SciFi and Fantasy Book Club discussion
Members' Chat
>
Book formats - paper, ebook, audio?
date
newest »
newest »
Penny, I wouldn't disagree that the content has value. I love reading above just about all things.What I'm saying is rather this:
ebook: content
book: content + object
The object value (and the advantages that come with it) justifies a higher price, while the content value (if indeed they can be sold for as little as a token fee) is evidence that supports the position that the infinitely-copyable has no intrinsic value of its own.
To risk yet another analogy, diamonds would be worthless if you could infinitely reproduce genuine copies with relatively little expense. It is their rarity coupled with demand that gives them high value. In other words, precisely because they are a finite physical commodity.
In the centuries since the invention of movable type, the printed book has not changed very much. Even before, the primary difference in manufacture was in the work required to hand-copy and bind the content. In that era, with reproduction difficult and specialized, books had very high relative value. I don't believe that ebooks will supplant the physical book nor do I feel they warrant the value assigned to physical books. Instead, I feel that ebooks are like that digital movie download option - something essentially free that should come with the purchase of a physical book for the value of its convenience - and Amazon has just realized this and enacted a new program to pursue it.
Don't get me started on diamonds :PSo does that mean that a paper book that had only a thousand copies printed has more value than one that had millions? Your rarity argument would say so, but readership would suggest otherwise.
The printed physical copy yes.When I say value in this sense I am talking about money invested, whether intending to ever sell or not. (I never ever do, but I like to know that I'm making a smart purchase and not getting had - getting my money's worth instead).
The value of the content itself would probably (but not necessarily) be higher in the book that has millions of copies. You could infer that it is either a terrible mass market paperback devoid of purpose or a classic universally acclaimed by millions. Importance of a text can't really be determined by number of copies sold or the value of the physical copy. That's another discussion entirely.
I'm arguing here about any given book, given the choice between an ebook and a physical book.
I'm not sure if it was because of the publishers, the type of books I read, or what, but the last ten years, before I switched to mostly virtual books, the quality of the 'object' declined. I had brand new paperbacks whose covers just popped off, or just semi detach. Other paperbacks, and hardbacks, whose spines broke way too easily. Pages detaching themselves, etc. I had books falling apart just trying to read them once, much less from being read multiple times (which I rarely do). I've had library books with missing pages in the middle. And one alarming time I had a new book stop in the middle and then begin again upside down and backwards.I have a couple high quality books, in terms of packaging, but that is mostly rare. Like my leather bound couple of the Hitchhiker series.
For the sake of my own sanity, for others, and for myself, I find much more value in not having me be tense and worried of destruction of my precious books by having them be protected by being in digital form.
I admit that there have been a few issues with ebooks. Mostly free ones. Actually, I only recall one incident. A book from the Guttenberg Project that just froze at page 100. I was able to get around it by skipping ahead to next chapter, but that did mean that there were pages I couldn't read. Was as if it had those pages cut out.
All of this, the shody packaging, plus the used book market, at least when I looked at it last, seemingly filled with sellers wanting to sell their books for a penny ($0.01), leads me to, probably, under value any extra monetary value a physical book might have.
Oh right, so we're talking about two things then.I was simply trying to make the point that I strongly disagree that ebooks have no intrinsic value. If we're talking resale value, then I can agree that paper books have more than ebooks. If we're talking market value, then I think content is most important.
Personally I might even consider paying more for the convenience of ebooks. The pros in terms of my reading experience outweigh the cons of not having a physical book to hold at the end. I'm not sure what kind of value to call that, but I think it counts for the most.
Kenneth wrote: "The object value (and the advantages that come with it) justifies a higher price, while the content value (if indeed they can be sold for as little as a token fee) is evidence that supports the position that the infinitely-copyable has no intrinsic value of its own. "No, that means it costs less to produce, it has nothing to do with value. (If cost = value to you, the marketing people have you by the hair.) With an ebook the costs of paper, ink, printing presses, storage at various points of production, shipping, and the buy back program have been eliminated. That's why there is a price difference (which most of the time is only a few dollars).
It is not "free" and never should be since there are still costs related to the actual writing, editing, formatting for medium, marketing, etc. Just because something is digital doesn't make it worthless. It's that kind of thinking that leads to digital piracy.
The cost of many things have dropped over time (shoes, clothing, electronics have all dropped dramatically since the 1970s) not because of a decrease in value but increases in efficiency.
Seeing books as an investment is a poor idea. Almost all used books drop in value, so you lose money. Only a few increase in value and you better have first editions, not reprints. Unless you are wrapping your books in mylar dustjacket protectors and keeping them in a temperature controlled room, your chances of actually getting best value for them are pretty low. In fact the most likely course for you to ever see your "investment" back is if you have a rider on your house and it burns down.
I like the fact that, with an ebook, I can have many books being 'currently read'. I was never much of a multi book at a time reader, but I've come to realize that this was mainly due to being unable to carry everywhere more than one or two books at a time. At least until ebooks. I now find myself keeping 4 or 5 books going. Flipping from one to another as I desire at that exact moment. In the past I would have to decide which physical book to take with me in the morning. Then that day be stuck with reading only it. Even if, while standing on the train, I suddenly desire to read one of my other ongoing books. I was stuck. And the book I was 'forced' to read (or stare vacantly into space, which was sometimes my chosen option) suffered. Now I just virtually insert a bookmark and flip to one of my other books.
(Also, and I feel I should whisper this, but I am glad my hands are no looking smeared with faint hints of black text. Yes, is better I on ebooks now. I was, it appears, very rough, and or, always was reading books desolving in my hands)
I LOVE the fact that I can pump the font. I can no longer read 10 or 12 point type. I can even do this with comic books!
Lexxi: That is strange. I've had a few issues with print books, but maybe 1 in 300? I tend to never buy mass-market paperbacks so maybe that contributes to my lack of issues. Or maybe it's by publisher. Who can say without more research.Penny: Yes, two different things. I used the word intrinsic because I was talking about universal value of the object itself as a finite, limited publication. Subjective value (as I see it) would consist of the popularity or quality of the story within, convenience, sentimentality, etc. That can't be argued for or against because for everyone it is different. And since that primarily depends on the text itself, I think it's a separate topic. Convenience would be the one that crosses boundaries.
Lara: Costing less to produce means that the asking price should be lower as a result. Considering that production of a digital copy consists of essentially copy+paste, or no cost at all after the book is edited and marketed, the cost of making one copy vs the cost of making 10,000 copies is negligible. This should be reflected in the price the consumer pays. I'd be interested to see your information on cost breakdown for ebook publishing that supports your position. You yourself acknowledge the production of other items like shoes and clothes has resulted in lower costs as a result of the ability to produce cheaply. While you can justify $.99 for an ebook, you will have a hard time justifying $7.99 for an ebook. Thanks for investment advice, but like I said previously, I've seen that my choices gain value over time. I'm not buying mass-market paperbacks, as I wrote before. I'm buying the best editions I can get of my favorite stories, to have on my shelves for my family and friends in years to come. They are well protected.
Lexxi: I would consider that a convenience advantage. I tend to read one book at a time, so it doesn't benefit me but it would benefit others with your preferred way of reading.
I don't have a strong preference for any particular format. However, I do enjoy the feel of a good, old-fashioned book. However for reasons of cost and convenience (you can't carry a hundred normal books in your backpack, but you can put a hundred eBooks on a reader that fits in your backpack), I've become a bigger and bigger fan of eBooks.The lower costs associated with e-publishing have also made it easier for me to find books for niche genres or ideas (e.g., an eBook can sell 1000 copies and be profitable, the same is pretty much impossible for a normal book). I may also have a vested interest since I've recently started self-publishing.
But yeah, I'm happy to see a diversity of formats. As it stands, people who want regular books can get them, and people who want eBooks can get them. Everybody wins.
No harm intended, only curiosity: Why would you want a hundred books on you at one time?
I also like the idea of having lots of books on me at once. My reasoning is that once I finish a book, then I have a large selection of books to choose from for my next book.There also the fact that there's a comfort/security thing attached to it in my case. I always feel safe in libraries and book stores when I'm surrounded by books, so it just makes me feel good to know that I have dozens or even hundreds of books with me.
I think "a hundred" was perhaps used to make the point which holds for any number larger than one. Ereaders are small and light and carry multiple books. I gather you don't like them, but most people agree that this is a plus.
I have traveled overseas with a suitcase full of books. It is not fun. Clearly an Ipad library is better.
Kenneth wrote:Costing less to produce means that the asking price should be lower as a result. Considering that production of a digital copy consists of essentially copy+paste, or no cost at all after the book is edited and marketed, the cost of making one copy vs the cost of making 10,000 copies is negligible. This should be reflected in the price the consumer pays. I'd be interested to see your information on cost breakdown for ebook publishing that supports your position. You yourself acknowledge the production of other items like shoes and clothes has resulted in lower costs as a result of the ability to produce cheaply. While you can justify $.99 for an ebook, you will have a hard time justifying $7.99 for an ebook. You seem to be firmly entrenched in the idea that digital file = worthless. The cost of making copies may be negligible (after the initial work of editing, marketing, etc) but you still need to get back the investment of that time/money (plus pay the author) so your options are 1) put all that cost on the first copy you sell and then only charge the author's cut and profit or 2) figure out your reasonable amount of expected ebook sales and distribute those fixed costs across the copies (plus author cut plus profit so you can invest in future authors). Publishing houses do the second option since no one wants a comma in the price of an e-book. If a book takes off and you grossly outsell your expectations you can pocket the extra or lower the price. If the book under-performs, you're in the red. Just like in regular book publishing, except now you don't have a buy back program. What does help is since the digital world is more flexible, it's easy to do things like offer book 1 in a series for free two weeks before book 6 becomes available to draw in new readers. Or a sale on the author's birthday, that sort of thing.
The asking price for e-books typically is lower. If the paperback is $7.99 the ebook copy is frequently $4.99 or $5.99. No matter what medium a book is published in, there are still the costs of running a publishing house (lawyers, editors, HR, accounting, marketing, the rent & utilities) even if 10 years from now a publishing house is 100% digital.
If you think the work consist of "copy paste" you don't understand what goes into creating ebook editions and making sure they look okay on a device regardless of device type and font size selected.
Kenneth I have some of this information from my dad, who is a published author, some from a friend who has her Masters in Library Sciences and is a librarian, and some from the articles and blogs on the web who have researched the various aspects of this topic and published findings on the web. The details on "how much savings" varies (of course the biggest savings appear when print sales drop to the point where publishing houses can sell excess presses and warehouses). If you look you will find that there is a lot of interested parties discussing what is fair, what is unfair (price fixing), where the benefit for reduced costs should go (should the author's cut go up, should prices go down, should the publishing house and its shareholders have it). It's been a topic of blogs, journals, conferences, etc. for publishing houses, investors, librarians, bookstore owners, and authors/agents.
Kenneth, I can think of a reason to have hundreds of books on you at once. My friend did two years in Africa with the Peace Corps. If she had a Kindle she could have loaded it up with tons of books and all she would need is a charger (solar, windup) and she would be set even if she didn't have a cellular signal for new downloads. In fact Kindles (and similar devices) are very exciting for 3rd world rural schools and the like because the largest hold back in getting books to rural libraries and schools is the cost of shipping. There are charities specifically for getting new and used e-readers into these communities.
Wow a long one! First paragraph: Yes, of course. It's good for the publisher and others involved in the process. But I maintain that the end result, that the buyer gets, is primarily a price paid on those recoup costs and not on the value of the item received. Therefore, as I've been saying, the item itself has little to no value. It's infinitely reproducible so each copy is next to worthless. The user pays for the publication cost, not the materials.
I don't do e-publishing so you're right, I'm not familiar with the optimization process. I can understand the challenges of getting it to appear right on different devices. This again is publication cost and not material cost, which is what I was arguing. Also, after the work's done, the finished product is indeed copy + paste. Don't have to worry about paper, bindings, or inventory costs. And the user receives a digital file, instead of a physical object.
Got any links for those blogs and journals? I am interested in the present (and future) of print publishing.
That's a fine point for carrying a library in a digital device. A much more reasonable argument too than what I usually hear, which is something like "I like to have a hundred books on me." But in the 1st world, that's hardly necessary.
In the end, I think that the digital format is an advantage of convenience but that it never will or should replace physical books.
I'm also one who finds more value in physical books, but it's not about price at all.Though I do feel that eBooks should cost much less than what publishers market them at, in the end the price of a book is kind of like any painful experience: forgotten as soon as the pinch is over. After the actual purchase I'm no longer conscious of what I paid.
Obviously the value of a book's contents is the same whether it's physical or electronic. So the real difference between the formats is an experiential thing. And that's where physical books win out for me.
Think about it, the experience of reading a physical book involves sight, sound (flip, flip), touch, smell...it's a fully immersive experiential thing. In order to read it, you must, repeat MUST interact with it on a physical level.
With an eReader, you're not interacting with the book, but with the eReader. It's visual, and it has a touch element, but those elements are essentially the same for every book. They feel like windows looking into a book rather than feeling like an actual book. They seem to remove one from the book, isolate you from the thing by way of their virtuality. Much like a computer game does not feel like being in a real environment no matter how good the graphics.
Not so with a physical book, which will always have a unique weight, a unique thickness. The visual element is not just the words on the page, but the texture of the page, the ink's thickness, the size of the book, the cover that's always a wrist-turn away, the different appearance when seen at various angles, the 3D visual feedback of the pages turning and your bookmark marching through its thickness.
We're tactile, sense-oriented beings. Physical books deliver on that level, even when their weight and/or size is uncomfortable, they are providing more sensual feedback.
I find this enriches the reading experience. It naturally leads me to a connectedness with a book that I don't get by just reading a screen. When I think of Lord of the Rings, I remember that book, as in a particular printing of it, rather than just a book, as in the story, characters and setting.
YMMV, but that's why I prefer physical books.
Perhaps I'm not savvy with the lingo but what does YMMV stand for?I'd agree with Micah but I also like to have the audiobook IF... its a big IF, the narrator does a good job. It's very interesting to read 'Game of Thrones', listen to Roy Dotrice read the books, & then watch the series on HBO, its 3 different performances of the same concept. Jake Gylnnhaal also did a good job narrating 'The Great Gatsby' but that type of book u can't listen to only, the physical print is also needed for complete capturing of the story. Jared Diamonds 'Guns, Germs, & Steel' is fun to listen to but only because I've already looked up certain words or concepts when I 1st read the copy my sister bought me.
Also, my commute can be long & I'm doing remodeling of our house, I'm living in a basement with wife & 3 kids (in-laws :/), REALLY hard to read anything handheld.
YMMV = Your Mileage May VaryDon't get me wrong, there are definitely advantages to eBooks and audiobooks, and sometimes I think they make a huge amount of sense.
Audiobooks when done well are fantastic. It's like listening to old time radio plays. I've often thought about producing some myself, but coming from a musical production background, I understand what a huge undertaking that is if you're going to do it the way I'd like.
Lara Amber wrote: " Kenneth wrote:Costing less to produce means that the asking price should be lower as a result. Considering that production of a digital copy consists of essentially copy+paste, or no cost at all a..."You raise some very interesting points. I think eBooks highlight some of the major asymmetries between the traditional publishing houses and self-publishers.
For a self-publisher, even a relatively small amount of sales can be considered a success. Consider the case of someone who works on their novel in their spare time and gets a little bit of help putting it together from various internet resources. This is not an uncommon scenario (indeed there are forums dedicated to helping people put together eBooks). For someone like this a few hundred sales would constitute a great success. They have taken a story that might never have seen the light of day from a traditional publishing house and managed to make some money off something they love doing.
Now consider the point of view of the traditional publisher. A few hundred sales is never going to be enough to justify the costs that they must sink into a book (whether published on paper or as an eBook). A few hundred sales would constitute a failure since they do not make their money back (let alone turn a profit).
This asymmetry should be considered with several caveats. Firstly, the level of editing and proof reading in the eBook put together by the publishing house will almost certainly be superior to that put together by the self-publisher. But this doesn't necessarily doom the self-publisher. First of all, the self-publisher could hire an editor (and there are some competitive rates going around). And second, a great majority of readers will not be overly upset about grammar and punctuation once it exceeds a certain standard (e.g., few readers are going to obsess over the arguments for and against the Oxford comma or whether or not it is better to use two separate sentences or join them with a semicolon). Obviously, readers will complain (and rightly so) if a self-published book cannot meet certain minimum standards, but few readers will get upset if perfection is not achieved.
Self-publishers also have the ability to put out certain kinds of stories that few traditional publishers would touch. It is not uncommon for self-publishers to publish short stories and sell them for $0.99. These stories typically range from anywhere between 8000-30,000 words. Self-publishers can afford to do this because any profit they receive is better than nothing (many will turn to friends and family for help proofing and putting together covers and the like, or they will do it themselves). In contrast, a traditional publisher has a much larger overhead, which makes publishing stories of this length for this price impractical.
If it seems like I am being overly critical of traditional publishing, that isn't my intention. Rather, I would like to highlight some of the differences. As a self-published author, I admit that I have a vested interest in this matter. At the same time, however, I've seen this same kind of phenomenon occur in other industries. Self-publishing and e-publishing represent disruptive attacks on the publishing industry, and how traditional publishers respond in the next few years is critical to their survival.
Amazon itself can be considered as having launched a disruptive attack on tradition book retailers. The results of that attack are, I think, very clear.
If I come off as a bit fanatical, my apologies. I'm a bit of an economics and business buff.
Micah, totally agree with your points about books being a tactile experience. It is an experiential thing and so subjective, that is why I used the price argument to attempt a more objective analysis. I love the feel of books, the smell of books - eReaders can't provide that. They certainly are windows looking into books instead of the books themselves.L., I would only take contest in the concept that traditional publishing is risking survival. They're not going away. If anything, it is the eReader format that has to prove it can compete with longevity against the traditional format. To risk yet another analogy-example, mp3 players were once the new thing threatening to defeat CD sales. Currently they've seen a sharp decline along with the CD players they aimed to replace, but the traditional format - LPs - have seen a resurgence as well as using one's smartphone as a player. This is just to say that it's probably too soon to say there's any danger to traditional publishing from digital, at least in the current format offered.
Anyone know the sales breakdown internationally or domestically of eBook sales vs book sales?
I usually have an audiobook going while I also am reading either an ebook or a paperback. If I am driving or exercising, I am listening to a book. Paperbacks I buy for one reason: to read. When I am done, I take them down to a used bookstore and trade in. I only have a small collection I actually keep, would rather put them back in the stream of commerce.
When I turned fifty I looked at the great collection of paperbacks and hard covers I had collected since high school. I had a library with floor to ceiling book-shelves filled to over-flowing. In my storage room I had over 30 boxes of paperbacks that I had brought with me 10 years earlier when we moved into our townhouse; unopened. I had every book that I had read since I became an avid reader in elementary school and could afford to buy second hand paperbacks. I started by giving away the boxes in the storage room to charity, realizing that everyone that was going to read those books in my life had read them and it was time to pass them on. 5 years later I got a kindle.
Loved it. I began to realize that I was attached to stories themselves rather than their physical manifestation. Faced with moving again, into a house where I would no longer have a library, I began to divest myself of my collection. It was much easier than I thought it would be. I no longer need the physical symbols of what I have read. I have always shared my books and now a small group of us are on an amazon account and we continue to share.
I still have some books on shelves. Those that I could not give away or were collectible. But now I am a dedicated ebook reader, and loving it.
Kenneth wrote: "Micah, totally agree with your points about books being a tactile experience. It is an experiential thing and so subjective, that is why I used the price argument to attempt a more objective analys..."The proportion of the market taken up by eBooks in comparison to traditional books varies depending on a number of factors.
If we look at adult fiction/nonfiction then eBooks are, in fact, the leading format (source). However, the same cannot be said in the YA market where eBook sales are closer to 35% of the market although that number is also up from late last year. More pertinent is the fact that eBook sales are up at a time when book sales as a whole are down.
Traditional publishers are not fighting for survival yet. Indeed I doubt that traditional publishing will die in the same way that so many of Amazon's competitors have. Your analogy with LP is a good one - there will always be certain books that are better suited for hardcopy and there will always be certain people who want to own hardcopy. But how they respond now will affect in what form they survive in the future.
I believe the correct response would be for publishers to co-opt the disruption and offer services to prospective self-publishers (e.g., affordable editing and cover development) under a business model that operates on a low volume, high-turn over basis. They could do this (and some have already begun to do so) by creating different imprints for eBooks and traditional books. My only concern is that many of these newly created imprints are still trying to operate exactly as hardcopy imprints would, which is unlikely to work as well.
Anyway, it's great to hear from someone with knowledge of the publishing side. My knowledge comes mostly from financial reports and my experiences with book retailers and publishers in Australia. We've recently seen something of an armageddon amongst the large book stores here, almost all of which have closed. Australian publishing is also such a small market in comparison to the US that drawing conclusions about the larger markets is almost impossible (plus the various laws we have here prop prices up at fairly unrealistic levels).
I use my ereader 99.999% of the time anymore. It is just so much easier for me. Reading on it is much faster than reading a traditional book, in my experience. I have most of my books in one place, which I love. And most ereaders are lighter than most fantasy books. That's a plus. And I no longer have to feel guilty over hoarding books. Another big plus, for me, is being able to buy almost any book at any time. Especially with so many book stores closing this is a biggie for me. My whole family reads on ereaders now. Including my grandmother, she loves hers. The only thing I don't like about ebooks are DRM rights. I don't strip my books and I don't agree with piracy but this is the one issue that in my opinion is holding ebooks back. Most readers that I hear from who don't like ebooks its because of the thought that the ebooks don't "belong" to them. And under DRM they're right. They don't. This definitely needs to change if publishers want ebooks to compete with paper books.
Nienna wrote: "I use my ereader 99.999% of the time anymore. It is just so much easier for me. Reading on it is much faster than reading a traditional book, in my experience. I have most of my books in one place,..."I think you're spot on about DRM. As someone who enjoys video games, I've always hated the idea that you licence content but don't own it. If I paid full price, I expect full rights (it's why I don't DRM lock the eBooks I have for sale on Amazon).
I think the vast majority of people who buy eBooks will do the right thing. And the ones who don't do the right thing will find ways around it anyway. It's kind of like how its pointless to warn people about pirating movies. Everybody already knows the laws. People who will follow them will follow them. The ones who won't, won't.
Amazon's lending policy is, however, a step in the right direction. Still, I want something comparable to lending my friend my hardcopy version of a book. Surely, there is a solution to this.
Right. Those who are going cheat the system are already cheating the system. I understand the principle behind it. If I have 1 hard cover book I can pass it around to others but there is never more than 1 book. But if I have 1 e-book I can pass around as many copies as I want plus hold on to mine. So I get it. But there has to be a better way. I don't know the answer to that though.
A lot of people who want to strip DRM are honest users. If I've paid for an ebook or legally downloaded a free one, I should be able to use it on any ereader of my choice. If DRM isn't stripped off then you are stuck using it on the device you purchased it on.Ever since I got my tablet I don't really use my Kindle much anymore and I should have the right to read my ebooks on whatever ereader app I want. I hate the Kindle app so I'm definitely not going to use that one. I prefer an app that is much more customizable so I use one of those.
Nienna wrote: "Right. Those who are going cheat the system are already cheating the system. I understand the principle behind it. If I have 1 hard cover book I can pass it around to others but there is never more..."I think the Matchstick program (not sure if that's the right name) where people who buy the hardcopy get the eBook as well is a definite step in the right direction since you can pass the hardcopy around and hang onto the eBook in the meantime.
It's nice talking about this kind of thing. Whatever happens, I think we live in a very exciting time publishing-wise!
I can't wait til all book sales are like blu-ray. You buy the hardcopy and there's a free download. Voila! I don't care if that means the paperback I'm getting is 9.99 instead of 8.99 it would be worth it for most bibliophiles who want the convenience of ebooks but love their collections as well.
I've told my daughter, when she Rules the World, to fix the ebook platforms across the planet. She is currently bucking for major in the US Army, so we do progress.
One thing I want for ebooks (well... two things actually) is the option to lend all of my ebooks. Like I said before when you have 1 paper book you can lend that paper book as often as you want and I think the same should go for ebooks. Or at least have the option of lending the same book up to 3 or 5 times. The other thing is there are some books in my ebook library that I am never going to read again. But I know someone else might. There is an option on Amazon and B&N to buy and gift ebooks for someone else. I want the option to give my ebooks to someone else.
The last one won't fly, I think. Because it's a way to de-monetize the product. You give the ebook to someone, they read it, and give it to someone else. People do this now with physical books of course, but for an eBook the license is the product. So effectively everyone who was given the book deprives the publisher and service of a sale. There's also no good way for them to verify if you've made a copy before giving it away. That's another reason why the digital publishing sector is a minefield.
I partly agree with Kenneth. BUT, if I have paid for an ebook, I should have the right to resell that ebook (ever seen a Used Bookstore?) OR gift it to someone.Backing up to the original (?) topic though, I am currently going about 50/50 hardcopy to ebook - partly because it is easier to keep track of series that I am reading in hardcopy.
I cannot endorse audio books (at least until I go blind) because I've always been a tactile learner - give me paper or give me an "F". If I had ever had a 100% lecture class, there is no way I could have passed.
I do understand both sides of the argument but the way I see it is that until readers feel as though they own their eBooks, eBooks will never be more popular than traditional books. When you buy a book you own it. When you buy an eBook the publisher owns it. I have over 500 eBooks spread out between Amazon and Barnes & Noble. If B&N goes out of business or stops distributing eBooks there goes more than half of my library. I'd be lying if I said that doesn't bother me or make me worry. It does. That's why I started to backup my eBooks that way I at least have a copy that isn't on my devices.
Yeah that's a very good thing to back up your ebooks. I have my ebooks saved on my laptop as well as an external hard drive in addition to my ereader devices.
On an individual basis I prefer a physical copy. I like the feel of a real book. But for space, convenience of delivery and cost e-books are generally better.
Bruce wrote: "I've been nearly 100% ebook for years. I actually bought (and still have) an old Rocket eBook from the turn of the century (boy that sounds old :-)). I've used various other devices, but most of th..."I think audiobooks depend very heavily on the reader as well. A good reader can bring life to a text, but a boring one can ruin even a well-written book. I do think audiobooks are good for commutes, especially on the way home from work when you're tired and just want to unwind.
I have friends who swear by audiobooks when they have to, say, paint the garage, or bushhog the back 40, or drive to Pennsylvania. Nothing makes a long dull task go faster than an audiobook, and that's not a situation where you can use an e-reader or a paper book.
"Yep, agree with that. My biggest struggle with audiobooks is the "need to back up a couple of lines" use case. Sometimes I just miss something and depending on the player, its distracting to back up just a little bit." Since I listen at work I do that all the time and actually listen to same audiobook tracks over and over. So used to it.
John wrote: "Lara Amber wrote: "The Kindle doesn't tell you how many pages are left, but at the bottom it tells you percentage left in the book, how many minutes are left in your chapter (based on your reading ..."You are indeed correct. If you convert an EPUB to a MOBI using Amazon's previewer you'll find that one of the messages it typically spits out is that there is nothing telling it about page numbers. It stands to reason then that there is something in the file that can be used to create binding page numbers. Most of the eBooks with page numbers are conversions of paper books with the page numbers based on the hard copy. Most eBooks that only exists as eBooks will not have page numbers (since page numbers are so dependent on the physical dimensions and chosen font for a book).
SciFi and Fantasy Book Club
Authors mentioned in this topic
C.S. Forester (other topics)Tom Clancy (other topics)
Terry Pratchett (other topics)
Terry Pratchett (other topics)
Terry Pratchett (other topics)
I understand that ebooks have less physical presence and paper books provide a better reminder or souvenir, but I'd argue that the value of a book is in its content.
I fully expect each of us to have our own preference on which medium we prefer, but I'm not convinced that ebooks or audiobooks don't have value.