# New York: No ereaders allowed in some cafes!



## Jack Wallen (Feb 9, 2011)

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/13/magazine/13FOB-Medium-t.html?_r=1

"Many indie New York City cafes now heavily restrict, or ban outright, the use of Kindles, Nooks and iPads. Evidently, too many coffee shops in town have had their ambience wrecked when itinerant word processors with laptops turn the tables into office space."

I thought those sorts actually defined the "cafe" and "coffee shop". at least they do here in Louisville, KY. You always see "tabletop offices" in the likes of Heine Brothers.


----------



## QuantumIguana (Dec 29, 2010)

I can see their point. They may go too far with banning ebook readers, but I would guess they don't want to have their staff judging what devices are acceptable and which are not. Some people camp out in the coffeeshop for the free WiFi. Ordering one coffee, and using the WiFi for a couple hours is abusing it. When I think of a coffeeshop, I think of people drinking coffee and reading books. A room full of laptops isn't what I have in mind, and doesn't seem like a place I would care to hang out.


----------



## telracs (Jul 12, 2009)

when did my kindle become a word processor?

and by the way, starbucks and their ilk have been trying to ban laptops for a while due to the fact that they offer free wi-fi and some people do try and use the shop as an office.


----------



## Me and My Kindle (Oct 20, 2010)

> I thought those sorts actually defined the "cafe" and "coffee shop".


I totally agree. It's the gadget-lovers who tend to drink the most coffee -- and the intellectual vibe of a coffee shop has always come from the people who read books. So I still agree with the first line of that article....

"No Kindles in cafes? You've got to be kidding. This is an affront, not only to readers and gadget lovers, but also to the spirit of cafes!"


----------



## mooshie78 (Jul 15, 2010)

It's tough.  On the one hand one thinks of sitting around and reading in a coffee house.

On the other hand, they have to lose money from people who come and order one beverage and stay for ours reading or goofing online or working etc.  And that happens a lot--especially at Starbucks where I've been guilty of doing the same myself.

So I can see their need to move people along and free up seats as I've passed by many a coffee that was too crowded and gone elsewhere when just wanting to sit and have a coffee and relax.

One solution is to do what some places do and limit the wifi access to 30 minutes before you get knocked off.  I know Panera Bread does that during peak, lunchtime hours.


----------



## QuantumIguana (Dec 29, 2010)

There are too many coffee shops that look like the casual friday version of a cubible farm. When you see a dozen laptops with people who are there just because of free wifi, it kills the atmosphere. Plus, the store doesn't sell nearly as much coffee that way.


----------



## Guest (Feb 14, 2011)

Just tell them to shove it and go to a McCafe  They can keep their smug lattes, high prices and tips


----------



## QuantumIguana (Dec 29, 2010)

McGee said:


> Just tell them to shove it and go to a McCafe  They can keep they smug lattes, high prices and tips


Make the bad man stop scaring me. 

Seriously though, buy your coffee where ever you want. But I would prefer not to get mine from a place with a "Fun Land" or a clown.


----------



## racheldeet (Jan 21, 2010)

Boy, am I glad I live in the part of NY where a full cafe is not to be found. Our coffee shops generally have 3-4 tables taken and the rest empty, the fellow at the counter knows what you want, and is more than willing to keep a tab for you for as long as you stay.  I think I'd cry a little if my place asked me not to bring my laptop/Kindle anymore. (And then go find a DTB and return for the coffee, of course.)


----------



## Zero (Jan 27, 2011)

I like the 30 minute limit idea...but I would certainly NOT go to a place where my laptop/kindle/gadgets are banned.


----------



## Guest (Feb 14, 2011)

QuantumIguana said:


> Seriously though, buy your coffee where ever you want. But I would prefer not to get mine from a place with a "Fun Land" or a clown.


You would rather get your cup from someone with piercings all over their face and ink all over their body ?


----------



## mooshie78 (Jul 15, 2010)

Yes, as the coffee is better and it's not packed with kids and riff raff like fast food restaurants are.


----------



## history_lover (Aug 9, 2010)

I'm glad I don't like coffee or NYC.


----------



## Guest (Feb 14, 2011)

mooshie78 said:


> Yes, as the coffee is better and it's not packed with kids and riff raff like fast food restaurants are.


Who are you calling a riff rat? 


Actually, I don't patronize either types. I have an espresso machine, all meals are home cooked and a 3G USB card.


----------



## telracs (Jul 12, 2009)

history_lover said:


> I'm glad I don't like coffee or NYC.


gee, remind me to say something nice about where you are at some point.

May I respectfully request that people discuss the topic, ie banning of items in places, rather than getting personal about the details.


----------



## musclehead (Dec 29, 2010)

QuantumIguana said:


> I can see their point. They may go too far with banning ebook readers, but I would guess they don't want to have their staff judging what devices are acceptable and which are not. Some people camp out in the coffeeshop for the free WiFi. Ordering one coffee, and using the WiFi for a couple hours is abusing it. When I think of a coffeeshop, I think of people drinking coffee and reading books. A room full of laptops isn't what I have in mind, and doesn't seem like a place I would care to hang out.


How is people drinking coffee and reading books different from people drinking coffee and surfing the net? They seem the same to me. If a customer walks in and sees a bunch of people reading, that's no different than seeing a bunch of people surfing.


----------



## QuantumIguana (Dec 29, 2010)

McGee said:


> You would rather get your cup from someone with piercings all over their face and ink all over their body ?


Absolutely. Much better than a place with less atmosphere than the moon.


----------



## mooshie78 (Jul 15, 2010)

musclehead said:


> How is people drinking coffee and reading books different from people drinking coffee and surfing the net? They seem the same to me. If a customer walks in and sees a bunch of people reading, that's no different than seeing a bunch of people surfing.


Well, it's a different atmosphere. Many go to coffee shops to get away from computers and people working etc. When it's packed full of people on laptops typing away, it feels like a cubicle farm rather than a place to relax and I'd rather stay home or at work (have my own office) than go there.

People sitting around reading is a different atmosphere, and more relaxing IMO.

That said, it is the same problem for the owners in terms of people buying one drinking and staying for a long time regardless of whether they're reading or working on a laptop etc. But the article seemed to imply that some places were banning them for reasons of ambiance rather than campers staying for hours and only buying one drink.


----------



## Ann in Arlington (Oct 27, 2008)

mooshie78 said:


> But the article seemed to imply that some places were banning them for reasons of ambiance rather than campers staying for hours and only buying one drink.


Well, they may be saying it's mostly because of ambiance, but with a business it's a safe bet that a big part of the equation is how much revenue they might be losing. And I can understand the irritation if there are people spending almost no money but taking up a table. And if the place appears full to folks passing by because of folks on computers, they might very well not bother to stop. In my mind ereaders are more like books than computers. . .but then there's iPads which are kind of something in between. . . .


----------



## Elk (Oct 4, 2010)

I would love a coffee shop which banned all electronic devices, including Kindles and cell phones.


----------



## Susan in VA (Apr 3, 2009)

Elk said:


> I would love a coffee shop which banned all electronic devices, including Kindles and cell phones.


Well yes, if they're claiming that it's because of the ambiance, then they should be banning ringing cell phones as well.

And if they admit it's because of people using table space for too long, then where's the difference between someone reading on a Kindle or iPad and someone reading a newspaper or paper book?


----------



## telracs (Jul 12, 2009)

what I find interesting about the article is its vagueness.  "many indie coffee-shops"?  really and how many indie coffee shops are there in NYC.


----------



## Elk (Oct 4, 2010)

Susan in VA said:


> And if they admit it's because of people using table space for too long, then where's the difference between someone reading on a Kindle or iPad and someone reading a newspaper or paper book?


Or a laptop?


----------



## Susan in VA (Apr 3, 2009)

Elk said:


> Or a laptop?


Well yes, exactly. Or me taking my knitting to Starbucks and sitting there for two hours while DD is at some event. So it's not a gadget... but it still takes up a table! (Though IMHO it improves the ambiance. )


----------



## mooshie78 (Jul 15, 2010)

Susan in VA said:


> Well yes, if they're claiming that it's because of the ambiance, then they should be banning ringing cell phones as well.
> 
> And if they admit it's because of people using table space for too long, then where's the difference between someone reading on a Kindle or iPad and someone reading a newspaper or paper book?


Agreed. I'd love a coffee shop that banned laptops and cell phones etc. and focused on quite places to relax, quietly talk to the people you're with, do some reading etc.

And I don't see e-readers as any different than books in respects to ambiance. But yes, if it's about needing to turn over tables and not have people buying one coffee and staying for hours while people pass on as it's too busy, then it's not a matter of banning devices but one of having clear signage saying tables cannot be used for more than one hour, knocking people off wifi after 30 minutes etc.


----------



## Elk (Oct 4, 2010)

Susan in VA said:


> Or me taking my knitting to Starbucks and sitting there for two hours while DD is at some event. ... (Though IMHO it improves the ambiance.


I'm very pro-knitting. It definitely improves ambiance!


----------



## mlewis78 (Apr 19, 2009)

history_lover said:


> I'm glad I don't like coffee or NYC.


??


----------



## history_lover (Aug 9, 2010)

scarlet said:


> gee, remind me to say something nice about where you are at some point.
> 
> May I respectfully request that people discuss the topic, ie banning of items in places, rather than getting personal about the details.


My comment was to point out the fact that it's unlikely I'll wind up in a coffee shop in NYC anyway so I'm glad I don't have to worry about the issue of NYC coffee shops banning Kindles. It is absolutely on topic and I'm entitled to have an opinion about coffee and NYC.


----------



## mlewis78 (Apr 19, 2009)

I live in NYC and have not seen any of these bans on electronic devices in coffee shops.  In fact, they've encouraged their use by having free wi-fi.


----------



## mlewis78 (Apr 19, 2009)

history_lover said:


> My comment was to point out the fact that it's unlikely I'll wind up in a coffee shop in NYC anyway so I'm glad I don't have to worry about the issue of NYC coffee shops banning Kindles. It is absolutely on topic and I'm entitled to have an opinion about coffee and NYC.


You are entitled to your opinion, but your comment is not appreciated. I don't come onto the boards and make broad statements about other cities or regions. No one is going to try to get you to come to NYC or like it.


----------



## Fireheart223 (Oct 3, 2010)

scarlet said:


> when did my kindle become a word processor?


Yeah, for real... if you can sit at a cafe and read a book, why not be able to sit with a Kindle? These coffee shops are just going to lose business if they get that picky about what you can and can't have while sitting in their cafe.


----------



## history_lover (Aug 9, 2010)

mlewis78 said:


> You are entitled to your opinion, but your comment is not appreciated.


I think you're taking this a little too personally.



> I don't come onto the boards and make broad statements about other cities or regions.


It was in reference to the fact that I was grateful this issue wouldn't be effecting me. It was on topic - it's not like I just randomly go around slagging cities off.



> No one is going to try to get you to come to NYC or like it.


Didn't say anyone was.


----------



## mooshie78 (Jul 15, 2010)

Fireheart223 said:


> Yeah, for real... if you can sit at a cafe and read a book, why not be able to sit with a Kindle? These coffee shops are just going to lose business if they get that picky about what you can and can't have while sitting in their cafe.


Agreed on Kindles vs. Books. I don't see any difference in ambiance there. I can get the point with laptops etc. as it make the place not relaxing at all if it looks like a cubicle farm.

And as discussed earlier, if it's an issue with people camping and buying one drink and staying for hours--then books, laptops, kindles etc. are all the same. And in that case it's not an issue of needing to ban devices but to limit customers to staying for an hour at most during peak hours as you don't want people passing by when they see it's too busy.


----------



## Trophywife007 (Aug 31, 2009)

I was just down in Fullerton, CA... The Starbucks next to the CSU campus had work tables set up for laptops.  I guess electronic devices weren't viewed as nuisances there and the place was packed with students working and just chatting, too.  I've never seen a Starbucks that banned ereaders or computers.  They must know that's part of the draw.

BTW, I'm happy to buy coffee from someone who is inked and/or pierced as long as s/he has a decent attitude and knows how to make drinks well.



Edited to add "never" omitted accidentally.


----------



## telracs (Jul 12, 2009)

history_lover said:


> My comment was to point out the fact that it's unlikely I'll wind up in a coffee shop in NYC anyway so I'm glad I don't have to worry about the issue of NYC coffee shops banning Kindles. It is absolutely on topic and I'm entitled to have an opinion about coffee and NYC.


Perhaps you would have been better understood if you stated that you were never going to be in a coffee shop in NY. But stating that you "don't like coffee or NY" was a stating things a bit personally, and us NYers were entitled to take it that way. I don't like coffee either, but that doesn't mean I'm not going to not be in a coffee shop. Put yourself in our place before posting. Think how you'd feel if someone simply said, I don't like (insert either your hometown, the place where you live, or your favorite city, here) without thinking how it would make you feel.

And lastly, as I've said before, we can't tell tone in a written post. So if you meant it as a joke, maybe insert a smiley so we know that. We're not mind readers and as NYers, we tend to take things at face value.


----------



## splashes99 (Aug 11, 2010)

scarlet said:


> Perhaps you would have been better understood if you stated that you were never going to be in a coffee shop in NY. But stating that you "don't like coffee or NY" was a stating things a bit personally, and us NYers were entitled to take it that way. I don't like coffee either, but that doesn't mean I'm not going to not be in a coffee shop. Put yourself in our place before posting. Think how you'd feel if someone simply said, I don't like (insert either your hometown, the place where you live, or your favorite city, here) without thinking how it would make you feel.
> 
> And lastly, as I've said before, we can't tell tone in a written post. So if you meant it as a joke, maybe insert a smiley so we know that. We're not mind readers and as NYers, we tend to take things at face value.


I guess I'm not sure why it is such an affront for someone to say they don't like NYC. So what? It's her opinion. Everything someone says offends SOMEONE. That doesn't mean that people can't give their opinions. Some people don't like red hair, some don't like blond hair. Some like cats and not dogs, some dogs and not cats... I have cats and people all the time say "I hate cats!" - I just shrug and say "To each his own." What someone else doesn't like does not affect me.

Maybe a better response to history_lover's comment would have been "Great, then don't live there!"


----------



## patrickt (Aug 28, 2010)

It's the American way. If I want to sit with a cup of coffee all the way through you peak hours, who is the business to object? It's me. Don't you realize who I am? I'm special. 

There is a cafe I like and I'll sit there and read but when they start getting busy for lunch, I either leave or order lunch. Since it's my favorite cafe, I have no desire to help drive them out of business.


----------



## telracs (Jul 12, 2009)

splashes99 said:


> Maybe a better response to history_lover's comment would have been "Great, then don't live there!"


Then I would have simply been answering what I read as an impolite post with another impolite post. And that was not my intent. My intent was to ask people to think before they post one-line answers that may be misunderstood.

And that's my last comment on this portion of this thread, because I don't think we need to continue the hijack.


----------



## karichelle (Dec 28, 2010)

It seems silly to me to ban everything, when one could easily ban laptops and if you want to take care of word processing on the iPad, external keyboards, or something like that. (Because really, how much word processing would you really want to do on an iPad without an attached keyboard?) Or limit the Wifi access to 30 minutes unless you buy another coffee. I'm willing to bet this comes down to revenue more than anything.


----------



## auge_28 (Oct 3, 2010)

A business owner should be able to decide who he wants in his establishment.
The owner knows what he is doing and will make decision for his company depending on what kind of clientele he wants. Perhaps a coffee shop wants to cater to business people, students, mall shoppers . . . etc.
If he bans something that's his way of choosing his clients, I live in Seattle and we have two coffee stands on each corner a Starbucks and an indie shop. If one decides to not let me come in and read or type a letter on my laptop, I will walk down a block and take my business elsewhere . . . no harm no foul, he made the decision to not have me as a customer . . . no skin off my teeth.

I also understand that a restaurant or café makes their money by turning tables. And I would have no issue with a rule that states something like *1 drink = ½ hour * then please make the table available for someone else or get another cup, if I am there meeting a friend our 2 cups means we can visit an hour. 
In my area it seems most of the money earned are from folks walking up to the counter and taking their order in to-go cups anyway.

Anyway, that's my two cents.


----------



## evrose (Jan 7, 2011)

scarlet said:


> Then I would have simply been answering what I read as an impolite post with another impolite post. And that was not my intent. My intent was to ask people to think before they post one-line answers that may be misunderstood.
> 
> And that's my last comment on this portion of this thread, because I don't think we need to continue the hijack.


Now there's something you don't see everyday... a New Yorker worried about being impolite.

The irony almost caused me to choke on my bagel.


----------



## pidgeon92 (Oct 27, 2008)

I solve this problem by having my own espresso machine at home, where I can have my Kindle, my laptop, my dogs and everything else that offends everyone else out of their way.

My husband often worries that I am lonely at home, and that I should get out more. I am quite happy here. If I need to be social I can interact on the forum, and when someone says something that annoys me I go in my kitchen and have another cappuccino.


----------



## auge_28 (Oct 3, 2010)

scarlet said:


> Perhaps you would have been better understood if you stated that you were never going to be in a coffee shop in NY. But stating that you "don't like coffee or NY" was a stating things a bit personally, and us NYers were entitled to take it that way. I don't like coffee either, but that doesn't mean I'm not going to not be in a coffee shop. Put yourself in our place before posting. Think how you'd feel if someone simply said, I don't like (insert either your hometown, the place where you live, or your favorite city, here) without thinking how it would make you feel.
> 
> And lastly, as I've said before, we can't tell tone in a written post. So if you meant it as a joke, maybe insert a smiley so we know that. We're not mind readers and as NYers, we tend to take things at face value.


Nothing was said that broke the rules of the board.
He said he did not like coffee and he did not like New York.
Neither one of those is a personal affront to you or any individual or group (you cannot count a city as a group in this case).
What I find offensive are folks that take it upon themselves to go around being PC police. 
I have never been to NY but I have been to Hollywood, and I hated it, it's a nasty dirty place. I did not say anything about the people who live there just like the other poster said nothing about you folks that live in NY. 
Simmer down and don't get your tail feathers tangled up.



scarlet said:


> We're not mind readers and as NYers, we tend to take things at face value.


Right here you did the same thing you are mad about the other poster doing, lumping New Yorkers in a group.
Were you voted to speak for the members of your city?
All you have accomplished was to distract the thread.


----------



## AnnetteL (Jul 14, 2010)

Back to the original thread--

I get why they'd want to discourage people from camping out just for the free WiFi, but banning e-readers? That's like banning a calculator. Laptops make far more sense.


----------



## mooshie78 (Jul 15, 2010)

Again, I think banning any device is silly.  Just put a 30 minute per drink ordered limit as I'm sure the table turn over issue is the real reason, and not the ambiance.  I doubt many owners care about ambiance as long as the place is staying full and they're making money.


----------



## auge_28 (Oct 3, 2010)

AnnetteL said:


> Back to the original thread-


Yes, please . . . let's do that.



AnnetteL said:


> I get why they'd want to discourage people from camping out just for the free WiFi, but banning e-readers? That's like banning a calculator. Laptops make far more sense.


Somebody above said something that I think is valid.
It would be difficult to give employees the task of choosing what to allow and what to ban. If this happened then of Tuesday I can read my Kindle but on Thursday I may not be able to as this is a different shift.
I stick to my statement that an owner of a business should have the freedom to choose who and what he wants in his establishment. He is not discriminating (illegally) against gadgets.


----------



## splashes99 (Aug 11, 2010)

I think Starbucks used to have a 30 min time limit, but then got rid of it.  It is an interesting question of whether the issue is REALLY ambiance or table turn-over, since that changes things.  As has been said, if it's a problem of ambiance, then I suppose it makes sense.  If the real issue is turnover, then why single out just the electronic devices?


----------



## auge_28 (Oct 3, 2010)

splashes99 said:


> If the real issue is turnover, then why single out just the electronic devices?


Its easier than pointing at a fella and screaming "GET OUT ! ! !"


----------



## splashes99 (Aug 11, 2010)

auge_28 said:


> Its easier than pointing at a fella and screaming "GET OUT ! ! !"


lol, ok, fair point. I guess I meant, why not say that you can only sit there and enjoy the ambiance. Because, I can sit in a chair with a paper book for just as long as my Kindle. And since I'm a terrible knitter, were I to sit down with that, I would be there for even longer!


----------



## mooshie78 (Jul 15, 2010)

auge_28 said:


> Its easier than pointing at a fella and screaming "GET OUT ! ! !"


They could just put up signs that say the time limit during peak hours etc. Panera Bread does this by limiting wifi to 30 minutes during peak hours, after which time you get knocked off. And there's a message when you sign in saying you only have 30 minutes during peak hours.


----------



## auge_28 (Oct 3, 2010)

I wish I had the time to be effected by this issue.
I have two children one of which is a teenager and twin girls due in two months and a full time job that I commute about 3 hours a day to.

*Oh, what I wouldn't give for the leisure time to be told that I can't hang out with my book someplace.*

 -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -​


----------



## musclehead (Dec 29, 2010)

auge_28 said:


> I wish I had the time to be effected by this issue.
> I have two children one of which is a teenager and twin girls due in two months and a full time job that I commute about 3 hours a day to.
> 
> *Oh, what I wouldn't give for the leisure time to be told that I can't hang out with my book someplace.*
> ...


I agree, auge. I can't imagine the kind of leisure time that must be required to do something like that.


----------



## mooshie78 (Jul 15, 2010)

musclehead said:


> I agree, auge. I can't imagine the kind of leisure time that must be required to do something like that.


That's one of many reasons I decided not to have kids. Mainly that I just don't like them, but also that I'm busy with work and selfish and don't want to have to devote that kind of time to someone else when I don't have enough time to myself as is.

That said, I seldom go to a coffee shop to do any leisure reading. I'll go some times to do some work-related reading, or grade student papers/exams etc. to get away from the distraction of the internet etc. at home or in my office.


----------



## NapCat (retired) (Jan 17, 2011)

Goodness !!  What an interesting stop this was on my evening trip through the Kindle Boards !!

For the life of me I cannot understand objection to reading on a Kindle....no noise, does not use the vendors power, you are not using the WiFi when reading...and you are likely to buy coffee, pastry, etc.

Certainly not invasive to fellow patrons like cellphones.

*************

...and the sub-thread is very upsetting.  I hate arguing.

*************

Everyone, take your Kindle to the Park, sit under a tree and have a nice day !!


----------



## The Hooded Claw (Oct 12, 2009)

As a capitalist kinda guy, I support the right of business owners to set whatever rules their little hearts desire for their establishment.  Some of the rules are going to rub some people the wrong way, and it is certainly the right of us consumers to avoid going to businesses that set rules we don't like, and to patronize those with rules we approve of.

I loathe the smell of cigarette smoke, and don't care for the health effects of second-hand smoke, so even before "no smoking" laws in restaurants became ubiquitous, I never went more than once to a restaurant that didn't have a non-smoking section that was well-ventilated and out of draft range from the smoking section.

Having supported the right of businesses to do this, I do agree it is a silly rule, and I suspect the article may exaggerate how common it is.  Doesn't affect me in any case, as I don't care for coffee....While I was in the Army, I was legendary for not smoking, not liking coffee, and not liking beer!


----------



## racheldeet (Jan 21, 2010)

musclehead said:


> I agree, auge. I can't imagine the kind of leisure time that must be required to do something like that.


It's not always leisure time. IE: Students. Late hours, caffeine, wifi? Sign me up.


----------



## Indy (Jun 7, 2010)

So, if they... whoever they may be.... doesn't want people bringing wifi devices in and using them in their establishment, why don't they stop offering wifi?  Hello if you offer it then people are going to want to use it.

My local panera does have a few people with a large setup going on at some of the tables, but I have never been unable to find a seat.  There are a few coffee shops that seem to be places people flop in, and stay in, for hours at a time... again the proportion of people who have a whole office setup thing at their table is actually very small.  There are a few laptops, a few e-readers, a lot of books, some folks talking, etc.  It's a very relaxing atmosphere.  Isn't the whole idea of a coffeehouse that you relax a while, and read or talk or knit while having your coffee?


----------



## mooshie78 (Jul 15, 2010)

Indy said:


> It's a very relaxing atmosphere. Isn't the whole idea of a coffeehouse that you relax a while, and read or talk or knit while having your coffee?


Yes, but if the original article is to be believed, the concern is the ambiance for those things being ruined by people banging away on laptops, talking on cell phones etc. making the place busy and distracting and not amenable to reading, studying, quiet chats with a friend etc. Though again I don't see how e-readers fit into that.

Though to business owners I can't see how your (and mine as well) idea of a coffee shop if very amenable to maximizing profits. You can make a lot more money selling coffee to people who take it and go or drink it and leave in 20-30 minutes than people that buy one and stay for hours keeping the place full and causing people to not stop in because it looks to busy and noisy.

Honestly, from a profit standpoint one would probably be better off running a coffee stand/shop with no seating that was just for takeout as you could sell more coffee, have less utility bills, less area to clean, less employees needed etc.


----------



## Trophywife007 (Aug 31, 2009)

I think people shouting on their cell phones ruins the atmosphere quicker than anything.  Are laptops noisy?  Maybe they should only ban PCs.


----------



## Indy (Jun 7, 2010)

mooshie78 said:


> Yes, but if the original article is to be believed, the concern is the ambiance for those things being ruined by people banging away on laptops, talking on cell phones etc. making the place busy and distracting and not amenable to reading, studying, quiet chats with a friend etc. Though again I don't see how e-readers fit into that.
> 
> Though to business owners I can't see how your (and mine as well) idea of a coffee shop if very amenable to maximizing profits. You can make a lot more money selling coffee to people who take it and go or drink it and leave in 20-30 minutes than people that buy one and stay for hours keeping the place full and causing people to not stop in because it looks to busy and noisy.
> 
> Honestly, from a profit standpoint one would probably be better off running a coffee stand/shop with no seating that was just for takeout as you could sell more coffee, have less utility bills, less area to clean, less employees needed etc.


Hm. I guess I have seen ... not enough people "ruining" the atmosphere for it to look like a problem to me. Either that or I go when it's not that busy, which is always possible. My ideal coffee anyhow is at my house, or maybe my neighbor's house, we sit around and talk over the TV, it's nice. I also can not figure out why e-readers are something they don't want but books are.


----------



## auge_28 (Oct 3, 2010)

Trophywife007 said:


> I think people shouting on their cell phones ruins the atmosphere quicker than anything. Are laptops noisy? Maybe they should only ban PCs.


I think the problem is that they may not want their cozy little shop to look like a corporate office with people set up to spend half a day or longer . . . it may not even be about wifi usage.
Lots of folks are traditional, lots of folks don't like to see change, lots of folks think that the good-o'-days are better than today. I think that if it's their business they can think that all they want.


----------



## Elk (Oct 4, 2010)

Indy said:


> I also can not figure out why e-readers are something they don't want but books are.


Books have a different emotional resonance.


----------



## intinst (Dec 23, 2008)

Elk said:


> Books have a different emotional resonance.


Yeah, they are harder to read, at least to me.


----------



## dragonfly (Aug 25, 2009)

I suppose that what is allowed at an establishment is the choice of the owner of the establishment. I know that given the choice of establishments, I would always choose "Kindle Friendly"


----------



## janreber (Feb 16, 2011)

I'm confused - why do "cafe's" like Starbuck's even have wi-fi if they don't want people to use it?


----------



## mooshie78 (Jul 15, 2010)

Indy said:


> Hm. I guess I have seen ... not enough people "ruining" the atmosphere for it to look like a problem to me. Either that or I go when it's not that busy, which is always possible.


Yeah, time of day and location are key. I live in midtown in a major city, so all the coffee shops etc. are almost always packed as there are a ton of high rise condos and apartments around so the population density is very high. And it's worse in mid morning to early afternoon when people are taking coffee breaks, going for lunch break etc.



janreber said:


> I'm confused - why do "cafe's" like Starbuck's even have wi-fi if they don't want people to use it?


It's a catch 22. The wifi attracts customers. But they lose money if people come and buy one drink and sit and use the wifi for hours. But as I've said, banning things is silly. Just put a 30-60 minute limit on the wifi during peak hours and knock people off when the time is up like some Panera Bread's do.


----------



## Tris (Oct 30, 2008)

Has this come up again?  Didn't they already do a big thing on this a couple of years ago?  I remember a good 3-5 years ago, my local Starbucks tried to ban laptops.  People were angry, and boycotted (or something like it).  So Starbucks changed it to 30 minute limit...eased it a bit with their customers, but not a whole lot.  Then after 3 months, I heard that it completely disappeared and everyone acted like nothing ever happened.

But if they ban it...well, they can.  It sucks for a lot of people yes, but I'm sure people will adapt and find other places.  I'm sure where ever the people who have a major issue with this will be gladly accepted by those establishments that don't have similar policies.  I mean the ones closely around the Starbucks in my area was utterly thrilled and had special deals.  Actually, they always do when Starbucks closed for a day or night for training or what not.

It's not a big deal for me because I don't really hang-out at coffee shops/cafes reading, using my computer, or studying.  Mostly to socialize or pick up a treat for myself or for fellow coworkers/friends here and there.

Tris


----------



## Elk (Oct 4, 2010)

intinst said:


> Yeah, they are harder to read, at least to me.


While books may be harder for you personally to read, this is your individual issue.

It doesn't address in any fashion why a cafe owner would treat ebooks differently than physical books for his coffee shop.

Some find the presence of laptops disturbing. It is easy to understand that others may find the technologically based nature of ereaders just as off-putting.


----------



## mlewis78 (Apr 19, 2009)

I don't think that this article is about Starbucks.  It doesn't mention any specific cafe, so we would need more information.  I think they wrote the article to create a buzz.  The thread about this in MobileRead is huge.


----------



## Jodi O (Mar 3, 2010)

janreber said:


> I'm confused - why do "cafe's" like Starbuck's even have wi-fi if they don't want people to use it?


Um...yeah...that. Seems like an easy fix. No wifi.


----------



## mooshie78 (Jul 15, 2010)

mlewis78 said:


> I don't think that this article is about Starbucks.


Definitely not Starbuck as it starts with "Many *indie *New York City cafes ..."


----------



## AELee (Feb 17, 2011)

I don't really see the difference between someone bringing a Kindle in to read or someone who brings the entire Washington Post or NY Times to read. Believe me, reading the entire NY Times can take quite a bit of time.

Am I wrong to believe that the whole point of putting chairs in a cafe was for people to stay a while? Seems to me it's not the computers or e-readers, it's the amount of money not being spent. These owners need to suck-up and require minimum amount that has to be spent or cut off the wi-fi.


----------



## mooshie78 (Jul 15, 2010)

AELee said:


> Am I wrong to believe that the whole point of putting chairs in a cafe was for people to stay a while? Seems to me it's not the computers or e-readers, it's the amount of money not being spent. These owners need to suck-up and require minimum amount that has to be spent or cut off the wi-fi.


Agreed. The issue is the chairs are there for people to sit while drinking their coffee(s). The problem is people who buy one drink and stay for ages, and as I've said many times the simple solution is to drop wifi after 30-60 minutes, and put up signs that tables are limited to 1 hour during peak times etc. Not to ban gadgets.

That said, I get the ambiance concerns. I'm going to pass by a coffee shop that's full of people working on laptops and yammering on cell phones as that's not a relaxing atmosphere. But that doesn't apply to e-readers, paper books, magazines, students studying etc.


----------



## ShawnT (Jan 1, 2011)

Elk said:


> It is easy to understand that others may find the technologically based nature of ereaders just as off-putting.


Then wouldn't that just be those other peoples individual issues as well?


----------



## originalgrissel (Mar 5, 2010)

What is stupid about the entire "banning electronic devices" issue itself is that these places used the "free wi-fi" come on to lure customers in, basically saying, eat here, buy your coffee here & we'll give you this awesome perk for FREE! So, customers fell for it, came in in droves & then they did what the companies weren't counting on, they stuck around for hours and din't spend as much money as the company thought they would. So, now they want to penalize customers for coming into the place to use what the company had initially dangled before them as a perk. If the company didn't want to have to deal with people using their wi-fi for hours they should not have offered it for free or they should have set up guidlines of use from the get-go. 

Yes, businesses can make any rules they want, & I am all for them doing that, but they are now in this position because of their own stupidity & lack of foresight and good customers, that don't abuse the wi-fi  are the ones getting the shaft. As for banning e-readers, specifically Kindles, I'm not sure I get the logic. If it's an issue of atmosphere, there is really no difference between someone reading a DTB & using a dedicated e-reader, and if it's actually a case of too many people using the companies wi-fi, I still don't see the problem, as generally, most people who use a Kindle won't have their wireless enabled unless they are buying a book, searching for a new book to read or downloading a new issue of a newspaper or magazine, which isn't going to take an hour. 

I think these companies are going to find a lot of their good customers heading out the door right behind the bad ones if they keep this up. What would be better is for companies like Starbucks & other high end coffee shops to start offering access to their wi-fi at a small fee, having a minimum order to access the wi-fi as someone else suggested or making the wi-fi accessible from only one section in the cafe if they're worried about the entire place looking like a sea of laptops.


----------



## mooshie78 (Jul 15, 2010)

originalgrissel said:


> ..and if it's actually a case of too many people using the companies wi-fi, I still don't see the problem, as generally, most people who use a Kindle won't have their wireless enabled unless they are buying a book, searching for a new book to read or downloading a new issue of a newspaper or magazine, which isn't going to take an hour.


Well I don't think it's an issue of using wifi, its an issue of people staying for hours reading etc. when they only buy one drink.

But again, you don't solve that by banning anything, you solve it by putting time limit on occupying seating after finishing your beverage. No reason to be there for more than a hour max if the place is busy and you're only buying one drink. Put up such signage telling people to please not linger in seats for more than an hour if the cafe is busy etc.


----------



## auge_28 (Oct 3, 2010)

originalgrissel said:


> What is stupid about the entire "banning electronic devices" issue itself is that these places used the "free wi-fi" come on to lure customers in, basically saying, eat here, buy your coffee here & we'll give you this awesome perk for FREE!


I cannot find a single reference to Wi-Fi in the article. I think somehow we latched onto this Wi-Fi- thing and stuck with it. Perhaps the article is speaking of Luddite type places were no gadgets are welcome. If Wi-Fi was never on offer then the argument fails . . . I think that even if it was on offer at one point they are still within their rights to change policy.



originalgrissel said:


> What would be better is for companies like Starbucks & other high end coffee shops to start offering access to their wi-fi at a small fee, having a minimum order to access the wi-fi as someone else suggested . . .


Starbucks was doing this until recently, and then decided just to offer it for free. You had to put $5 on a gift card and use it to order a drink or something . . . use the number on the card to log-in.

I think it should be mentioned again that the article states independent shops, not the major chains.

This may be a method to distinguish independents from the big fellas, "_you can go to Starbucks and surf the net or you can come here and enjoy coffee in silence and tranquility"._


----------



## sparklemotion (Jan 13, 2011)

Zero said:


> I like the 30 minute limit idea...but I would certainly NOT go to a place where my laptop/kindle/gadgets are banned.


Agree!


----------



## buffaloquinn (Feb 17, 2011)

I've been on both sides of this issue being a restaurant owner and WiFi surfer (and now Kindle owner). I agree that reading a Kindle (or other eBook) should not be viewed any differently than a hardcover or paperback. The question is really never about what you are doing in the coffee shop (or restaurant) but rather how long you are there. If there be tables a plenty, most owners will have no issue with you leisurely taking up space, in fact they probably encourage it because nothing is worse for business than an empty room. The problem is most people don't know when it is time to move on. Time limits are the best way but most managers don't have the guts to ask someone to move along if there are people waiting, and far too few patrons recognize that their lingering when customers are waiting can cost the cafe a lot of lost revenue.


----------



## Elk (Oct 4, 2010)

ShawnT said:


> Then wouldn't that just be those other peoples individual issues as well?


Do you truly not understand the distinction between your individual enjoyment of a Kindle and a business owner's conclusion that his cafe would possess a different ambiance - a different emotional resonance - without electronic devices?

You may similarly prefer bright florescent light, but you must certainly understand the appeal of candlelight, yes?


----------



## mooshie78 (Jul 15, 2010)

auge_28 said:


> This may be a method to distinguish independents from the big fellas, "_you can go to Starbucks and surf the net or you can come here and enjoy coffee in silence and tranquility"._


Though again that makes sense for laptops, cell phones etc., but not e-readers which don't lessen silence or tranquility anymore than a paperbook.


----------



## originalgrissel (Mar 5, 2010)

auge_28 said:


> I cannot find a single reference to Wi-Fi in the article. I think somehow we latched onto this Wi-Fi- thing and stuck with it. Perhaps the article is speaking of Luddite type places were no gadgets are welcome. If Wi-Fi was never on offer then the argument fails . . . I think that even if it was on offer at one point they are still within their rights to change policy.
> 
> Starbucks was doing this until recently, and then decided just to offer it for free. You had to put $5 on a gift card and use it to order a drink or something . . . use the number on the card to log-in.
> 
> ...


You make a great point about the wi-fi not being specifically mentioned in the article, and if the cafe's that are banning don't offer that perk, it's not an issue, and I can see places wanting quiet, low-key atmosphere and deciding that noisy things like cell phones & laptops that can be used for music/video/calling kind of disturb that atmosphere. I just don't get why they want to lump e-readers in with things like cellphones & laptops unless it's just ignorance of how e-readers actually work & what they are capable of doing. Because unless they are banning books as well, I don't see how it makes any real sense.


----------



## musclehead (Dec 29, 2010)

originalgrissel said:


> You make a great point about the wi-fi not being specifically mentioned in the article, and if the cafe's that are banning don't offer that perk, it's not an issue, and I can see places wanting quiet, low-key atmosphere and deciding that noisy things like cell phones & laptops that can be used for music/video/calling kind of disturb that atmosphere. I just don't get why they want to lump e-readers in with things like cellphones & laptops unless it's just ignorance of how e-readers actually work & what they are capable of doing. Because unless they are banning books as well, I don't see how it makes any real sense.


From a practical standpoint, however, there's no way for the owner to ban iPads and not Kindles. An employee would have to look closely to see if the customer was breaking a rule. The store doesn't want to police its customers. But it's easy to draw a line between books and electronic devices. "If it has a power switch, it's not welcome here."


----------



## Susan in VA (Apr 3, 2009)

musclehead said:


> From a practical standpoint, however, there's no way for the owner to ban iPads and not Kindles. An employee would have to look closely to see if the customer was breaking a rule. The store doesn't want to police its customers. But it's easy to draw a line between books and electronic devices. "If it has a power switch, it's not welcome here."


That rule would crumble the first time someone challenged it who could _only_ read on an electronic device due to a particular physical limitation -- eyesight, weight of book, whatever -- can you just imagine the bad press that would result?


----------



## JD Rhoades (Feb 18, 2011)

mooshie78 said:


> Well I don't think it's an issue of using wifi, its an issue of people staying for hours reading etc. when they only buy one drink.
> 
> But again, you don't solve that by banning anything, you solve it by putting time limit on occupying seating after finishing your beverage. No reason to be there for more than a hour max if the place is busy and you're only buying one drink. Put up such signage telling people to please not linger in seats for more than an hour if the cafe is busy etc.


A skilled wait/bar staff can do wonders for moving the "parkers" out. When I was a waiter, I could move a pokey guest out the door with exquisite politeness.


----------



## musclehead (Dec 29, 2010)

JD Rhoades said:


> A skilled wait/bar staff can do wonders for moving the "parkers" out. When I was a waiter, I could move a pokey guest out the door with exquisite politeness.


Please tell all! I always like hearing "behind the scenes" type stuff.


----------



## mooshie78 (Jul 15, 2010)

Susan in VA said:


> That rule would crumble the first time someone challenged it who could _only_ read on an electronic device due to a particular physical limitation  -- eyesight, weight of book, whatever -- can you just imagine the bad press that would result?


Yep, just lots of reasons not to ban specific devices. Just enforce a time limit, train staff (as the above suggested) to politely move people along etc. so you don't have campers taking up tables for hours and buying one drink.

That won't get bad PR as no one has a right to sit around in a restaurant or coffee shop when they're not longer spending money or consuming what they bought. It's up to the owners if they want their shop to be a hang out joint, or just a place for people to grab a drink and/or snack, enjoy it and move on.


----------



## mlewis78 (Apr 19, 2009)

Just looked at the article again.  It's very misleading.  They mention the ambience issue, yet they don't know that this is the reason for the ban.  I think it's just that they want a faster turnover for economic reasons.  The writer doesn't mention this.

I've yet to see one of these places that ban kindles but realize that I'm in one small part of a very large city.  

Let us know if you hear of a specific cafe that bans kindles and ipads.


----------



## JD Rhoades (Feb 18, 2011)

musclehead said:


> Please tell all! I always like hearing "behind the scenes" type stuff.


Oh, just kill them with kindness. "You need anything else? Want me to refill that? Let me get this stuff out of your way then. Sure I can't get you anything else? Want a danish? How about some of our crumb cake?" All in as chirpy a voice as you can manage. Basically become so obtrusively helpful that it gets annoying.

Obviously, you only want to use this on someone who's clearly outstayed the normal bounds. If someone needs to be aggressively moved out ("Look buddy you don't have to go home, but you can't stay here") that's the manager's job.


----------



## Elk (Oct 4, 2010)

mooshie78 said:


> Though again that makes sense for laptops, cell phones etc., but not e-readers which don't lessen silence or tranquility anymore than a paperbook.


I agree with you, but I recognize that a cozy or elegant place without electronic devices possesses an entirely different vibe.

Wood fireplace v. gas "fireplace." Live musician v. recorded. Ducati v. Japanese sportbike. Etc.

I spent many happy hours reading newspapers and discussing events/music/philosophy in Salzburg's and Vienna's cafes. I understand the desire to create a similar atmosphere.


----------



## auge_28 (Oct 3, 2010)

mooshie78 said:


> Though again that makes sense for laptops, cell phones etc., but not e-readers which don't lessen silence or tranquility anymore than a paperbook.


Oh, I agree with you . . . a book is a book.
But neither one of us is the shop owner.


----------



## auge_28 (Oct 3, 2010)

originalgrissel said:


> You make a great point about the wi-fi not being specifically mentioned in the article, and if the cafe's that are banning don't offer that perk, it's not an issue, and I can see places wanting quiet, low-key atmosphere and deciding that noisy things like cell phones & laptops that can be used for music/video/calling kind of disturb that atmosphere. I just don't get why they want to lump e-readers in with things like cellphones & laptops unless it's just ignorance of how e-readers actually work & what they are capable of doing. Because unless they are banning books as well, I don't see how it makes any real sense.


I mean this with respect . . . 
You are measuring other people by your yardstick and this is a silly yet common thing to do. You seem to expect other people to instinctively understand and agree with your opinion without regard to their own preferences. 
Some people are so enamored with tradition and the romance of earlier times that they shun whatever they think may disturb it. This is neither right nor wrong, but as shop owners they should have the right to cater to likeminded people.


----------



## Elk (Oct 4, 2010)

auge_28 said:


> Some people are so enamored with tradition and the romance of earlier times that they shun whatever they think may disturb it.


I think you are right and this can be part of it.

I believe there is an additional aspect however that doesn't require "shunning;" simply that there is a place and time for other experiences.

Enjoying a horseback ride or hiking a trail or paddling a kayak isn't shunning modern transportation. Instead, it is an active embracing of a quieter, slower experience.

I would adore a local elegant cafe with no electronics.


----------



## mooshie78 (Jul 15, 2010)

auge_28 said:


> Oh, I agree with you . . . a book is a book.
> But neither one of us is the shop owner.


Oh, I agree with you that a shop owner should be able to do whatever they like. There are no shortages of coffee shops in big cities. If a few don't want to allow e-readers or sitting and reading at all, no skin off my nose. Moot for me as I don't hang out in coffee shops or restaurants anyway unless I'm meeting friends to chat.

I've never gotten the point of going out to read. I go out and wander around the city to do things I can't do at home!


----------



## auge_28 (Oct 3, 2010)

Elk said:


> I think you are right and this can be part of it.
> 
> I believe there is an additional aspect however that doesn't require "shunning;" simply that there is a place and time for other experiences.
> 
> ...


I think this is what I meant... not that they NEVER want it . . . they may want a break from this stuff and want to extend it to there kindred.


----------



## auge_28 (Oct 3, 2010)

mooshie78 said:


> I've never gotten the point of going out to read. I go out and wander around the city to do things I can't do at home!


I do all my reading at home, work or on the bus between these two places.
However, my twins will be born in about 8 weeks . . . that will put four children, one wife, two dogs, one bunny, and more than one stereo and television in my home. I share a room with my wife (of course) and do not have a room to myself (den or office) . . . so maybe a few hours a week in a coffee shop to do some reading just might be the ticket.

I am looking into buying a nice outdoor shed to put a laptop, lamp, space heater and a comfortable reading chair . . . ahhhh, sounds like a little slice of heaven.


----------



## mooshie78 (Jul 15, 2010)

Solid reason there.  I'm always either living alone or with a girlfriend, so minimal distractions at home.  And it will stay that way as I have no interest in having kids.


----------



## Elk (Oct 4, 2010)

auge_28 said:


> . . . so maybe a few hours a week in a coffee shop to do some reading just might be the ticket.


A bit of down time to recharge one's batteries is always good.

And very smart.

Congrat's on the little ones!


----------



## JD Rhoades (Feb 18, 2011)

mooshie78 said:


> I've never gotten the point of going out to read. I go out and wander around the city to do things I can't do at home!


I don't often go out especially "to read", but I fairly often read at lunch if I'm eating alone.

EDIT: Actually, now that I think about it, if I'm eating alone, I pretty much always bring something to read.


----------



## mooshie78 (Jul 15, 2010)

Another good use.  I seldom go out to eat by myself though.  I'll get carry out if I don't have someone to eat with, though I usually just cook for myself and bring lunch and eat at my desk on weekdays.


----------

