutely! Fantastic idea and good price. Probably irrelevant for western countries (iphone, mobile web) - but imagine its usefulness in low bandwidth countries or in regions where mobile access is patchy!
Think Africa, India, China, even Afghanistan, Iraq, there's a huge market out there. This can be a very simple, but unique change agent.
And for $99 its probably more value than the MIT laptop for every child campaign, which if I remember correctly couldn't get costs below $200?
Seriously good.
Jeet
· 1 month ago
Will it have "DON'T PANIC" written on cover? I might be tempted to buy it ;-)
Dns
· 1 month ago
Would You Pay $99 for Wikipedia in Your Pocket? Absolutely not, even it's a $0.99 as an iphone app, i am serious
abby
· 1 month ago
Same here.. Paying up for Wikipedia content? No way!
serialinsomniac
· 1 month ago
Well...what's wrong with a decent iPhone wiki app? I know this device is solely about Wikipedia and obviously the iPhone isn't, but there's some very decent clients for it that are either free or a hell of a lot cheaper than this, good as it may be.
dainathomas
· 1 month ago
$99 for wiki on iphone .. NO .. even I m serious.. I mean this is just not acceptable .. $99 for wiki .. I would use it on my PC rather then using it on iphone..
Best, Daina Thomas
Jerry Zambrano
· 1 month ago
Would I pay the $99 ? Absolutely not. Wikipedia is a free and open source project. To pay a third party for non-real-time information is pointless in a time of need for "Real Time" information. That plus, the $99 seems to serve only this 3rd party's monetary interest. If (and I have to emphasize IF) part or most of the $99 went towards the actual Wikipedia project, I'd think about it.
As it stands, NO is my answer.
EntrepreNerd
· 1 month ago
Yes, yes I would, and did. I got my iPhone for $99 and have the Wikipedia App. Would I pay that much for that pile of trashtech? Not a chance.
DinahS
· 1 month ago
No.
Jon Murray
· 1 month ago
I would need bigger pockets.
Stephen Robinson
· 1 month ago
No way, most phones can access wikipedia, so why pay for this?
Stephen Robinson
· 1 month ago
Oh and that wouldn't fit in my jeans pocket.
Kass
· 1 month ago
Wikipedia is STILL not considered to be dependable enough to cite as a reference or resource in school papers, bibliographies, etc. Encyclopedia Britannica? Maybe.
I also think it's shoddy that Wikipedia has a device that can't update in real-time. What is the need to purchase this when you can get a cell or PDA that can access Wikipedia in real time?
This device is a product disaster waiting to happen.
facebook-503994488
· 1 month ago
Tripple NO!
Richard Bacchetta
· 1 month ago
No, Already have it in my pocket on my iPhone.
Paula - Affiliate Blog Online
· 1 month ago
I don't use Wikipedia enough now to make it worth my while. Even if it was free, I'm pretty sure I wouldn't use it much.
Richard Cunningham
· 1 month ago
Wikipedia already has an optimized stylesheet that works very well on the iPhone/iPod touch - though I expect this device it is aimed at less tech savvy folks (the type of which don't read mashable of course). One issue of course is that parents are uncomfortable with their children being on the Internet unsupervised and this solves that is an easy to understand way.
Amit Gawande
· 1 month ago
No way. With all the free iPhone apps along with all time available wiki mobile page, I don't think anyone ever would buy one.
I guess the makers of wikireader should also be made aware that iPhone 3G costs the same.
djthistle
· 1 month ago
They should have found a way to just get this on the Kindle and let it update for a small monthly fee. I don't see people buying this thing.
Charmaine Hon
· 1 month ago
It's the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, I mean, portable Wikipedia! Not really, especially since you can get a phone that can access Wikipedia for a little more money, but adds so much more value.
Name
· 1 month ago
Totally. People who read Mashable have obviously never been to a pub quizz where you can't get a decent phone signal...
Kate
· 1 month ago
Big NO! Can't even use Wikipedia as a resource for school essays/reports.
erichdoss
· 1 month ago
How many times have I been walking down the street and thinking, "Wow, if I only knew the article of the day." "Wait, the article of a few days ago." "Wait, I forgot to order an updated SD card." This makes about as much sense as the Presto email printer.
psikeyhackr
· 1 month ago
Would You Pay $99 for Wikipedia in Your Pocket? No Way!!!
I might pay $20 or $30 for Wikipedia on a microSD so I could plug it into another device like a netbook.
Robert Basil
· 1 month ago
HUGE FAIL!
VaporOne
· 1 month ago
I'd have to concur with the majority here. No. My phone has it. If you got an Amazon Kindle you have access, netbooks are pretty cheap. All real-time. And... You get extra features on all those.$25 maybe. $50 still no.
Eric Sedgley
· 1 month ago
NO! - First, this isn't an internet device - it gets its data from either an SD card or via a USB transaction on your computer. It's more like a 2nd gen iPod (from the looks of the screen, pre-video) that just searches and displays articles from its own database. I'd expect to pay $5-$20 for this from maybe Sharper Image or Brookstone. This actually could be mated with similar functions to a digital organizer (think about those Sharp and Casio things from a decade ago) and be sold by Franklin Covey or someone similar - at least the organizer functionality might make it worth $50.
WittyScreenName
· 1 month ago
$99 bucks? I got my kid a nice laptop for $300. Even for young kids, it's not worth it. You need to be old enough to read it, so figure a 5+ year old can manage a computer. Mine sure can. Hell, my two year old can turn it on and manage her games without any help.
Matt Johnson
· 1 month ago
I'd possibly pay 100$ for an iPhone wikipedia application but he** no to carry an ADDITIONAL device. I wouldn't even carry it if they paid me 100$. I know of many people that have trouble just carrying their headsets with them everywhere they go so they just buy multiple; how are we supposed to remember this STUPID thing? hahaha
stacey D.
· 1 month ago
How absurd is this?
I have access on my phone or via Twitter to Wikipedia through a chatbot (and, it's faster than searching myself).
Cost = zero.
Ryan Lalonde
· 1 month ago
I have Wikipedia on my iPhone so no, I would not pay $99 to have Wikipedia in my pocket. If I didn't have an iPhone I still wouldn't pay $99 for it.
damaddok
· 1 month ago
Though the offline access would be useful, I already have an iPhone, so most of the time I would just use that. Of course, for friends that don't have access to the internet from their phones, I would consider it as a Christmas/birthday gift if they liked to browse Wikipedia.
Alyssa Myers
· 1 month ago
No way... for $100? That's crazy! Even if you weren't using a dedicated app on your iPhone, the mobile web version works pretty darn well. And I don't need to carry another damn device.
travel pillow
· 1 month ago
I wouldn't pay because i prefer to search at home,in my room!Out life is life,i live without "study"or easy solutions.....
Tyson Quick
· 1 month ago
MASSIVE EPIC FAIL!!!! iPhone
imglab
· 1 month ago
YES. Only if there are large friendly printed letter 'Don't Panic' on its back cover.
camkevbell
· 1 month ago
No school I know of allows you to use wikipedia as reference material. This is a poorly concieved doodad.
Yiting Shen
· 1 month ago
It's a good concept but the product is a bit young, i.e. no graphics, grey background. I'd pay $20 for this version, probably more suitable for emerging mkts where internet is not readily available yet. There seems to be an iphone app launched in '08...
felipe09
· 1 month ago
If that was launched back in the 90's I could see that becoming a hit but nowadays, only one function, running on AAA bateries is so 90's to me.
cartouche d'encre
· 1 month ago
At $99 you can pick up a used GPS with more features and funtionality. I personally hate all e-reader inspired gadgets. They will never bridge the gap between smart phones, laptops, and tablets. E-Readers/Ink = Epic-market failure...
Puneet
· 1 month ago
Its a stupid idea. Super fail.
Taranfx
· 1 month ago
OpenMOKO wass good for where it started, there was no need to enter eReader market specially when you have strong competitions from Kindle, Sony PRS readers
gubatron
· 1 month ago
Hell to the no. It's so inconvenient, yet another thing in your pocket. Just go to wikipedia on your phone browser, duh.
Gotta imagine the people that got together and thought this would actually sell... for $99!!!
But hey, they might make a few bucks, there's one born every minute.
I suppose we're not the market for it, I think I saw an opportunity for it when I went to the site and saw a picture of a kid doing homework. But still, $99 is a little too much. Maybe $29.99 for your 10 year old in elementary school
teo
· 1 month ago
buy an ipod touch 8GB, download wiki app... I'm done
Name
· 1 month ago
you can get a smart phone, for not much more (G1 on tmobile for 150ish) why would you buy this?
Elker
· 1 month ago
I'd use my iPhone.
Vinicius
· 1 month ago
No and its ugly!
aeroraptor
· 1 month ago
Sure, I'd buy it, and I might even. I seem to be one of the few people here who doesn't have an iPhone or web-capable phone, and I could find uses for it other than writing papers or doing reports for school. I rather enjoy reading to kill time - I already have portable wikipedia on my netbook, which is great but sort of a hassle to use. Hell I'd probably use the wikireader more than my iPod.
Cody Gibbs
· 1 month ago
All you hating on it, you're not the target market. A sticker on it that says "the world's information in your pocket" strategically placed at a Barnes and Noble might garner quite a few moms and grandmas buying it for their kids this Christmas. You also forget that most of the world doesn't have internet on their phones.
Pixelrage
· 1 month ago
Yet another thing you're supposed to lug around with you? It's just a bad execution. It looks like some kind of retro-futurist device. Unless it had a full color multi touch screen like the iPhone or iPod Touch, it's already outdated technology (kind of like the Kindle - oops)
All Comments
What really happened here?
Think Africa, India, China, even Afghanistan, Iraq, there's a huge market out there. This can be a very simple, but unique change agent.
And for $99 its probably more value than the MIT laptop for every child campaign, which if I remember correctly couldn't get costs below $200?
Seriously good.
Absolutely not, even it's a $0.99 as an iphone app, i am serious
Best,
Daina Thomas
As it stands, NO is my answer.
I also think it's shoddy that Wikipedia has a device that can't update in real-time. What is the need to purchase this when you can get a cell or PDA that can access Wikipedia in real time?
This device is a product disaster waiting to happen.
I guess the makers of wikireader should also be made aware that iPhone 3G costs the same.
This makes about as much sense as the Presto email printer.
I might pay $20 or $30 for Wikipedia on a microSD so I could plug it into another device like a netbook.
I have access on my phone or via Twitter to Wikipedia through a chatbot (and, it's faster than searching myself).
Cost = zero.
Gotta imagine the people that got together and thought this would actually sell... for $99!!!
But hey, they might make a few bucks, there's one born every minute.
I suppose we're not the market for it, I think I saw an opportunity for it when I went to the site and saw a picture of a kid doing homework. But still, $99 is a little too much. Maybe $29.99 for your 10 year old in elementary school