Marc Johnson's Blog, page 14

The Butterfly Effect of Editing

I've always found writing a book to be easy peasy. Granted, that first draft won't be very good, but I can generally bang out a very rough manuscript within two to three months. What I'm learning is that I'm starting to hate editing.

My second book titled, What Once Was One, is taking far too long to edit. Even though I've had a lot more time to work on it since I'm unemployed, I still haven't finished it yet. I keep saying I'm going to finish it at the end of the month. It's been four months since I've said that, and this is only for this round of editing. There would at least be a couple more passes to go.

But no matter how frustrating I find it to be, I'm not going to rush it. I believe that's probably the biggest mistake indie authors make. I'm not going to get into the whole quality vs. quantity debate, but there's this feeling I get from other indie authors. Aside from obsessively checking sales and worrying about what everyone thinks, there's this buzz about getting your books out within a certain time. It's as if the world will end if they don't. But I digress.

One thing I'm learning and hating, is that all the changes I've made and will do, are creating ripples throughout my entire series much like the butterfly effect. Frankly, it's a pain in the ass. I had heard and ignored other people when they talked about working on another, new story instead of working on the same one. Since this is the one story I want to write, I wasn't going to do that.

I thought I was giving myself a head start. That when the time came to be published, whether I published it myself or not, I would have this huge start. I kind of have a start in that I know where the story's going, and that's about it.

I have to not only think about the changes made in that one book, but where the series is going to go and what I have planned for the other books. That's one of the reasons it's taking so long to edit.

I would like to say it's the only reason, but my editor calls me out on a lot of things and I want to get things right. Both because it would be cheaper for subsequent edits and also because I want to make a better book. I want this book and all my books, to be the best they can be. I know other people won't like them, but as long as I'm happy with them, I'm OK. And I'm a very hard man to please.

I love writing and I always will. I think my book will be better because of all of the editing, but that doesn't mean that I can't hate it from time to time.

Writers Don’t Like Money

Writers are very strange people. It might be the artist thing, but we’re they’re weird, whiny, very egotistical, and argumentative. Maybe it’s a human thing, but the one thing I’ve found that confuses me is that writers constantly say, “I don’t care about the money.” Huh?

Call me crazy, but I love money! Show me the money!

Money helps me pay for things like food to eat, a roof over my head, gas for my car, bridge toll, and parking. It also helps me pay for things like editing for my next book, website hosting, and a cover. Money is a means, but never an end. It is used to get things you want and need.

It baffles me to see writers say that they don’t care about money. It’s thinking like that that reminds me that writers are terrible business people if they can’t change their mindset. More importantly, it tells me how egotistical they are.

Writers have a huge ego. It’s all about us them and they want people to like us them. I constantly see posts and tweets about how they want to have thousands of downloads so they make their book free in hopes of that.

It’s not about increasing sales because they’re not in it to make money. It’s about having as many eyes on their work so that they feel good about themselves. It’s also why they feel so down when they get a bad review because it’s a case, “Nobody likes me.”

I used to blame publications and places that wanted writers to work for free. I remember seeing an ad offering .0001 cent per word. I laughed out loud as I thought paying someone .01 a word was terrible. After the laughter, I couldn’t help but wonder why even bother with that insulting rate?

But there are writers that will work for less than slave labor. It’s all to have their names in the publication or something. It’s weird.

If you’re going to be an indie writer, you must change your mindset. You must like money and plan to get that money because all businesses want to make money.

Sure, there will be times where you will fail and it will cost you money, but if you work smarter, not harder, you will succeed.

Marc Johnson

Writers Don't Like Money

Writers are very strange people. It might be the artist thing, but we're they're weird, whiny, very egotistical, and argumentative. Maybe it's a human thing, but the one thing I've found that confuses me is that writers constantly say, "I don't care about the money." Huh?

Call me crazy, but I love money! Show me the money!

Money helps me pay for things like food to eat, a roof over my head, gas for my car, bridge toll, and parking. It also helps me pay for things like editing for my next book, website hosting, and a cover. Money is a means, but never an end. It is used to get things you want and need.

It baffles me to see writers say that they don't care about money. It's thinking like that that reminds me that writers are terrible business people if they can't change their mindset. More importantly, it tells me how egotistical they are.

Writers have a huge ego. It's all about us them and they want people to like us them. I constantly see posts and tweets about how they want to have thousands of downloads so they make their book free in hopes of that.

It's not about increasing sales because they're not in it to make money. It's about having as many eyes on their work so that they feel good about themselves. It's also why they feel so down when they get a bad review because it's a case, "Nobody likes me."

I used to blame publications and places that wanted writers to work for free. I remember seeing an ad offering .0001 cent per word. I laughed out loud as I thought paying someone .01 a word was terrible. After the laughter, I couldn't help but wonder why even bother with that insulting rate?

But there are writers that will work for less than slave labor. It's all to have their names in the publication or something. It's weird.

If you're going to be an indie writer, you must change your mindset. You must like money and plan to get that money because all businesses want to make money.

Sure, there will be times where you will fail and it will cost you money, but if you work smarter, not harder, you will succeed.

Marc Johnson

The Future of Fantasy

As I mentioned way back before, I don't read that much fantasy. I do read some and I have a tendacy to think about the future. What I've noticed is that there seems to be a divide between the two main types of fantasy. You have your dark and gritty vs. the lightheartedness and fun.

Sadly, it seems that you can't have fun in today's fantasy, which kind of sucks. Since books are a reflection of today's world in the same way video games, movies, and TV are, things are gritty now. It's probably why Urban Fantasy is so huge right now.

Everything has to be "realistic" or dark. They've even tried to make Superman dark. Characters are cynical and bitter and there's an abundance of violence, rape, incest. There's not really any happy endings anymore. They feel more like Pyrrhic victories. I never feel any better after reading any of those books or watching most movies these days.

Now that's not saying those books have their place. Obviously, they do. But there seems to be some kind of stigma if you do a far less "realistic" book. And I'm not just talking about my book either.

Brandon Sanderson, who writes some great fantasy, seems to get a little bit of this flack. Some say it's because of his religious upbringing and while that may be true, he may not want to write such downers and he want to write what he likes. Just because a book's not graphic doesn't mean that it can't be dark, and that things can't just get worse. Just look at Lord of the Rings, which took a very dark turn from its beginnings of The Hobbit. And the Harry Potter series gets darker, but doesn't get as graphic as say A Song of Fire and Ice.

It's a shame that traditional publishers don't buy enough light fantasy and that everything's going dark. One of the bright spots of reading indie books is that people can write what they want. I've noticed an overabundance of lighter fantasy from indie authors and the books I've have been pretty good.

I don't know what the future of fantasy is, but I do know what the future of reading is. Because of all the turbulent changes, readers no longer have to be pigeonholed. They can search for what they want and we can write what we want. That's all a person can ask for.

Marc Johnson

7 Reasons Why the Harry Potter Movies Failed

I just finished watching all eight Harry Potter movies in about two weeks. I know I'm late on this, but I want to talk about them!

While I had seen the 1st five movies, I wanted to rewatch them all in their entirety. Mainly because unemployment is boring, but also because people compare my books to Harry Potter sometimes. Something about a boy wizard. I've never read the books as I couldn't get into them 12 years ago. From what I understand, the books are way better.

With that said, I'm going to strictly look at the Harry Potter series from the movies point of view with no knowledge of the books. Spoilers ahead!

1. The movies are made for fans of the books

Since the books made a lot of money because it has a ton of fans, this isn't necessarily a bad thing. However, for people like me who haven't read the books, I feel like I'm missing a lot. The movies should have been vehicles for non-fans to buy the books. I had a lot of questions and there were things I didn't get. The 1st movie didn't have this problem, but as it progressed, I just felt lost. Talking to fans though, they kept saying I need to read the books.

There are adaptations that have been done well or completely different from their original book source like the Lord of the Rings or The Shawshank Redemption. A lot of things are cut out of those movies, but I never felt lost. When I read the books, I felt more knowledgable.

2. Nothing makes any sense as things are never explained

There are plenty of instances when this pops up. Let me list a few.

For the 1st seven movies, wands aren't explained. For a few minutes in the last movie, they are…sort of. Can you use two wands? What makes wands so special? Are they breakable? Do you have to use them to perform magic? The answer to that last question is no because Voldemort and Harry clearly use magic without it yet it's never actually done again.

So other questions that popped up while I was watching.

Why does Harry's uncle hate him yet choose to have him live with him? Does he get money from it much like our foster care system? Does he actually care about the boy and hope to keep him safe?

What are Voldemort's goals? Clearly, he hates Harry and wants to kill him, but what else? What did he want before? What would have happened had he beaten Harry? And what's wrong with his FACE??? Why did he stop looking like a normal human being?

Also, there were other schools shown in the 4th movie. Where were they in the fight against Voldemort?

Those were just a few of the questions I had. I had MANY more.

3. Characters don't get enough screen time

Now, I understand that Harry Potter has a huge cast of characters. Much like the Lord of the Ring's Tom Bombadil, you don't need to focus on a bunch of them. And I found myself liking a couple of them like the Twins, Dobby, and Longbottom. However, when a lot of characters die or become important to the plot, I don't care or am confused. There are three main characters: HP, Hermoine and Ron. Everyone else is minor.

At the end of the 4th movie, Edward from Twilight dies. I knew I was supposed to feel something, but didn't because he was barely in it. Same thing for Gary Oldman.

Harry Potter (forever known in the rest of this long blog post as HP) gets an Asian girlfriend, kinda, during the 5th movie, but she's barely in it and he quickly dumps her after she turns traitor. Even after that's cleared up, there's not a makeup or resolution scene after that. In the 6th movie after, they start to set up HP with Ron's sister. That could work, but the problem she's been in the previous five movies for 2 minutes despite the fact that HP has been around Ron's family for the majority of the films.

The biggest fault lies in Draco though. This character should have been HUGE, but he ended up being nothing. From the 1st movie, I expected him to be the Kaiba or Vegeta type. You know, the enemy, rival, reluctant ally, then friend. He started off that way but then completely disappeared in the middle movies.

All the characters aside from the three and probably Hans Gruber, are one-dimensional, because they're just not there enough.

5. Hermoine and Harry

This might be my biggest frustration for all eight movies. This was the perfect romance to set up. Sure, it was obvious, but it would have worked. You got the feeling that Hermione loved Harry. She was always worried about him and constantly hugged and kissed him. With Ron, she just seemed annoyed and pissed off. That only happens once you're in a relationship. The love triangle never quite worked because HP and Hermione never kissed and it drove me crazy! I yelled at my TV for them to kiss. One time!

When Ron was gone from the 7th movie, I expected them to at least have a night of passion. They're being hunted, it's them against the world, and they only have each other. But there was none of that. You could have still had Hermione end up with Ron. It would have been like Dawson's Creek. Dawson and Joey only got together once and Joey ended up choosing Pacey. I would have been sad over that, but I would have understood. Maybe. I never much liked Ron or Pacey.

But Hermonie loves Ron for some mysterious reason and HP loves Ron's sister for also another mysterious reason.

6. Muggles

Towards the last couple of movies, there was supposed to be something against muggles. It was supposed to be like racism, classism, or anything with -ism. Voldemort hated muggles and half-breeds, but it was never explained why. Did muggles know about his magic then bullied him? I would have accepted that. But there's nothing.

Instead, Voldemort wants to boot them from Hogwarts. Does he then want to kill all of them on Earth? That'd be pretty hard to do considering he's way outnumbered and while the muggles don't have magic, they have technology.

Then that got me wondering. Is a half-breed stronger or weaker in magic? Are there muggle liasons? There should be. Wouldn't they be upset for what was happening? Would they help against Voldemort? Do they cover up the magical world by saying the English equivelant of weather balloons?

Lastly, while Hermoine was a half-breed, it was never shown. Her parents weren't in the movies. It would have been more powerful had they been with her at Teacher/Student conference or a Quiddich game or something and they felt out of place yet they showed pride and love towards their daughter and she towards them. That way, when Hermoine erased their memories, I would have cared and been sad.

But the muggles live in their own world and the wizards in their magical one. Without the lack of overlap, prosecution, or destruction, who cares about the other side?

7. The Rules, or lack thereof, of magic

I never quite knew what the wizards in HP's world could or couldn't do. They mostly needed wands, but not in the beginning. They could transport, make things fly, shapeshift, blast fire and energy bolts, move things, morph people, clean whole rooms, etc. There didn't seem to be rhyme or reason to the things they did. In fact, they seemed too powerful because they could do anything.

It would have been interesting if it was the wand they needed, but then that would have meant anyone could become a wizard. Or if they had to sacrifice something to perform the magic. Better yet, if there were any sort of limitations on what they could do or couldn't do, it would have been better.

Ironically, because of the fact that there are no rules of magic, the wizard fights were pretty lame. Not as lame as the Sauron and Gandalf fight in the LotR movies. There was only one good fight in the Harry Potter movies, but most of them devolved into shooting each other with magical blasts and ending with two powerful beams of magic clashing against each other.

Now, I'm not saying the movies are bad, they're serviceable. I enjoyed the 4th and 8th movie the best. I just wish there was more. I will read the books when they're available electronically. Unless of course, I just really don't like the 1st book. On hindsight, I don't quite enjoy the movies now then when I watched the 1st five. And they're not that old.

Do you people agree or disagree with me? I'm curious if the people who read the books first agree with me or if their minds filled in all the questions and confusion I had. Please let me know.

Marc Johnson

Walking Away From the Internet and Arguments

The Internet's a funny place. People are able to hide behind their screen names without any sort of repercussion. I believe because of that, far more arguments break out than there should be.

My generation's very weird. We're in the middle of things. For half of our life, we can remember lower gas prices, a day before cell phones or the Internet, only having two new video games a year, going outside and playing, blowing on our NES cartridges, and remembering people's phone numbers. So unlike a lot of people, I've spent over half my life on the Internet, but I can still remember what life was like before it.

If there's one thing I learned early and while I was still a teenager, is that it's pointless to argue over the Internet. ALL discussions morph into arguments if a thread goes over two pages. There's a saying where when someone calls someone else Hitler, which will happen, you should stop. However, I believe you should stop WAY before that.

If you find yourself typing an emotional response, stop. I said, stop! That's when I think you should quit. Nothing good will come of your response.

You're going to get emotional and so will the other guy. The discussion devolves into these things: name calling, straw-man argument, yelling, circular argument, passive-aggressive and finally Hitler. By then it's like, what was the point of the thread or chat again?

This should especially apply to writers. Even if you want to point out something a reviewer got wrong or that they didn't read the book, don't do it. Just walk away.

In real life, people are no where near as confrontational or talk shit in front of other people's faces. But because of the anonymity of the Internet people feel like they can get away with anything. Just walk away, brush the dirt of your shoulders, and let them "win" the argument.

Sadly, what I've noticed is that a lot of people, especially older ones, 35 and up, have a hard time walking away. These people ALWAYS have to have a response and ALWAYS try to get the last word in. I don't understand why. It's not going to matter and it'll make you look equally petty even if you're right.

There's one last thing you should keep in mind before you respond. Things rarely sound how you intend over the Internet. My dry, sarcastic, smartass, wacky, self-deprecating humor doesn't translate well at all. You can't hear my tone so even if I use smiley faces, bold or italicized words, you still don't hear the inflection in my voice or see my deadpan face. So what you mean to say won't actually be what people read.

Who cares about what Random Guy says about you? It's not going to make a big difference what they say. And don't be like them. Do what you'd do if that person was right in front of you. Have some manners and don't be a jackass.

Marc Johnson

Much Ado About Amazon

Ever since Amazon launched their KDP Select program and have releasing been testing a price check app, there's been a lot of threads, blog posts, and generally bitching about Amazon.

I see nothing wrong with what Amazon is doing. They're a business so they want to make money, but people are also forgetting that in competition, whether it's sports or business you want to crush the other guy so you can be the best or top dog. That's what they're trying to do.

I like Amazon. I've always liked Amazon. Even though they're on top now, they've not opposed to change. They never have been. They adapt and that's what I like most about them. They don't settle. They're always trying new things and taking risks yet people are worried about them being a "monopoly." Let's take a look back at some other monopolies.

IBM, United States Postal Service, and Pacific Bell were all on top at one point. But they got lazy and stagnant and subsequently lost their market share and dominance. Amazon has never shown that. They're constantly innovating and trying new things whether it be Amazon Prime, KDP Select, the Kindle, the Kindle Fire, free shipping, and so on.

People wrongly believe that Amazon stays in business because they undercut other business prices. While that is part of it, it's not the only thing. If it were true, then Amazon would be nothing but another Walmart and they're not doing too well right now.

Too many people are worried about Amazon becoming a monopoly. What if this or what if that happens? And what about the future of indie publishers? What are the Big Six publishers doing? What do consumers think? Will everything go to a subscription model? What about my ranking? Blah, blah, blah.

It's all great to think about these questions and ask them to yourself, but if there's one thing I learned early in life is that you can't worry about things that are out of your control. Amazon's out of your control, your competition is out of your control, your ranking is out of your control, people signing up for Amazon Prime and borrowing your book is out of your control, and so on. If you worry about all these things that are out of your control, it will drive you insane.

You can only worry about yourself. You can only do what's best for you, whether you're a writer or a consumer. If it's better for you to sign up to KDP Select then do so. If it's better for you to give your book away for free, do it. If you it's better for you to borrow books and only buy books under $4.99, do it. If you just like free or $.99 books, go for it. Don't worry about what other people or companies are or aren't doing based on something that may happen. You may never have to explain your reasons to someone else, but you should ask yourself why you will or won't be doing something.

I don't deal in hypothetical in what may happen. Sure, Amazon may become stagnant but I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt until they show signs of decay. If Amazon were running my country, I'm sure things would be a lot better. Oh, I'm sorry. I just got a bit political.

My only worry is: should I keep my Amazon Prime account?

Marc Johnson

From Paper Books to Ebooks

Convincing people to switch to ebooks is surprisingly hard. For some reason, people are reluctant to read them despite having computers, smart phones, iPods, 360s, GPS, and so on. What I've found is that it's the younger people in their 20s-30s that are the most resistant.

I'm having a hard time convincing those technology savvy and plugged in people to buy ebooks. I point out the other devices they used, but it falls on deaf ears. I understand people are resistant to change, but it makes no sense if you changed format on everything else.

The number one defense is, "I like the smell and feel of a book." The feel of the book is the same as an e-reader. It's just a thinner, far lighter book. Reading is also the same if you use a device with e-ink, but superior. You don't feel the strain and you can adjust the font and take notes. I will give them one thing. The smell of a book is actually better than the smell of plastic. However, once those pages turn yellow and collects dust and mold, it stops smelling so sweet.

I don't understand why it's so hard for people to make the switch. I've tried to convince my friends that read, but to no avail. Books look nice on a bookshelf, but do you honestly re-read them? I know I don't. At best I used them as a stand for my mic or flip through a couple of non-fiction books when I'm doing research.

I'm trying to go digital on everything and not "own" things. I live in a small apartment and will eventually move again. As someone who's moved a lot over his life, I learned that books suck. Sure, they're easy to pack, but they're also bloody heavy. I've owned a lot of books over the years and every time I move, I get rid of most of them. Shortly thereafter, I acquire more. Thankfully, I won't have that problem anymore.

There's also the fact of cleaning, getting rid of, bringing with you, or buying new bookshelves. Ikea makes great ones, but they're not meant to lug around with their cheap materials. The better ones are heavy. I'm a strong guy, but I find it very tiresome and pointless especially for books I won't read again.

I have no doubt that eventually these people will eventually make an adjustment. Partly because they'll be forced too with bookstores closing and having less shelf space for books, but also because of the cheaper prices, convenience, and the fact that you can find almost any title you want. The question is when and how?

Everyone who thought the above way changed their mind as soon as they got their hands on an e-reader. Like having a smartphone, they wonder, "How did I go without this?" They also read and buy more books.

Has anyone else had problems convincing other people to make the switch? I had reservations years ago, but I wasn't as stubborn as some people I know are. How have you convinced other people to change and why did you make the change yourself?

Just because the publishing industry is resisting the change, doesn't mean that you should be. The future is now!

Marc Johnson

My Kindle Fire Review

I've never been excited about a piece of technology before. However, I was excited for the Kindle Fire. I was looking for a tablet and was thinking of getting the HTC Flyer when it dropped in price. But since I'm a fan of Amazon plus the cheaper price, I ended up getting the Fire.

Now, while I can no longer write or outline like I wanted to with a stylus on the HTC Flyer, I thought the Fire would be perfect for reading comics and magazines, surfing the web, checking my email and Google Reader, and going over documents.

And it is.

But like everything it has it's pros and cons.

1. PRICE

Pros:

It's only $200. Granted, that's a lot of money to me now, but I ordered it before I got laid off. But in the grand scheme of things that's super cheap. It's a fine tablet for $200. And you have to remember that.

The thing that separates it from every other Android tablet is it's backed and designed by Amazon. I hear they're pretty good. I've been a fan of them for awhile. They had all the books I couldn't get from the store, then they had them cheaper, soon after that they had other stuff, they started giving out free shipping, and throughout it all they've adapted and had great customer service.

Cons:

It's only $200. Sometimes, you get what you pay for. You're missing a lot of other stuff like a camera and microphone, but personally, I find those useless anyway. However, if you feel you need those, you're going to pay more than $200.

The technical aspects also aren't as "good" as the Nook Color. But for who it's designed and marketed for, it doesn't have to be. It's still very good for it can do…for $200.

2. APPS

Pros:

It has some of the big apps: Netflix, Hulu, Comixology, Tunein Radio. Plus, Amazon has a free app of the day. Those free ones are either very good or complete crap, but hey, they're free. Ummm…that's about it.

Cons:

It's missing a lot of popular apps like  Gmail and Facebook app.

The Google Android Marketplace is significantly smaller than Apple's. The Amazon Android Marketplace is significantly smaller than Google's. Things you buy on Google you'll have to rebuy them on Amazon's. Unless it's ice cream or an Ultimate Collection of your favorite movies, who likes double dipping?

Also, some of the updates don't have the latest edition. For example, Majesty, a rather fun game, updated on Apple first. Not too long after, it updated on Google. It still hasn't updated on Amazon's so you're missing a few free levels. I was tempted to double dip on it too.

On the bright side, my friend told me that at launch, the iPad was pretty bare bones. So there's hope for the Kindle Fire and Amazon's App Store. It would be far better if Amazon and Google both worked together. I doubt it though.

3. DESIGN

Pros:

It's simple to use and ready out of the box. It's small and light enough to fit in one hand. I don't like typing without a keyboard (I have a Droid 3), but it's easy to type with it if you use it landscape.

It's an Android operating system, but it doesn't look like one. This can either be hit or miss. Since I have an Android, I find myself trying to do things and look for buttons that are on it, but they're not there.

Cons:

No external volume button. It's not that big of a deal but when you want to change the volume while you're in an app, it'll pause the program. The placement of the power button causes me to hit it more often than not, but you can turn it upside down.

Some people don't like the carousel. I like how it shows the recent things. However, a lot of hate it has is because it shows all the books you bought and apparently, people buy a lot of erotica. That said, despite people worrying about it, no one's going to go deep into the carousel. It is annoying and long and it would be better if it was limited to the first 10-15 items.

4. BOOKS

Pros:

If you read books through your Kindle, it's still good. With Whispersync between multiple devices, the adjusting of font or background, nothing's missing here…except the e-ink.

Cons:

I was tempted to get rid of my e-ink Kindle until I couldn't sleep and read on my Kindle Fire. The brightness blinded me and hurt my eyes. Reading books or anything without pictures still isn't as good as e-ink.

5. COMICS

Pros:

I love Comixology and this is better since it's bigger screen than my phone. They have a huge selection and have sales about two times a week. Reading a comic on my Fire is a lot better than reading it on my phone.

Amazon also offers some great, classic trades for a good price. Wish I hadn't have read them all already. Don't feel like double dipping on those.

Cons:

Comics as PDFs suck. It's hard to read anything and zooming in is awkward.

As much as I like what Amazon is trying to do, it's reading experience isn't as good as Comixology. You can only read in portrait and not in landscape. And you must read the full page. You can have the panel pop out if you tap it though. On a 10" Kindle Fire, it would be a lot better. The writing's not intelligible but it is kind of blurry.

6. MAGAZINES

Pros:

The few digital magazines I read that were made in a Kindle format do look good. That's about it.

Cons:

There's just not enough magazines. Amazon's store doesn't have enough choices and out of the handful of magazines, nothing interested me. If you go to your favorite magazine's websites, a lot of magazines don't have digital versions, have crappy PDFs, or you can only get it if you subscribe through their print. That's a bit of a bust.

7. WEB SURFING

Pros:

You don't have to get up, lean forward, or have a hot laptop on you. It's not heavy or unwieldy to hold. It's fast for a tablet.

Cons:

It's fast…for a tablet. If you expected something just blaze, you're going to be disappointed. However, the speed does pick up based on the constant websites you visit.

For some reason, it also brings up tabs I closed despite having closed them manually. But it doesn't do that all the time. I don't know why it does that and it would be really awkward if I was previously looking at porn or something. Not that I would do such a thing.

8. VIDEO

Pros:

Amazon Prime's selection looks great. It takes up the entire screen and everything and there was hardly any buffering. Plus, they have a huge selection. With what's been happening with Netflix lately, they might even have a bigger selection than them. At least when it comes to movies.

Cons:

Netflix doesn't look as good as Amazon's selection. It doesn't take up the entire screen. It could be because I have a really loud turtle filter, but I couldn't hear the sound that well and had to use headphones. While visiting family, the sound quality was fine so it probably was my turtle filter.

9. CLOUD

Pros:

The cloud works fine. Despite only having 8 GB of memory for the device and no SD card, streaming stuff from the cloud worked, whether it be music or video. Not having things stored on a drive will take some getting used to because streaming is still getting used to. But if you're like me and are trying to declutter and stream a lot of things anyway, you should be fine.

Cons:

You won't always be near a wifi spot, but you can download it to your device before you go. Sadly, you can't download videos, but you can transfer things unto your device from a mini-USB cord. Of course, a USB cord doesn't come with a device.

NITPICKS

Despite the tablet itself being 7 inches, the entire front is not used. There's about a half an inch gap. I don't know what that's or why it's designed like that. It's a bit misleading. And for some reason, I find myself having to press buttons multiple times. It just doesn't read my fingerprint.

OVERALL GRADE: B+

If you love Amazon and their affordable products and excellent costumer service, you should definitely buy one. It also comes with a free month of Amazon Prime. I didn't have Prime before this, but I do like their free two day shipping. I'm tempted to continue with it, but I already have Netflix and I can't watch Prime movies through my Xbox.

If you're a techie nerd that cares about RAM, processing speed, and want to root and change things to your specifications, the Kindle Fire's not for you. It is only $200 so it's going to be lacking in some of those departments, but it's great for what it is.

The Amazon Fire is the perfect tablet for someone looking to buy and try one for a lot less than $500 and for someone who's more comfortable buying things from Amazon and wanting to be tied into Amazon. That's it.

I really hope the support and apps increases in the next few months as I enjoy this little piece of machinery.

Are you guys planning to get one? Why or why not?

Marc Johnson

Keeping Things in Perspective

One of the major problems with being a writer is that you don't have a pulse on what's happening in the real world. This is true whether you're traditionally or indie published. When you write, you spend all of your time by yourself. It's a little maddening really.

If you're traditionally published, you won't have control over your own book or even have accurate numbers as to how it's doing because of returns, accounting issues, a bad and confusing business model, and so on. If you're indie published, you'll obsess over your cover, sales, marketing, and what the other guy is doing.

Absolute Write Water Cooler and Kindleboards are probably the two best or largest representatives of each side. Even then, they're not actually in tuned with the real world.

When I let people know I have a book, I tell them what it's about and the price. Here are some things they do and don't say.

1. "It's only THAT much?"

When I tell people my book is $4.99, they're shocked at how cheap it is even though I tell them that it's only available as an ebook.

They're probably shocked it's less than $5 because the Big Six constantly prices their ebooks for at least $9.99, but more often between $12.99 and $14.99. $5 is a steal compared that. Also, $5 is still less than a paperback and probably a cup of coffee. I don't drink coffee, but I hear people always bring up this analogy.

But if I were to listen to the forums and other writers, I'm either underpricing or overpricing myself. Their arguments are "X worked for this person so you should try that" or "everyone else is pricing their books at X."

It's terrible advice to do something because everyone else is doing it unless you understand the reasons why. This is writing. There is no set thing. Everyone has different stories of how they got published anyway. If that's not bad enough, people who are successful have no idea why. So they keep saying it's luck. With that in mind, why would you want to mindlessly copy them?

2. "You sold HOW many?"

While I haven't given exact numbers either here or in person, I do tell people I sold a few hundred copies. They're always impressed by that amount. To make a living off it, I would need to sell A LOT more. I'm more curious as to how many I'll have sold when my book's been out a year. I'll list the exact numbers then.

But if I were to listen to other writers, I either sold a lot or very little. Those that constantly post their huge amount of numbers seem to be doing nothing but dickwaving. Yes, your dick is bigger than mine. I'm not sure how always posting your great numbers is helpful. The fact is the majority of authors won't reach those numbers. Some could say it's inspirational, but I believe it gives people false hope. Hope is the most dangerous thing in the world as it tends to blind people. Do you post it to help people or to stroke your ego? We're all writers so we have big egos. At least, I know I do.

I'm probably somewhere in the middle when it comes to my sales. I don't think I'm doing too bad for someone with no audience, no platform, and only one book. And it's not like I'm always marketing it either.

I like to look at it much like Dean Wesley Smith's way. He doesn't talk about big numbers and spends more time on the business aspect of writing. To him, it's write something, publish it, forget about it, and work on something else.

That 1% that everyone currently hates for no discernible or logical reason is used to thinking that way. Them and people who are well off but don't quite reach those heights, tend to get a lot of their money from passive income or portfolio income. Most of us live from paycheck to paycheck and don't understand that.

Indie writers are far more obsessed with their sales than traditionally published writers. Maybe having up to date sales figures is not a good thing. There's even an entire site about Why Is My Book Not Selling?

With my royalties, I can currently pay for one round of editing. I'm still in the red, but as long as my sales can partially cover my costs, I'm good. I'd be happy when they can completely cover them. I would love to sell more and never have to work a regular job again, but it's not a race. I'm not trying to prove anything to anyone else.

3. "Who published you?"

There's a question that's NOT asked. People don't care or know about publishers yet for some reason, publishers think they're important. There are very few things where publishers are actually known and have become a brand like Marvel and DC or Nintendo and Microsoft, but no one cares who publishes a book.

But if I were to listen to writers, who publishes you is very important. It's some kind of weird validation instead of being validated by good reviews, fan mail, or my favorite, money deposited into an account. There are writers on Twitter that list who they're published by and I can't help but wonder why? That's a waste of a limited bio page.

Even if I had signed with a traditional publisher or do in the future, I could care less about who they are. I only care for what type of business they run and if it's efficient, what they could do for me, what rights they want, and what percentage they offer. I don't even care about an advance as that's the least important thing.

Those are the three major things that seem to come up in the writing community. I have to remember that as useful and insightful as some of the people are, it's a small world. They're not any indication of regular people or the book buying public. So I keep that in mind while I read blogs and forum posts, or listen to panels and interviews.

And like the gunslinger I am, I just kind of do my own thing.

Marc Johnson