Talk:Mobipocket

message: I don't quite understand parts of this article. "Mobipocket Reader, a universal reader for PDAs." So it's software that runs on PDAs, but in what sense is it "universal"? Does it run on any PDA? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tangerine Cossack (talk • contribs) 20:34, 19 November 2007
: Mobipocket is may things: A Fileformat, Software, a DRM scheme and an eBook shop. The different aspects of Mobipockt are independed - for example there are quite a few eBook shops apart from Mobipocket to sell eBooks using the Mobipockte Fileformat and DRM Scheme. Also there is Software from 3rd party vendors which can read Mobipockt fileformat.
: Now the file format is well documented and can be ported to any PDA. So in theory the any PDA can be used to read Mobipocket files. When it comes to the DRM scheme things look different: You need a licence to implement the DRM scheme. For example Sony was denied the licence and as a result did not add any Mobipocket support to there eBook readers.
: And yes that should be all added to the main page. --Krischik T 06:07, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: This article sucks.  It's overloaded with technical jargon, and after sifting through it, I'm still not sure if it is describing a digital file format, a computer algorithm, a piece of software, or a company, . — QuicksilverT @ 17:58, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  What is it? 

message: The paragraph in the Implementation Section that is devoted to a thinly veiled rant about the lack of support for mobipocket on Android really doesn't fit an encyclopedic article. I rewrote it so that the original point (no support for mobipocket on Android devices) is still there, but less like a personal rant, and more like a note on the matter. I removed the sentence "Some users suggest that this is due to the new owners, Amazon, wishing to maximise sales of their Kindle e-book reader and suggest that the Mobipocket format and software are dying from intentional neglect." because the source it links to is a forum post from someone with no connections to Amazon or Mobipocket SA and is basically ranting about "the man" (in this case "the man" seems to be Amazon). It's an individual opinion and serves no purpose in an article since it's completely hypothetical and not based on actual communication with Amazon. I've also pruned and revised a few other sentences, though not to the degree of the one previously mentioned. 174.112.6.146 (talk) 16:36, 18 March 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: "Hear, hear" As someone who invested US$100 or more in licensed Mobipocket titles (including several Oxford Dictionaries), I've been quite disgruntled about Mobipocket winding down and not building licensed .MOBI file compatibility into the Kindle app for other platforms. My personal feelings as a Mobipocket customer don't belong in the article, naturally, but I do think the article must maintain a neutral point of view. -- David Spalding (☎ ✉ ✍) 18:59, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

text: I'd like to second the sentiments expressed here.  The article as it stands has an almost Alice-in-Wonderland tone to it.  For example, it says, "Despite great demand ... Mobipocket has not released a version for Android" [emphasis added]  That tense is usually reserved for situations where it would make sense to say "has not yet...".  In other words, it implies that Mobipocket might very well go ahead and produce such a version.  But that's senseless; it's like saying "King Tut has not visited England" or "Data General has not completed Ada support".  It's gramatically correct but none the less incorrect English usage.  In all three cases it would be far more appropriate to use did not or never, as in "Mobipocket never released an Android version".   The article also makes the bizarre assertion, "Long term plans for ... Mobipocket ... are in question".  This is about as reasonable as asserting "Long term plans for Kaiser Motors are in question".  Most of us already got the answer to the question a long time ago.   You may be fooled by the fact that the Mobipocket website is still up, and still has a friendly looking front page.  That, too, is rather strange; it's not immediately clear why Amazon wants to keep up the front.  If you poke around a little, you'll find that it's had all books, as well as all the old support forums, stripped from it; there's nothing left but the skeleton, and it has been in that state for some years now.  Salaw (talk) 23:57, 9 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Implementation section (Android) 

message: What does not work on Linux using WINE, though? --217.170.134.114 (talk) 16:50, 29 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  WINE 

message: Article needs to describe the subject in the past tense. Take a look at the mobipocket web site. --Cornellier (talk) 03:10, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Not only is the mobipocket site down, but even Amazon is no longer using mobi files for new books. This is a quote from their support pages: "After August 1, 2021, we will no longer support MOBI files when publishing new or updating previously published reflowable eBooks. Instead, use EPUB, DOCX or KPF formats". It can be found at <https://kdp.amazon.com/en_US/help/topic/G200634390>. WesT (talk) 00:32, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Needs overhaul