fiction files redux discussion
An e-Book thread!
date
newest »
newest »
I think the "I Love Books" argument only works for generations who have grown up knowing, loving, and reading books. If e-Book Readers get much more popular in the next 10 years or so, people born today will most likely never have that nostalgic attachment to books and will find it pretty silly to read from one...I love books too, and can't imagine reading anything prolonged on any kind of "device". I hope books never go away, but I think they will.
Mod
I don't know how much I buy into that argument because reading from a normal computer screen sucks, I don't see books going away for a long time. There would need to be much lower price point for the readers and widespread acceptance neither of which has happened yet.
Regardless, I will be clinging to my books for as long as possible.
Mod
The main benefit I can see to having kids use them is really related to their backs.
No, seriously. My ten year old lugs home a ridiculously heavy backpack. That thing weighs about a quarter of what she does.
Mod
I think what will end up happening is that we will all carry around something that looks like one of those little netbooks and all of our data will come from a cloud, so no need to lug a heavy computer around, and we we will switch our netbooks to book reading mode for reading, which will change the screen.
The reason it has to be a different kind of device has to do with refresh rate and contrast on the screen itself. To look at a screen for a long time, as we all know, messes with your eyes. That's why the Kindle has the screen it has, and the argument that it should go to color is ironically a really bad one.
All the non-nostalgic arguments against eBooks seem to be based on what the eBook can'T do that the traditional book CAN (and ignoring all the things eBooks CAN do that traditional books CAN'T). But it seems to me that it's only a matter of time before the technology catches up and can do basically everything a book can do (other than provide the nostalgia and the smell and feel of the book). I think at that point, people who never grew up knowing books (like people born today or a few years from now) wouldn't know they were missing anything, and so the arguments for books being this wonderful experience would not really work anymore.
Jimmy wrote: "All the non-nostalgic arguments against eBooks seem to be based on what the eBook can'T do that the traditional book CAN (and ignoring all the things eBooks CAN do that traditional books CAN'T). B..."I'm definitely going with Jimmy on this one...it reminds me of what Homer was saying back in the day about people *gasp* writing stuff down. He was worried that people's memories would deteriorate if they didn't preserve stories in the mind, which actually kind of happened. And then the next step seems to be the ADD-inducing electronic stimulus which has served this latest generation so well. I'm not sure how much faith I have in the endurance of books through the electronic age. Maybe I'm just being hiply cynical, but its a convenient device in a convenience culture and its not getting any less so.
Mod
It will be interesting to see kids growing up who don't know books. I often see kids at work who can't remember life without the internet.
Mod
word processors did not cause pens and paper to vanish from the world, and e-books will not make paper books disappear. books aren't going away, especially not the ones that already exist. they require no maintenence, aside from storage, so why would they go away?
my main concerns about e-books are access and intentional or unintentional censorship. barnes&noble and amazon.com already have an unhealthy amount of control over what people read. they would have limit choices even more to target popular consumer culture via electronic readers. this does not seem like a good idea to me.
also, access, which seems obvious. different books might become available to certain economic classes of people that are not available to everyone. and that would really suck.
Mod
http://thevarsity.ca/articles/23855
Isn't it a bit... well, unsafe to store information electronically and only electronically? What if there's some sort of technological breakdown? It's pretty difficult to access visual and audio information stored using obsolete technology. Unless all e-books were constantly updated to be compatible with current technology, wouldn't we lose them? I don't mean best-sellers and classics, but lowly-statured things and academic works? I suppose the physical book is more obviously susceptible to the ravages of time... but I just don't trust technology not to malfunction and eat all our books. The physical form seems more solid, safer and more permanent. Probably future generations will laugh at this idea, but I can't help it.
Mod
It's actually safer, because most electronic information is stored in more than one physical location, if it's done properly. And its integrity is easier to maintain in terms of version and replicability.
Also, as to formats - while it may have been the case in the past that people designing formats such as ... say... PDF (portable document format) thought in an analog way about data formats, this is no longer the case. XML is a perfect example of what amounts to a universal language. It makes a blinding number of things possible on the web. And any future markup language will have to be backwards compatible with it, so it was a very carefully constructed language and continues to be carefully maintained.
Also, we are moving more and more away from the "document" that has "authors" as such, so that will change how we think of books, too.
All this goes to say, physical copies have the same limitations as electronic ones, both in terms of physical safety and language limitations.
Think about translations of Dostoevsky - couldn't you compare translating to his works into English for the wider world to the shift from basic HTML to the more advanced, extensible, and usable XML? I think so.
Mod
this happened quite recently and could impact the market - in essence the publishers are trying to phase the release of e-books just like the studios phase the release of dvds - who knows if 'windowing' is a good model?
as a retailer I have two big problems in the world one of them is ebooks and the other is the big box price wars (i.e. Walmart essentially giving away books at less than cost)- the biggest problem with ebooks may well amount to the same thing - price point - they are offering essentially the same product (a $27 hardback book say) at 9.99 - amazon isnt making money on the sale of that e-book and walmart isnt making any money on the sale of the hard cover
and neither entity is trying to function as a bookstore (both are much more and dealing in books as a loss leader to drive other sales) and both are quite effectively making it next to impossible for all but the most elite and efficient independent bookstores to stay in business (and Borders aint doing so hot either)while they do battle with each other
what is most devilish is that the walmart approach eats away a bookstore's front list and bestseller opportunities while in addition to competing with walmart for the bs share amazon also scoops up all the backlist and evergreen opportunities offering a far deeper selection than a physical bookstore can hold
('curatorial' is a word to think about when discussing the continuing existence of your favorite indy - do they serve a curatorial role in your life and do you reward them for it?)
why would a $9.99 e-Book not make them any money? It costs practically NOTHING to make an e-Book.
Mod
You'd think so but I was talking with an executive from Random House a couple weeks back who told me that the cost(structure) on e-books (as it applies to wholesale/retail purchasing) is more or less the same as it is for hard copy - you're thinking about cost of production but you may not be considering the cuts taken on rights/royalties for the author or the publisher's other expenses (marketing, editing etc) that will be buried into the per copy cost
TO ME WHATEVER ENCOURAGES A PERSON TO READ WHATEVER FORM THE MEDIUM IS A GOOD THING -ALSO IF THERE IS A PLUS ON THE ENVIRONMENTAL SIDE BY THESE TECHNOLOGIES, THEN THAT'S ALL TO THE GOOD
I ALSO LISTEN TO ME BOOKS ON CD AND THINK HEARING A BOOK READ WELL IS TREMENDOUS
Mod
Matt wrote: "WHY ARE YOU YELLING?"lighten up
Mod
lighten up
"
normally it's the people who are YELLING that are advised to lighten up, dope
me I'm light as a feather - comes from having a sense of humor
Matt wrote: "Jim wrote: "Matt wrote: "WHY ARE YOU YELLING?"lighten up
"
normally it's the people who are YELLING that are advised to lighten up, dope
me I'm light as a feather - comes from having a..."
You need to chill out but that's only a suggestion but given the season I won't call you an asshole
Mod
from now on I shall be chilly like willy
Mod
Uh, anyway...Let’s get back to the supposed death of the traditional book. To start with: O, the drama. Please. Everyone relax. MP3s were going to wipe CDs off the face of the earth ten years ago. But my local Best Buy still seems to devote about 1,000 sq. ft. to displaying them.
Actually, I’m sorry I even brought that up. More than a few journalists and industry pundits have cited the obsolescence of various audio technologies to support their argument that eBooks will eventually do the same to paper ones. The record player gave way to the cassette, which gave way to the CD, and so forth. So in these arguments, the readers who cry that traditional books are irreplaceable are just nostalgic fools — like the handful of ridiculous audiophiles who still cling onto their old turntables for dear life.
The big difference is (and I really do think there’s something to this), those audio technologies passed through relatively small windows of time. The phonograph/record player started to be marketed and sold widely in the U.S. around 1905. Cassette tapes started to chip away at it in the late ‘60s...as did 8-tracks in the mid ‘70s...and the CD ultimately snuffed it out by 1990. That’s 85 years of technological prominence, if you stretch it.
The printing press, by contrast, has been around for MORE THAN 500 YEARS! Plus, if you had to rank all modern inventions in terms of their respective impacts on the world, the printing press has to be in the top 5.
History runs deep. The idea that a kid born today — who may grow up in a world where Kindles are omnipresent — will have no regard for the paper book, just doesn’t feel right. That’s not nostalgia talking; it’s a gut feeling, which is worth something.
Ultimately, these are two very different media. eBooks are highly portable, can store tons of info, provide instant access to loads of new material, allow easy note taking and scanning and blah blah. Traditional books provide a more tactile experience, smell better, seem/feel more academic, and give you an unmatched physical aesthetic (who doesn’t love the look of a loaded bookshelf?).
So why should any reader feel like he/she needs to choose one over the other? Again, I think everyone should just relax. Don’t go selling your Barnes & Noble stock just yet.
-G
Mod
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/12...
How many classics and contemporary Finnish writers do you think you'd be able to find in original in the US? Relatively few. And do you know how much buying them from Finland and then having them shipped to the US would cost? With an international ebooks store you wouldn't have to pay postage and you wouldn't have to wait weeks for your books to arrive. Ebooks would make knowledge more accessible to people all over the world and help writers from smaller countries sell their books to a worldwide audience, I don't see how they could be the death of literature.I never read a book because I like holding it or because of its smell. I think it's a bit ridiculous to say you value the physical object more than the literary work.
Andreea wrote: "I never read a book because I like holding it or because of its smell. I think it's a bit ridiculous to say you value the physical object more than the literary work."On your first sentence, how much does it matter what YOU think? There's little value in a focus group of one. A lot of readers very much love the feel and smell of physical paper books. And those people are willing to pay money for them. Perfect product, perfect audience.
As for your second sentence, it has to be split two ways. First, who is saying that the physical object is of higher value than the work contained therein? We're only talking about delivery preferences here. Without the work, the media wouldn't need exist.
Second, I'll argue against myself (kind of) and suggest that the physical object may be AS IMPORTANT as the work -- at least in the sales realm. You fall in love with a book and/or its author, and then you want to possess some part of that story, those ideas, etc. And the way we've learned to do that is through consumption. Seth Godin would say that once we get that thrill, we feel compelled to take home a souvenir. Well, a book -- paper, e-book, PDF, or otherwise -- is that souvenir.*
-G
*I wrote about this in another thread: I borrowed a Ray Carver short story collection from my library some time ago, and absolutely loved it. So I went out afterward and bought the same paperback, which now sits on my bookshelf unopened. Why? I wasn't sure at first. Yeah, I'm sure I'll get the urge to read it again some day, and when I do I'll be happy that it's there, in my house, at-the-ready. But that's not why I bought it. If I'm being honest, I bought it because I fell in love with something ephemeral -- ideas contained in a physical form I need to hand back to a librarian; I needed to attach myself to it in some way, to physically hold it, to own it.
This is why I prefer CDs to MP3s (though I do have and use iPod/iTunes). CDs, like books, feel more REAL. eBooks/eReaders are convenient and can do things that paper books can't...but if a book really matters to me, it has to be on my shelf -- not in some e-box. And I can't be the only one who feels this way.
Does anybody here actually have an eBook or such device? Because I don't and I was wondering: when you buy an eBook, is it yours for eternity? or does it somehow "expire"?
Jimmy wrote: "Does anybody here actually have an eBook or such device? Because I don't and I was wondering: when you buy an eBook, is it yours for eternity? or does it somehow "expire"?"Technically they don't. I know about the Amazon/1984 fiasco some while ago, but Amazon is not the only books (and ebooks) retailer. On ebooks.com -for example- you not only own the ebook, but you can download it from the site as many times as you want if you happen to lose the file/delete it by accident/etc. or read it online on the website whenever you want and how many times you want.
Greg wrote: "Andreea wrote: "I never read a book because I like holding it or because of its smell. I think it's a bit ridiculous to say you value the physical object more than the literary work."
On your fi..."How much does it matter what ANYONE thinks?
I perhaps need to explain my opinion a bit further. I don't see books as mere products, I thought that people with overwhelming love and dedication towards tomes (the ones who keep bragging about how much they love their books) didn't either. Maybe I was wrong. If you value the literary work more than the object you should be able to read it in whatever form and still enjoy it. Of course some people have eyesight problems so they can only read large script books, etc. I don't mean that. I mean that you can't call yourself a lover of literature if you read because you enjoy holding a volume in front of your eyes. You're simply a lover of paper. Moreover, even if I gathered great pleasure from looking at books I own staked neatly on my bookshelves, I'd be willing to give that up if it meant that more people had access to books. Literature is such a wonderful resource, such a huge part of who we are as people, it's sad to think books are nowadays just things people in rich countries own and solely because they like to look at them.
Andreea wrote: "...even if I gathered great pleasure from looking at books I own staked neatly on my bookshelves, I'd be willing to give that up if it meant that more people had access to books. Literature is such a wonderful resource, such a huge part of who we are as people, it's sad to think books are nowadays just things people in rich countries own and solely because they like to look at them."Agreed in part. I'm still unclear why so many people are taking part in the e-book v. paper book debate. Why do we have to choose one? Why is it a foregone conclusion that one will remain and the other disappear? In other words, why should you have to (possibly) give up paper books, Andreea?
(I'm also not clear what your argument is re: "rich countries" having exclusive access to paper. A paperback costs around $15 (give or take). An e-book costs around $10 (give or take). This is creating an economic chasm? Not to mention, an e-book (or PDF) requires an e-reader or computer (i.e. cha-ching). Sh!t, even if you live in a tenament with three other families who share a loaf of bread every third day, you can find a way to get your hands on an old paperback or two -- no? If context dictated, I'd give a hand job for a used copy of Slaughterhouse Five. Whereas, I'd rather not even think about what I'd have to do for a Kindle.)
Mod
it's more of a question of whether the bookstore will go away
I used to love shopping in record stores and I thank Christ for Amoeba because that means my city still has at least one of those left - 'are bookstores next?' seems to me the real question
Greg wrote: "Andreea wrote: "...even if I gathered great pleasure from looking at books I own staked neatly on my bookshelves, I'd be willing to give that up if it meant that more people had access to books. Li..."And how many hardbacks do you think the average African school can afford? Yes, an American (or British) paperback bought in the US (or the UK) costs around $15, but it's bound to cost at least twice as much in other countries, not to mention that in some countries $15 itself is a lot. It's not just African schools, I'd give a handjob to anybody who would let me buy Slaughterhouse Five in English from them for less than $40 and I don't live at the end of the world (or maybe I do?). Books in languages other than one country's native ones are generally pretty hard to find and expensive and the ones on the market are rarely not well-known books. Most schools (even in the developed world) can't afford to have a a wide variety of books in each widely-spoke foreign language, not to mention languages with only a few million speakers. Strangely enough computers are more accessible than foreign books through programs like one laptop per child. People see the point in buying children computers, but fail to understand why they'd need books at affordable prices. Or why the world would need African, Hungarian or Chinese writers.
Moreover, I didn't say that we ought to give up books, just that I'd do so gladly if it meant that literature were more accessible. I enjoy reading both on paper and on a screen, the medium doesn't affect the text itself thus it's entirely irrelevant. And I'm sure that even in 50 years time there will be enough technophobics sniffing their beloved tomes.
Hmm...I just found a really interesting quote by the guy who runs Square Books in Oxford, Mississippi. When asked about e-books and if he thought printed books would disappear, he said: "I think that digital technology will go on its own path, no matter what. But in terms of books, I maintain that a book is like a sailboat or a bicycle, in that it's a perfect invention. I don't care what series number of Kindle you're on, it is never going to be better than this."
I just thought this was a nice addition to our discussion. The full interview can be found here:
http://www.pw.org/content/inside_indi...
Enjoy!
Matt wrote: "http://news.bookweb.org/7227.htmlthis happened quite recently and could impact the market - in essence the publishers are trying to phase the release of e-books just like the studios phase the ..."
It's funny that you mention the word "curatorial" Matt, because in the interview I just posted the link to in this thread, one of the last questions was about indie bookstores becoming simply curatorial. You should give it a look! :)
Mod
http://www.boingboing.net/2010/01/12/..."
The issue of ownership versus licensing is one of the largest issues in the ebook world. As a librarian it is even more of an issue with purchasing (licensing) database access. It is almost as if you do not *get* what you pay for.
The trend in ebooks needs to go towards ownership for it to be a fair deal. In the library world Elsevier has a monopoly over a certain range of scientific literature and charge a shitload for access because there is no competition.
It is a scary thing for a library to not be able to gain ownership over a significant part of their acquisitions budget.
Mod
New copies of Hilary Mantel's "Wolf Hall," Andrew Young's "The Politician" and other books published by Macmillan were unavailable Saturday on Amazon.com, after the retailer pulled the titles in a surprising reaction to the publisher's new pricing model for e-books.
Amazon wants to tamp down prices as competitors such as Barnes & Noble Inc., Sony Corp. and Apple Inc. line up to challenge its dominant position in the rapidly expanding market. But Macmillan and other publishers have criticized Amazon for charging just $9.99 for best-selling e-books on its Kindle e-reader, a price publishers say is too low and could hurt sales of higher priced hardcovers.
Amazon told customers in a posting on its online Kindle Forum Sunday that it "expressed our strong disagreement" with Macmillan's determination to charge higher prices. Under Macmillan's model, to be put in place in March, e-books will be priced from $12.99 to $14.99 when first released and prices will change over time.
"We want you to know that ultimately, however, we will have to capitulate and accept Macmillan's terms because Macmillan has a monopoly over their own titles, and we will want to offer them to you even at prices we believe are needlessly high for e-books," Amazon said in the posting.
Macmillan is one of the world's largest English-language publishers with divisions including St. Martin's Press, Henry Holt & Co. and Farrar, Straus & Giroux.
"We are in discussions with Amazon about how to resolve our differences," Macmillan CEO John Sargent told The Associated Press Sunday. He declined to comment further.
Amazon said other publishers and independent presses might "see this as an opportunity to provide attractively priced e-books as an alternative."
Amazon faces new challengers to the Kindle, including Barnes & Noble's Nook and Sony's e-book reader, plus the upcoming iPad table computer from Apple. The Seattle company sells about six e-books for every 10 paper ones when titles are available in either format. However, the popularity of e-books has driven publishers such as Simon & Schuster and HarperCollins Hachette Book Group USA to say they will delay the release of e-books in order to protect hardcover sales.
Mod
Mod
http://www.alistapart.com/articles/eb...
The internet did not replace television, which did not replace cinema, which did not replace books. E-books aren’t going to replace books either. E-books are books, merely with a different form.
The electronic book is the latest example of how HTML continues to win out over competing, often nonstandardized, formats. E-books aren’t websites, but E-books are distributed electronically. Now the dominant E-book format is XHTML. Web standards take on a new flavor when rendering literature on the screen, and classic assumptions about typography (or “formatting”) have to be adjusted.
Just came across an interesting blog post: What We Talk about When We Talk about the Future of Reading
Mod
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/18/boo...
Mod
Mod
Obviously the sales of paperbacks is massive so there is no chance that ebooks outsold them. Further more this news was announced just a day or two before Amazon announced lower than anticipated quarterly sales figures.
It seems their announcement was an attempt to distract from their low earnings.
Mod
also interesting is what went on with Wylie this week
Mod
also interesting is what went on w..."
There's a lot of publishers pissed off with Wylie this week.
As a Kindle owner, book reader, and early tech adapter (to some degree) I agree with him.
I read this today in Wired Magazine, of all places ---
Ode to Books, or why E-Book Readers Will Never Replace Them
The meat of the article (since I know it takes a lot of energy to click, read, and then click back) is as follows -- nothing I haven't heard before, but maybe some of us have some new thoughts...?
I think we should send this guy an invite to our neck of the woods.