Emir Shad

enjoyed this, very pretty presentation,
for me though its not the answer ...(easy for me to say, i do understand how much work went into this..)

elements of baudrillard's theories reaching fission ? re: rubbing/heating up..i like this.. its a great start/better start than most have made.

i just think for me the beauty of the printed page lies within the ease of just simply browsing...and the luxury of nonchalance that you really really do not have with digital technology, the effortless always ends up as the frustrating..
im not convinced technology has reached this level of intuitiveness.

i also like with printed pages ( i should probably stop using the word printed seen as you can print almost anything these days)

how you can kinda take in ALL the information in one go.. gauging the content in a shorter space of time..the tangibility of digital readers doesnt quite evoke its true relevance.


browsing on this is almost a formal affair, and indeed on all readers including the internet.. browsing should be the oposite of formal, taking in small amounts and very very fast pace..
then getting more refined very quickly like contents of a book..

by clicking on a link literally short cutting the whole idea of skipping content to get to another part is weird to me still... and am yet to find a structurally intuitive web/computer based equivalent that does this for me.

now obviously that is indeed the beauty of computers how you can have information rich pages with infinite potential to new content.. for me like wikipedia my mind goes elsewhere... and nothing is concentrated ..why would it be with the potential of clicking to go ANYWHERe in seconds...

obviously you briefly mention the idea of a closed informational loop to evoke the notion of completion, but again i think EVERYTHING is wrong... im saying this purely because nothing feels comfortable ... you and every other person may well disagree with me and its nothing really to do with this design.. just the format of digital information is not quite there yet..and in turn... nobody has quite fulfilled the potential of digital based readers...

so on one side im saying its not intuitive as tangible papers and on the other im saying its not fullfilling its potential.. there in lies a huge contradiction which is why i question the whole thing...

its hard to make a digital analogy, and maybe one shouldnt be trying to make analogies to printed papers, as you quite rightly have already pointed out. making systems for its own content relevant to itself and only itself is probably the way forward......yet...there are always these irritable things about how on one hand digital is potentially infinitely expandable and on the other infinitely limiting within the immediate context of using something / how you cant SEE all the information or feel it / for me not being able to understand the scale or gauge the scale of information in front of me is a serious issue// and this does answer some of those questions quite well but.. the nature of the digital is how its connected

how does one answer these very very contradictory statements.. i really personally have no idea my self


i have had an iphone since it came out and have used the kindle a few times...

i have NO answers and probably will never
all i can think of is looking at hybrid devises ..too many issues then arise...too much to think about
so i applaud you for at least trying something and i hope you do hundreds more developments

such a tough one..good elements to it but not quite there for me...

trying to be objective whilst showing huge appreciation

is this even the right context for feedback.. do you even want it..who knows

thats the paradox of digital technology...
should i be making these sweeping statements on the worlds largest public forum the internet.. probably not.. but you have put your self out there and so shall i..

one can only hurt their online persona's . . .!?