I think there are two big buckets for the books that pop out:
1. solve a problem
2. have fun

For solve a problem — I think we can measure against effectiveness. So the next question becomes, how do we measure effectiveness? This could be things like — complexity, relevance, usefulness, authority, actionability, … etc. In this space, adding fun to solving the problem wins over just solving the problem — it’s edutainment in action.

For the “have fun” bucket, this sure looks like fun. It’s a more immersive experience.

I wonder at what point attractions become distractions … like the animated gifs, pop up ads, or blinking neon signs. I think user experience patterns have a bright future.

I see the iPad as a huge gamechanger, not necessarily this iteration, or even this device, but the simple fact that it now exists and there’s a giant community of competitors and developers who are now incentivized to push the envelope. Can you even begin to imagine where this will lead us in 3 years?

I don’t think I’ve put quite this much nerdiness in a blog comment in a while.

If you think about leveraging the innovation..I would think …where in this is the reader’s space?

“I think the exciting stuff will happen with titles that are built in this space from the ground up, where the interactive elements are not window-dressing dropped in to display the capabilities of the tech but are essential to the ‘story’ in some way that we haven’t imagined yet. I suppose we have to get there somehow, so some growing pains will have to be endured. At least they’ll be pretty and glossy. I don’t really think that compelling, imaginative, transformative creative work is entirely a thing of the past. I just think that sometimes limitations enhance imagination, and I hope that doesn’t get lost in the shuffle while we explore the opposite path.”

“oh man. that kind of gave me a headache. I’d sort of prefer to see it not sped up by 20x. However. At the risk of being accused of being a Luddite, and with the caveat that I AM in fact excited about some of the possibilities of this stuff, umm… aren’t we losing sight of something here? I kind of preferred when Alice did all that stuff in my imagination, and it was my mind turning backflips, as opposed to flopping a screen around watching things wobble around ‘magically’… actually, there’s a level on which I find this saps most of the real magic out – because we know that what’s behind the stuff on the screen is technology and clever programming, whereas the magic before was something that we knew intuitively we were participating in imaginatively – precisely because the page itself was lifeless and bland. Somehow, despite the rich presentation and interactivity, I’m afraid we’re losing something of that. Thoughts?”