For the past 18 months Bookeen has been working with SunPartner Technologies to develop its Wysips solar panel into a cover, and today that was released to market.

The Leaf Solar Cover is a 59-euro cover for the 8″ Cybook Ocean (as well as Carrefour’s rebranded 8’’ Nolimbook XL ereader). It features a solar panel developed by Sunpartner Technologies, and incorporates its Wysips solar panel tech.

Wysips is supposed to be a transparent material which can be used over a device’s screen, where it will act as a solar panel. That is how Bookeen had intended to use the tech when the deal was originally announced in 2015, but then they changed their mind earlier this year and switched to making a cover.

Bookeen changed plans because Wysips still cannot work as promised. Sunpartner has been working on this tech for six years and they have yet to produce a commercial design with a solar panel covering a device’s screen.

So instead Sunpartner has made a cover for the Cybook Ocean rather than putting a solar panel on the ereader’s screen.

The cover is available today on Bookeen’s website. Here’s an actual product photo:

Do you see the ghost-white panels on the cover?

That’s the solar panel.

That’s not very attractive, but according to the press release one hour of sunlight is enough to charge the ereader for 30 minutes of daily reading.

So there is a benefit, but is that enough to spend 59 euros on the cover?

Today I am officially unveiling a new page on my site.

News of the eBook World shows headlines and links from RSS feeds for six sites which cover ebook news. The list includes Publishers Weekly (just their ebook coverage), Teleread, DBW, Publishing Perspectives, and E-ink Info, as well as the Publisher’s Lunch Automat. (I would also include The Bookseller’s feed if they had a digital-only feed.)

I was inspired by a similar page on eBook Friendly, and wanted to give readers a single page where you can find all of the latest news from the important sites in this niche.

The page is a work in progress, so if you have any suggestions on other sites to add (or can tell me how to turn a Twitter timeline into an RSS feed), don’t hesitate to say something.

image by ryanjraffa

When B&N fired its CEO last month, we all knew that the first-quarter financial report would not be good.

And it isn’t.

Barnes & Noble report on Thursday that revenues for the first fiscal quarter totaled $914 million, down 6.6% from the same period last year. Retail sales fell 6.1% to $882 million for the quarter, while Nook revenues continued their downward spiral.

Nook revenues (including digital content and devices and accessories sales) declined 24.5% to $41 million for the first fiscal quarter. The division incurred an operating loss of $14.0 million, and its EBITDA losses were $7.9 million.

O O O

Here’s the press release:

Barnes & Noble today reported sales and earnings for its fiscal 2017 first quarter ended July 30, 2016.

Total sales for the first quarter were $913.9 million, declining 6.6% as compared to the prior year. Retail sales, which include Barnes & Noble stores and BN.com, declined 6.1% to $881.7 million for the quarter.  Comparable store sales declined 6.0% for the quarter, softer than the Company’s expectations, due in large part to lower traffic and the challenging retail environment.  NOOK sales, which include digital content, devices and accessories, declined 24.5% to $41.0 million for the quarter.

Retail incurred an operating loss of $7.4 million during the quarter, which includes severance charges and consulting fees of $7.9 million resulting from Retail’s cost reduction initiatives.  NOOK incurred an operating loss of $14.0 million, which includes severance and transitional costs of $7.2 million related to the previously announced outsourcing of certain NOOK services and the closure of its California and Taiwan offices.

The consolidated first quarter net loss from continuing operations was $14.4 million, or $0.20 per share, as compared to a loss from continuing operations of $7.8 million, or $0.27 per share, in the prior year.  Excluding the charges noted above, the consolidated first quarter net loss from continuing operations would have been $5.0 million, or $0.07 per share.

Retail generated EBITDA of $17.6 million, inclusive of the Retail charges noted above.  Excluding the charges, Retail EBITDA would have been $25.5 million, a decline of $19.8 million versus the prior year, primarily as a result of the sales decrease.

NOOK EBITDA losses were $7.9 million, which includes the NOOK charges noted above.  Excluding the charges, NOOK EBITDA losses would have been $0.7 million, improving $16.6 million as compared to a year ago, due primarily to the Company’s cost rationalization efforts.

On a consolidated basis, the Company generated first quarter EBITDA of $9.6 million.  Excluding the charges noted above, consolidated EBITDA would have been $24.7 million, or $3.2 million lower than the prior year.

Return of Capital
During the quarter, the Company returned $20.8 million in cash to its shareholders, including $11.1 million in dividends and $9.7 million through share repurchases.  The Company acquired approximately 830,000 shares at an average price of $11.73 during the quarter under its share repurchase program.

Outlook
The Company remains focused on executing its previously announced strategic initiatives to increase sales and reduce expenses.  Given the softer than expected sales results to date, and the expected continuation of the challenging retail environment, the Company now expects fiscal 2017 comparable store sales to decline in the low single digits.

Although the Company is reducing its comparable store sales expectations, through its expense reduction initiatives, it continues to expect full year consolidated EBITDA to be in a range of $200 million to $250 million.  Retail EBITDA is expected to be in a range of $240 million to $280 million, excluding the impact of any charges related to its cost reduction initiatives and costs associated with the recent CEO departure.  NOOK EBITDA losses are expected to decline to a range of $30 million to $40 million, including previously announced transitional costs.

image by THE Holy Hand Grenade!

Penguin Random House bought the vanity press Author Solutions (ASI) in 2012, they made sure everyone knew about it, but when Author Solutions was sold in January, PRH didn’t announce the deal publicly nor have they revealed the terms of the deal.

And now we know why.

Bowker released a report on Wednesday which covers the number of ISBNs sold in 2015 in the US to indie authors, ebook distributors like Smashwords, vanity presses like ASI, and ebook service companies like Blurb.

What the report claims is that it tracks the growth of indie publishing, but as we all know ISBNs are just is not a valid way to count the number of self-published titles released each year (but bless Bowker’s heart for trying).

Sidenote: An ISBN is effectively a serial number for a book. It defines the book so it can be tracked by industry analysts, but as many indie authors will tell you an ISBN is not required to publish an ebook. This is why many authors don’t get an ISBN for their ebooks.

So we can’t say anything today about self-publishing in general, but this report does offer a unique insight into Author Solutions. That vanity press includes an ISBN with each of the publishing packages it offers to the unsuspecting, and that gives us a clue how many authors are fleeced by ASI each year – or at the very least, it tells us the number of transactions.

There’s even a chart just for ASI and its multitude of publishing imprints. The chart is not complete (it’s missing Archway and a few other minor imprints) but what it tells us is that Author Solutions has been in decline for the past four years.

The chart is embedded above as an image, and can be found on page seven of the report (PDF). It shows that ASI’s business peaked in 2011, and declined ever since.

By the time PRH sold it in January 2016, Author Solutions was buying less than half as many ISBNs in a year as it did in 2011, the year before the acquisition. The ISBN count declined in 2012, 2013, 2014, and 2015, falling 29% in 2015 alone.

The number of ISBN purchased fell every year even though PRH integrated Author Solutions into several of its subsidiaries around the word (Spain, India, BookCountry, and even a university) and convinced other companies like Barnes & Noble, Lulu, and Simon & Schuster to launch front companies for ASI to run.

In retrospect, the cause of the decline is fairly obvious; authors were smart enough to figure out that there were better options than being fleeced by Author Solutions. It’s not that hard to DIY, and there are also alternative to ASI which are run by ethical companies.

In conclusion, PRH set out to fleece authors, and were instead tricked into buying a pig in a poke. And to make matters even more deliciously ironic, it took PRH four years to figure out they had been had and to sell off Author Solutions for whatever they could get.

Today is a good day.

image by born1945

About two hours from now Apple will be holding a press event where they will announce the iPhone 7 – and possibly something we in digital publishing would be interested in.

While the new iPhone 7 has been so thoroughly leaked as to be considered fact rather than rumor, there have also been hints that Apple has a new addition to iBooks in the works.

Yesterday Brian Conway ferreted out a cache of Apple’s new trademarks. The tech giant is about to file dozens of trademarks, including for features for iPhone, iMessage, Mac, and one for something called iBooks Storytime.

No one knows what iBook Storytime is, and in fact there’s no way for us to know – the application hasn’t even been filed yet in the US (I checked). But there has been some speculation that it is a new feature which will be announced today.

My current favorite theory is that this is an iBooks Author app for the iPad Pro, but that is unlikely. "Storytime" suggests display rather than production, and anyway that iPad Pro app would most likely simply be called "iBooks Author".

While I decline to make guesses about iBooks Storytime (it could be any of a dozen features), I do think we should keep a watch for it today.

This might sound convoluted, but I am taking this report seriously because the application hasn’t officially been revealed to the public (it leaked). In my experience companies generally keep trademarks under wraps until after they announce a product or feature. This keeps everyone in the dark about what’s coming next.

So keep an eye out.

image by Valerie Everett

We’ve all read the claims from legacy publishers and their authors that ebook prices have to be kept high. The authors will justify prices by making tea in China comparisons or telling us that it just costs more for legacy publishers to publish a book, while publishers will tell us things like cheap ebook prices devalue IP (Markus Dohle, PRH, 2016).

I have generally doubted those claims, and today I came across a graphic reminder of just how bogus they are.

I was shopping in a local supermarket today when I found this bargain bin full of books:

Nestled in the frozen section (it wasn’t even placed with the magazines) was a pallet with a box full of discount books.

All of the books were hardbacks, and all were priced $5 to $6. This includes titles from most of the Big Five publishers like Macmillan and Penguin Random House:

Isn’t it funny how a reasonably priced ebook will devalue IP, and a remaindered print book doesn’t?

One would think that would be a logical contradiction, but apparently not under Whale Math.

For those just tuning in, "Whale Math" is the term outsiders have given to the bizarre business decisions of the Big Five publishers. Raising ebook prices to sell fewer print books is an example of Whale Math. Telling everyone that it’s good that revenues have dropped 10% is another.

Whale Math is basically the book publishing industry’s equivalent of Double Think from 1984, only without the media reinforcement. In that book the government devoted whole agencies to propagating the official view, but out here in the real world the only reinforcement of Whale Math comes from the book publishing industry’s echo chamber.

And thanks to the internet, which enables more voices to be heard; and the rise of indie publishing, giving authors more opportunities to bypass the gatekeepers; that echo chamber is not nearly as deafening as it was decades ago.

Just think, ten years ago I would never have been able to call bullshit on the official position of the book publishing industry, nor would authors be able to route around the major publishers and their self-destructive business decisions.

Just imagine where we will be in another ten years.

The Pew Research Center released a new report yesterday which showed that, for the third year running, the number of respondents who had read an ebook (or listened to an audiobook) remained flat while the number who had read a paper book wavered.

You can read the report on the Pew Research Center website, and you can read about it on a half-dozen sites. But I don’t know why you would bother; the headline data isn’t terribly useful – not in 2016, anyway(*).

The thing about this Pew survey is that it lacks specifics.

Pew asks a question which isn’t relevant in 2016. The print/digital divide mattered in the first few years after Amazon jump-started the ebook market in 2007, but in 2016 the market is a lot more complicated.

The question Pew should be asking is how readers consume the various genres and categories.

How are people reading their nonfiction?

Does it differ from their preferred format for novels?

What about comics vs digital comics?

The problem with Pew’s current report is that, for example, we now know that the romance and thriller genres have largely gone digital (and SF isn’t far behind). We also know that digital adoption in comics is occurring at a different rate than other types of ebooks, and there are also intimations that nonfiction readers are sticking with print.

You can’t find any of that nuance in Pew’s existing report, and it is the weaker for it.

And while we’re talking about reading preferences, let’s not forget that "ebook" is an incredibly elastic term in 2016. People are reading short stories, eSingles, websites, digital magazines, anthologies, articles saved in Pocket, and what have you, and yet Pew is only asking about ebooks.

If , for example, a given collection of stories is labeled a magazine issue rather than an anthology, it would not be reflected in the new report. Or if someone read an article in Instapaper rather than buying and reading it as an e-Single, that activity would not be tracked in the report.

And that makes little sense in 2016.

Don’t get me wrong; this report does have some useful data. Later sections confirm other reports that reading ebooks on tablets and smartphones is now more common than reading on ereaders.

The report also shows that 6% of the survey group read only ebooks, and that "7% of college graduates are digital-only book readers (compared with just 3% of those who have not graduated from high school), as are 8% of those with annual household incomes of $75,000 or more (compared with 3% of Americans with incomes of $30,000 or less)".

Those are useful data points, yes, but as I sit here looking at the survey results I am reminded that some in the book publishing industry, as well as pundits in the media, will use the stats to write off ebooks entirely.

"More people still read paper books that ebooks, so digital has failed to kill print" some uninformed reporter will write in the next few weeks. "Only 6% of consumers read only digital books, so it doesn’t matter that our ebook prices are so high" a Big Five CEO will proclaim.

Edit: Gizmodo has already proven me correct on my first prediction.

To be fair, it is not the fault of the Pew Research Center that this data will be misinterpreted. But we can’t have an informed discussion of the  state of reading until we have more data.

And we won’t have that data until researchers start asking better questions.

And that’s my takeaway on this report.

What’s yours?

image by smith

The independent bookstores of Chicago and the Chicago area have issued a statement in response to last week’s news that Amazon will open a brick-and-mortar bookstore on the north side of Chicago next year. The press release was posted by the Great Lakes Independent Booksellers Association and 16 area independent bookstores, all of which were named in the statement.

And yes, it is pompous. The press release includes statements from various booksellers and cites heavily from that questionable ABA report, but what really put the release over the top (other than the general tone) was this paragraph:

Whereas Amazon’s initial choice to sell books was largely for the purpose of collecting customer data, independent bookstores pride themselves on serving customers who read voraciously and eclectically and on using books to create a conversation with customers and their communities. Booksellers get to know their customers so that they are able to make personal recommendations that enrich and sometimes change people’s lives. In addition, independent bookstores collect—and have always collected—full sales taxes as required by law, thereby supporting schools, fire and police departments, and state and local governments generally. Amazon has also begun collecting and paying sales taxes, after being forced to by lawsuits and negative public opinion.

Does anyone know when all these upper east side literati decamped from Manhattan and moved to Chicago? Has any literature been written about that trek? (I’m out of sleeping pills, and am looking for alternatives.)

Honest to goodness, I haven’t read anything this pompous and self-centered since Authors United’s last salvo against Amazon – and that was over a year ago.

Remember Authors United?

AU was formed as a book publishing industry astroturfing group in 2014 during the Hachette-Amazon contract dispute. The last we heard from them was last August when they finally (after a nearly a year of blowing smoke) sent a letter to the DoJ, asking that Amazon be investigated for nonexistent antitrust violations.

Authors United has dropped off the radar after sending that letter, but now we have a new group which can pompously complain about Amazon.

Wait a second, what are the chances that we can get Authors United interested in protesting Amazon’s bookstores? Isn’t this right up there alley?

I think so, and I will do everything I can to get them involved.

P.S. It’s a shame Barnes & Noble didn’t sign off on this statement; that would have made it all the more ridiculous.

image by veritatem

 Yesterday I posted a review video of the Kobo Aura One, and after watching it for myself I realized that it didn’t adequately convey just how poorly the Aura One handled PDFs.

And so I made my own.

I tested my Aura One loaner with a 58MB Doctor Who comic. It’s not a large file, no, but I found that the Aura One handled a 6MB PDF and a 600MB PDF just as poorly.

The tl;dr version is that the storage limitations (8GB internal, and no card slot) won’t bother anyone because the Aura One is simply unusable for PDFs.

• When you watch the video, count the seconds it takes to open a PDF (8 seconds).
• Then count the seconds required to turn the page (4+ seconds).
• Also, late in the video note how it only partially loads a page (the footer is shown, but not the page image).

What’s not shown in the video (I couldn’t duplicate what I saw in an early test) is that the Aura One is even slower at redrawing a zoomed in page than it is at turning the page. If you picture the screen divided into a grid 12 panels, the Aura One was refreshing the page one panel at a time.

Do you want to know where Kobo screwed up?

It would be easy to blame the CPU, and RAM, but the real problem is the software.

Kobo choose a screen no other device maker could match, then gave the Aura One a one of a kind frontlight – and then crippled the ereader with the same awful software running on previous models.

As much as I love reading ebooks on Kobo hardware (the formatting options are to die for) I don’t use them for PDFs, and never have. The software is simply terrible, and that is true across the board.

Before publishing this post I confirmed that my Aura HD has similar poor performance in the PDF dept, thus depriving us of even the hope that the first official firmware for the Aura One could improve the situation.

And that is unfortunate for Aura One owners, because PDFs are one of the main use cases to justify the Aura One’s 300 PPI 7.8″ screen.

We’ve all seen business cards which unfold into pop-ups, or other clever tricks, but few can compare to Paul Schow’s work. This hardware engineer has designed and built a custom business card with a 2″, 200 x 96 resolution, E-ink screen.

The completed cards cost $35 each and are based on Schow’s own design which he then assembled using a soldering iron and a magnifying glass. He ordered the components online, and had the boards made to order.

Schow went through two designs before finally settling on the design he would use for his business cards. He reports that the boards alone cost around a dollar and a quarter each: "At that price, it’s almost practical to hand out the blank boards as "normal'" business cards."

This is a nifty idea, and I really liked it when I first saw it on Twitter a month and a half ago.

That said, I think there’s room for improvement. If the cards incorporated a larger E-ink screen then they could show more info and be more useful. Imagine handing out a card which was built around, say, a 4.2″ E-ink screen. That screen would be large enough to be used as an ereader or other information display.

Then again, the goal of Schow’s business cards isn’t for the end user to make use of them but to show off what Schow can do. And they fill that need quite nicely as is.

Paul Schow via Hackaday

Oxford Dictionaries has just learned the hard way why one does not run open-ended unsupervised polls on the internet.

At the beginning of this month the OD launched a new project which invited everyone to submit their least favorite word. Dubbed the One Word Map project, it was announced on the OD’s blog and covered in The Guardian yesterday:

Kicking off what it hopes will be the largest global survey into people’s language gripes, the dictionary publisher is inviting English speakers around the world to answer a range of language-related questions under the #OneWordMap initiative, starting with the quest to find the least popular English word.

Oxford Dictionaries is hoping that tens of thousands of people will contribute, enabling it to put together a list of the least popular words by country, age, and gender, and revealing similarities and differences around the world.

“There are a few likely suspects we’re expecting to see. ‘Moist’ seems to be a word that people instinctively draw for, and it’s already proven to be a popular response in some internal polls we’ve done,” said Oxford University Press’s Daniel Braddock.

And that’s apparently where everything went wrong. Eight thousand people had submitted a word to the project before The Guardian’s story, but then it came to the attention of trolls and had to be shut down.

Oxford Dictionaries turned off the project on Friday, citing "severe misuse".

The Oxford Dictionaries hasn’t revealed how the poll was abused, but a spokesperson for Oxford Dictionaries told the Oxford Mail: "Unfortunately, and despite our attempts to prevent negative behaviour on this site, we have had to take it down. While this is disappointing, we strongly believe in the importance of engaging with the wider community to enhance our understanding of the English language, and will continue to investigate ways of doing so.”

Chloe Foster, OUP spokeswoman, added: "We had filtered out words marked as vulgar and offensive in our dictionaries, but this wasn’t enough to prevent the misuse that led to the results being unusable."

This is obviously not the first time someone has hijacked an online poll, which is why it is surprising that the admins were unprepared for mischief.

Penguin Random House has in the past denied that readers want an ebook subscription service.

What with Kindle Unlimited now paying authors and publishers more than the Nook Store, and possibly even more than Kobo or Google, that excuse was getting a little thin, but recently PRH changed its tune.

The global CEO of Penguin Random House, Markus Dohle, was speaking at the Global Top 50 Publishing Summit at Beijing International Book Fair in China earlier this week . According to The Bookseller, Dohle said that:

PRH had not signed its titles up for any subscription services, such as Amazon’s Kindle Unlimited, Mofibo or Scribd, because the ‘all you can eat’ models threaten to “devalue” intellectual property (IP) at a time when most authors can barely afford to earn a living.

In the US, Dohle said 40% of the readership accounted for 85% of publishers’ revenue, so "heavy readers" switching to subscription models would have a “huge impact” on the industry.

He explained that the industry’s existing publishing model, successful for over 500 years, was "robust" and "not broken at all", and argued that subscription models were "not in the reader’s mindset". If they became popular, they would ultimately lead to "lower prices" and "a huge devaluation of IP", Dohle said.

"A la carte is not broken […] I don’t see us supporting subscription models, because we just don’t need it," he said. "Somehow we have to protect the measure of our intellectual property. Take an e-book for $12, that’s entertainment for 15 to 30 hours. That’s a fair deal compared with a movie and other media formats. I think we have a very robust pricing model in the market and subscription would just change the whole dynamic."

I don’t know whether he was misquoted or what, but that is just a crock of shit.

For one thing, the book publishing industry’s model has changed multiple times in the past five centuries as technology, society, and laws changed.  Five hundred years ago books were a luxury, and they have gotten cheaper as technology as improved and as the populace started having more and more disposable income.

Just in the past hundred or so years the book publishing industry has had to change in response to the introduction of cheap paperbacks (where were first ignored, then fought, and then co-opted and smothered) and new copyright laws.

And then there’s magazines and serial distribution of novels, a model which hung around for close to a century before dying out in the mid-1980s*.

But that’s really beside the point.

The real issue here is that Dohle is responding to innovation like the typical entrenched giant. He’s clinging to the old way and inventing excuses why the new way won’t work.

This is a common response from established players; they have a lot invested in the current system and they don’t want to see it disrupted (this is also why the Big Five are maintaining high ebook prices).

This is a behavior we have seen in the past, including from Blockbuster. And we all know what happened to them.

Coincidentally Blockbuster is an example of what happens when a company fights an innovation or disruption rather than embracing it, and it is also an example of how an entrenched company might not innovate even if the senior management wanted to.

Blockbuster’s second to last CEO, John Antioco, was fired in part for responding to Netflix by dropping late fees and starting an online service. This cut into Blockbuster’s profits, and lead to Antioco being ousted.

And where’s Blockbuster today?

Chew on that, and then ask yourself whether Dohle is right, or has his head in the sand.

Given that Penguin Random House’s policy on ebook prices is based on fighting market trends in order to prop up the old system and that their position on subscription ebooks can be summed up as not wanting to disrupt existing ebooks sales, it’s pretty clear that both positions are equally flawed.

This will inevitably lead to Penguin ending up on the scrapheap of history, but until then the legacy industry will likely continue to pretend that there is absolutely no reason to embrace change.

P.S. A number of Dickens' novels were first published in magazines before being collected in book form, and that trend still existed in the SF genre until at least the 1980s.

image by ActuaLitté

The following infographic was created by someone who still thinks that print and digital books are in an elimination battle which can have only one survivor.

That is a little 2012 for my tastes, but this infographic is entertaining nonetheless.

Enjoy.

Blurb

Back in February of this year Amazon informed Kindle owners about a mandatory firmware update for all Kindle models.

That notice was accompanied by dire warnings that Kindle owners would lose the ability to download ebooks to their Kindle by the end of March 2016 if they didn’t install the update, but now it appears that the warnings were just a paper tiger.

I’ve just read that Amazon is sending out another round of reminder emails about that update. This is the second set of reminder emails in just over a month, and it makes me wonder just how many Kindle owners have yet to update their device.

The update in question changes a few small but important wireless security settings, so it’s easy to see why Amazon is continuing to remind Kindle owners. What surprises me, however, is that Amazon didn’t follow through and change its security on schedule.

Either Amazon fibbed on the time frame, or they’ve decided that they value customer satisfaction over security.

In any case, have you gotten the email recently?

O O O

If you’re wondering whether the email you got from Amazon was real, here’s the one I got last month:

Hello,

An important software update for your Kindle device "The Digital Reader’s 4th Kindle" is required to continue to download your books and use Kindle services. This update will ensure wireless coverage so you can continue to have the best possible reading experience.

To update your Kindle wirelessly, follow these steps:

1. Turn wireless on by sliding the wireless switch on the back of your device to the "On" position, or by pressing the Menu button from the Home screen and then selecting "Turn Wireless On".
2. Plug your Kindle in to charge during the update.
3. Leave your wireless on and the Kindle plugged in overnight.

While the device is asleep, the software update should download and install automatically. Your device may restart multiple times during the update process. You will receive a final confirmation letter once the update is completed.

While the device is asleep, the software update should download and install automatically. Your device may restart multiple times during the update process. You will receive a final confirmation letter once the update is completed.

Frequently Asked Questions

What if I no longer have one or more of my devices?
If you no longer have or use one of your Kindle devices, deregister it from your account today. First, go to www.amazon.com/mycd and log into your Amazon account. Click on the Your Devices tab and select the Kindle device you want to deregister. Click Deregister.

How can I get help on updating my Kindle devices?
You can contact Customer Service by using the Contact Us option in the left-hand column of our Kindle Support pages at:

www.amazon.com/kindlesupport

Thank you for reading with Kindle, and be sure to turn wireless on regularly to receive all future software updates.

image by Matt Mordfin