Old Kindle devices will be kicked off the internet, Amazon
Page 1 of 1 [ 11 posts ]
Quote:
Older Kindles are about to lose their access to the internet, Amazon has warned.
Many of the earlier generations of the ereaders relied on 3G internet connectivity to download books and other content, and will no longer be able to access it.
Many of the earlier generations of the ereaders relied on 3G internet connectivity to download books and other content, and will no longer be able to access it.
https://www.independent.co.uk/life-styl ... 94042.html
Fnord wrote:
Yet another misinterpretation of a news article!
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/f9fc0/f9fc0a73dd57feae8f63e27df00fdad53bd734e7" alt="Rolling Eyes :roll:"
In fairness, the OP was merely quoting that article's tag line without posting the whole thing. I believe it's copyright infringement to post a whole article, but it's customary to start a thread with using the article's title + provide a link.
If anything, Andrew Griffin and the publishers at The Independent Online are being a bit misleading and sensational with their inaccurate tag line.
Saying the OP misinterpreted the article isn't exactly valid when the article itself starts off with a misleading declaration. You seem to be implying you read the article. You must've seen where the OP got his quote...
ezbzbfcg2 wrote:
Fnord wrote:
Yet another misinterpretation of a news article!
In fairness, the OP was merely quoting that article's tag line without posting the whole thing. I believe it's copyright infringement to post a whole article, but it's customary to start a thread with using the article's title + provide a link. If anything, Andrew Griffin and the publishers at The Independent Online are being a bit misleading and sensational with their inaccurate tag line. Saying the OP misinterpreted the article isn't exactly valid when the article itself starts off with a misleading declaration. You seem to be implying you read the article. You must've seen where the OP got his quote...It is a sad commentary, however, that the OP did not notice the discrepancy.
^Since the OP posted the link to the news article and started the thread, I thought you were accusing him of misinterpretation. As far as the article itself, I don't think the publisher misinterpreted the article. Wrong terminology. I think he or she was deliberately trying to create a false and misleading headline.
Fnord wrote:
ezbzbfcg2 wrote:
Fnord wrote:
Yet another misinterpretation of a news article!
In fairness, the OP was merely quoting that article's tag line without posting the whole thing. I believe it's copyright infringement to post a whole article, but it's customary to start a thread with using the article's title + provide a link. If anything, Andrew Griffin and the publishers at The Independent Online are being a bit misleading and sensational with their inaccurate tag line. Saying the OP misinterpreted the article isn't exactly valid when the article itself starts off with a misleading declaration. You seem to be implying you read the article. You must've seen where the OP got his quote...It is a sad commentary, however, that the OP did not notice the discrepancy.
You had to get the snide comment in.
Fnord wrote:
Yet another misinterpretation of a news article!
Kindle devices will not so much be "kicked off the Internet" as they will lose access to 3G systems as those systems are replaced with 4G, 5G, and eventually, 6G systems.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/f9fc0/f9fc0a73dd57feae8f63e27df00fdad53bd734e7" alt="Rolling Eyes :roll:"
Kindle devices will not so much be "kicked off the Internet" as they will lose access to 3G systems as those systems are replaced with 4G, 5G, and eventually, 6G systems.
So...instead of "being kicked off of the Internet" they will be "kicked off of the Internet"?
What is the practical difference between the two statements?
If they will soon no longer work on the internet then...they will no longer work on the Internet. Where is the difference in the distinction?
naturalplastic wrote:
So...instead of "being kicked off of the Internet" they will be "kicked off of the Internet"?
What is the practical difference between the two statements?
If they will soon no longer work on the internet then...they will no longer work on the Internet. Where is the difference in the distinction?
What is the practical difference between the two statements?
If they will soon no longer work on the internet then...they will no longer work on the Internet. Where is the difference in the distinction?
If they have data accounts, they can no longer be used to access satellite Internet bounced off towers, since the towers will no longer support 3G network technology.
They can most certainly still access the Internet via WiFi. Just like a smartphone without a data plan, it can still connect to unrelated WiFi in range and with a password. So, saying they'll be 'kicked off the Internet' is an inaccurate statement.
Fnord described this as a "misinterpretation" but didn't clarify at first who he thought was misinterpreting the article, seemingly accusing the OP. He then said he was referring to the publisher of the article. However, the publisher knows what the article is saying, but is deliberately being misleading for click bait, not failing to interpret the article. Poor choice of terms and not good clarification on Ford's part.
But I do agree with him that it's a shame when it seems people don't read the article. It appears to me that you are misinterpreting both the article and the discussion here.
ezbzbfcg2 wrote:
naturalplastic wrote:
So...instead of "being kicked off of the Internet" they will be "kicked off of the Internet"?
What is the practical difference between the two statements?
If they will soon no longer work on the internet then...they will no longer work on the Internet. Where is the difference in the distinction?
What is the practical difference between the two statements?
If they will soon no longer work on the internet then...they will no longer work on the Internet. Where is the difference in the distinction?
If they have data accounts, they can no longer be used to access satellite Internet bounced off towers, since the towers will no longer support 3G network technology.
They can most certainly still access the Internet via WiFi. Just like a smartphone without a data plan, it can still connect to unrelated WiFi in range and with a password. So, saying they'll be 'kicked off the Internet' is an inaccurate statement.
Fnord described this as a "misinterpretation" but didn't clarify at first who he thought was misinterpreting the article, seemingly accusing the OP. He then said he was referring to the publisher of the article. However, the publisher knows what the article is saying, but is deliberately being misleading for click bait, not failing to interpret the article. Poor choice of terms and not good clarification on Ford's part.
But I do agree with him that it's a shame when it seems people don't read the article. It appears to me that you are misinterpreting both the article and the discussion here.
I dont know from Kindle devices. Never even touched one. So you're saying that you will still be able to download books on the first generation Kindles even when 3G goes away?
naturalplastic wrote:
I dont know from Kindle devices. Never even touched one. So you're saying that you will still be able to download books on the first generation Kindles even when 3G goes away?
The article could probably do a better job explaining, but it does mention:
Quote:
Those that have WiFi will still be able to connect when they are near a network...Some other newer devices have 3G connections too, but are also able to connect to WiFi.
If the devices have WiFi connectability, they'll still be able to access the Internet. The problem comes in with devices that have paid data plans. 3G connectivity is becoming obsolete for ALL devices, so phones and tablets, etc., that use 3G won't be able to access the Internet on a data plan from cell phone towers, as 3G is no longer going to be operating. They're technically not kicked off the Internet if they have WiFi capability, since WiFi Internet connection has nothing to do with cell phone towers. But the device has to be near a WiFi connection and have access to it.
If you didn't pay your phone's data plan, you wouldn't be able to access the Internet from anywhere. You can still connect with your WiFi at home or near a WiFi source. Same with a tablet. Basically, data plans will no longer be active for devices that rely on the old 3G networks, but WiFi connectivity is unaffected, so they're not technically kicked off the Internet. Paid data plans for Internet access will no longer be an option for any 3G device (not just Kindle). WiFi Internet access on those devices is still operable.
It's like saying: NO MORE MILK IN YOUR REFRIGERATOR, the milk man is going away...If the milkman is no longer making deliveries, you can't rely on him as a source of milk. That doesn't mean your refrigerator can't cool milk you buy elsewhere (like at the supermarket). The article's sensational tag is misleading.
EDIT: But I suppose it is the end of an era of sorts. If you relied on the milkman, your refrigerator is unaffected, but you have to find a new way of getting milk. A lot of people with these earlier e-reading tablets did pay a subscription fee for a data plan that will now be obsolete. Fortunately, if they have WiFi at home and if the devices are WiFi compatible, they can log on through their home's WiFi connection. (They'll still have to pay a subscription fee for the books they download, but Internet access is still possible with a WiFi connection.)
Now, IF Amazon is somehow blocking their ability to download via WiFi connections, that would be a different story. But the article doesn't imply that.
Page 1 of 1 [ 11 posts ]
Similar Topics | |
---|---|
Texas bans DeepSeek, RedNote on govt devices. |
03 Feb 2025, 1:23 am |
Largest cache of 'finished explosive devices' found on farm |
01 Jan 2025, 1:31 pm |
Internet not working |
24 Dec 2024, 11:54 am |