Are paper books really disappearing?
bbc.com
bbc.com
I could go on.
And despite all that, they're priced as if they're in some way equivalent to the real deal. I've tried and failed to make the jump via Kindle and Kobo, and until such times as pricing on the major stores reflects the eBook's status as an inferior, vastly cheaper to produce knockoff of the real deal, I won't be tempted to buy any more ebooks (the price difference should be closer to 50%, not 15%)
Another aspect as an IT guy is that my ability to relax and focus when holding a computer is vastly reduced over a paper book. The limitations of paper books in that sense are actually a feature. I can't search, bookmark (without folding a paper page corner), 'browse', play with some half-baked eInk web browser, switch book etc., all of which are real focus problems I suffer from.
(1) They save space. If I were a voracious reader devouring many novels, this might actually matter to me. But as it stands, I'm the sort of person to be into a single novel at a time, and I don't make it a point to read fast but rather to read more slowly and enjoy every word. At the same time, there's a strange pleasure in assembling little shelves of novels I've read and loved. A Kindle or iBooks library just feels sterile and corporate in comparison.
(2) They're searchable. For novels, this is not as much of an advantage as I thought it would be, though. The senses of touch and sight are surprisingly powerful at forming a mental index of a novel. Even small things like the passing memory of the relative difference in weight or thickness between the pages on the left and the pages on the right go into helping me remember where a particular passage was. Holding a physical novel in your hands, there's a sense of seeing the entire book all at once, almost like a limited form of omniscience. Seeing only a page or two at a time in an ebook in comparison is like tunnel vision.
That's interesting, I seem to get the same benefit with less hassle. For me the portability of ebooks more than makes up for all of these issues. I think as it becomes less common to carry extra things that don't need to be carried and the ebook technology improves, ebooks with become a more ideal experience for more and more people
1. No wait. Occasionally I've discovered a book and wanted to read it immediatly. My kindle lets me do that easily.
2. Reading before sleep. There is something nice about getting ready for bed, turning off the lights, and reading on a backlit e-book reader. It means that I can read until the exact point that I feel like I am drifting off to sleep without needing to get up and turn out the light. Obviously this is good for light fiction. You wouldn't want to read anything that demands attention this way.
1) moderately large to large books are uncomfortable to hold after a while.
2) Fixed font size.
3) Take up physical space (i.e. you can have books and other kind of "publications" like magazines in a Kindle).
4) Unsearchable.
5) Every reader essentially has to "hack" something as simple as progress saving.
>"they require no battery": This doesn't really make paper books a superior product. The same argument could be said of landline phones but that doesn't make them better than cellphones.
>"accidental touchscreen events": Not all ereaders are touchscreen based, an in any case it's a poor, circumstantial reason.
Your other reasons amount to pretty much preference, none of them make paper books categorically superior to ereaders.
So most of the cost is probably going to paying the people who produce the book and repaying investors/publishers.
So I get 1) freed from having to secure and power a light source, and 2) the convenience of the hardback for the price of the paperback.
I was also quite bothered by the low res low contrast screen on the Kindle. The Paperwhite is worlds better, eliminating all of my gripes.
Paper, ink, cardboard, staples, and glue are all very cheap in large quantity. The actual material cost of a book is tiny compared to the book's selling price.
I don't know what manufacturing costs are, but based on what I've seen on "How It's Made" and similar shows it looks like it is highly automated, and so I suspect that for the big publishers it too is only a tiny part of the book's selling price.
The third cost that ebooks do not incur that physical books do is shipping. I'd not be at all surprised if this is actually higher than the material cost and the manufacturing cost for many books.
Putting this all together, if the publishers passed on all the savings from ebooks being "vastly cheaper to produce" I doubt that this would result in anywhere near a 50% lower price.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/01/business/media/01ebooks.ht... (and the graphic: http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2010/03/01/business/01eboo... )
Downside is all the obvious, needs batteries, charging, etc.
However, for non-linear reading (e.g. reference books), paper books can't be beat yet. But funny thing, I bought some reference books for one of my teams recently and had to teach a couple of them how to use an index because they had only learned to ctrl+f to find things. I'll admit that well organized hypertext reference guides work almost as well as a reference book, but you consume screen space trying to display the information while an open book on your desk automatically provides that "screen" space.
On the flip side, I can start reading a book on my tablet, move to my computer and then my phone all in the same day and modern reading apps keep everything synced pretty well.
I feel sad sometimes because my physical library hasn't grown much, but then I remember that I've read many times the number of books on my digital devices because they're so convenient.
I don't like e-reader software and the way the information is displayed. I've found that the full-page image scans of books is more beautiful in many cases and works wonderfully on modern tablets with high resolution displays. There's an entire library of these scans over at archive.org for those interested, in many genres.
That's unsettling. Were they college educated? I assume that they are but I can't fathom how you can get a college degree and not know how to use an index.
For reference books I find myself preferring PDFs because of the fixed layout.
Right out of. I had to give the "back in my day" speech making me feel impossibly old. I think it's a function of both plowing through textbooks and then just googling for information when you need to find something again. It wasn't so much that they didn't know how to use an index, just that they hadn't done it since probably middle school or earlier and had simply forgotten what those 30-40 pages in the backs of reference books were for.
One other thing that bugs me about e-readers is that they intentionally carry all the disadvantages of chopping text into discrete pages, when there's no reason at all to do so. In particular, it bugs me that, at the bottom of a page, I've got to memorize the context before flipping to the next. As I say it, it seems more jarring than it is, but even so, it's forcing a discontinuity that can interrupt the flow.
I just can't fathom why they don't do something to avoid that jump. Back in the early days of e-readers, I used software called "iSilo" on Palm and later PocketPC. This allowed me to configure it such that scrolling was in chunks of half a page. With this I could find any convenient spot (a paragraph or at least sentence break) on the lower half of the page, and choose to flip there. My previous "cursor" point would shift half way up the screen, and I could continue fluidly from there. I really wish Kindle allowed this.
From a pure consumer point of view, I'd already be glad if I had consistent, working footnotes in my Kindle books. Somehow, every ebook does them differently, and exactly zero make them convenient enough to bother with them.
Even the one or two foot notes per page in Discworld books are a chore to handle, non-fiction books with 5+ are impossible – and I only read those for leisure. At work I'd never even consider using ebook formats. I'd honestly prefer PDFs. At least their reader ecosystem isn't quite as dysfunctional…
In both cases, the Kindle loves to insist that I tap exactly the 5pt big footnote number itself (around the size of a fleck of dust) and will happily ignore any taps missing it (and just flip to the next page instead… or previous, who cares? Not Amazon).
All that, of course, is assuming I use a newer one with touch screen. Otherwise, I'll have to muck around with the arrow keys.
The kindle can, if the links exist. If they don't, it's the publisher's fault.
Oh, well. Time to get another bookshelf…
“For my grandchildren, the idea that reading is something you do by yourself will seem arcane,” he says. “Why would you want to read by yourself if you can have access to the ideas of others you know and trust, or to the insights of people from all over the world?”
Though what's authored in a book might not be from anyone we know and trust (in itself not a "bad" thing) it's quite likely still a body of (possibly collective) insight already—perhaps even from someone(s) in less-local parts of the world.
Maybe I missed the point, but it felt like the quote was missing that a book is already a view into others' ideas and insights.
That said, even if printed books are to fall out of favor with the majority of literate people, it could still be a good idea to maintain physical libraries of works that many would find essential in the (perhaps unlikely) case that digital records fail or become inconvenient to access.
Unfortunately it doesn't seem like ebooks are good at handling even basic annotations—certainly no better than dead-tree books—so I'm not seeing that happening any time soon. Plus if it ever happens it'll probably be some stupid online service, which I don't want. I want it to be part of the book, like DVD commentary tracks, or at least a downloadable add-on file of some kind that sticks around as long as I want it and can be backed up.
Oh, never mind, the wifi is down, and the on-screen keyboard driver is broken. Again.
Likewise I can remember the bit I'm looking for was on the bottom left of a page with a big picture on it, and will scan through the book till I get to it.
Both things I lose with eBooks; though of course there are plenty of other compensations.
Audible is another good substitution for non-technical paper books. It transforms daily commute into productive time. You don't need constant connection to network - books can be pre-loaded and then accessed offline without any problems plus I have a luxury to set 1.25x play speed and enjoy speed of reading above average.
Though, while role of paper books is reduced, there's still a lot of value for paper books. Paper books are much easier to follow for home repairs (DIY guides). I like printed catalogues more than electronic ones (like IKEA's one [1]).
[1] IKEA bookbook: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MOXQo7nURs0
1) I can send an ebook as a gift. AFAIK Amazon allows that only in the USA.
2) I can backup my ebooks and move them to other readers I own.
I suspect that #1 and #2 are related, technically and in the business model.
This leads me to buying books twice, first as an ebook and second in print to loan. Whilst publishers may well like this, it's scummy behaviour if they do and scummy business practices always come back and bite you eventually.
Or alternatively I never buy the ebook because I want the print book to loan, but the print is too expensive so I never buy either...
I think "case based reasoning" is going on. We have no problems loaning books out to friends because we always have. But pirating a copy is considered unethical, even though the net effect on the publisher is the same. One can argue that the former is slightly better because the both of us can't read it at the same time, but in my view we're just rationalizing.
That has always been the reasoning. Ebooks are not considered property. You are licensed a nontransferable copy of the book.
> One can argue that the former is slightly better because the both of us can't read it at the same time, but in my view we're just rationalizing.
With books, most of us just lend books when we're done reading them. It's rare where both need to read at the same time, although (I guess) that can happen.
My greater point is that we, as a society, are perfectly comfortable lending books out to friends or having public libraries simply because we've grown up doing it that way. In an alternative universe, if public libraries or paper books were invented today, most people (especially intellectual property lawyers) would view it as a form of intelletual property theft and consider those things "morally wrong". Not that I'm saying that's right or wrong, it's just that people have a tendency to understand the present in terms of the past (case-based reasoning).
I buy technical e-books from oreilly, informit, springer or nostarchpress.
They are more often than not, cheaper than amazon and you can download them in various formats, including but not limited to pdf.
Buying books for Kindle feels like you're renting them from Amazon.
One just needs to stay honest and don't spread those ebooks around.
I seldom buy anything from Amazon, although I own a Kindle.
Sorry can only up vote once.
And backup? What does that even mean for a paper book? Photocopy? EBooks are in the cloud; you can never actually lose one forever. Just buy it again, which is very, very likely to be cheaper than photocopying a paper book.
Just saying.
unless ANYTHING happens to that part of the cloud. In which case, you've lost your entire collection forever.
And you can also have a fire at your house. Which is quite a bit more likely?
In 2012 I bought some music in electronic format from Amazon. A bit later they introduced the Amazon music service. I looked in my purchased music section, and the music I'd bought in 2012 wasn't there, and if I lose the downloaded files it's not available to me unless I buy it again or the rights holders come to some agreement with Amazon.
It's possible that stuff will drop out of the cloud when the rights become impossible to work out. I'm not sure how likely that is with books, but it happens with films. The most well known is "Point Break", which now can't be shown in public by cinemas because no-one knows who owns the rights.
And sure we're not quite there yet - the entire library of congress isn't online yet. But we all imagine its going to end up there, no contest.
The real issue is, does e-book loss (losing rights) compare unfavorably with real book loss (loaned out and forgotten; burned or discarded; degraded to unusability)?
Loaned books and not returned: same thing with files if cloud service will ever let you do that and you can't make a copy for yourself. However they could let us set an automatic return date. That will solve the problem. The point is: why bother if they won't make money out of it? Pay a little fee to borrow or to lend?
Accidentally burned vs accidentally deleted: same thing. Only the ability of backing them up is going to save you. Or a cloud service unless we are ruling it out for the rights issue.
Degradation: hard to say. Ebooks haven't been around for enough time to say how many of them I could lose in the next years. However I still have files from the mid 90s so if one really cares about them it's probably safe to say that they won't be lost. I can probably read some cassettes and floppy disks from the early and mid 80s if I bother to switch on their original hw (and if it works). However it's a vastly larger pain than reading an old book on aged paper. My parents have some of those books from the early 20th century and we can read them. Obviously they might have thrown away other books and it won't be the case if those books were bits.
Still: without cloud services are we going to be able to read epub or mobi in a 100 years? And with cloud services how many books won't be available anymore by then because of policies, politics, commercial rights, censorship?
In my first year or two of owning a Kindle, I think I bought more ebooks than I had bought new paper books in my entire life. Even still buying ebooks doesn't give me a fraction of the pause that buying a physical book does. A physical book is a perpetual space commitment, after all.
So I didn't "switch to ebooks from paper," I switched to ebooks from nothing, largely.
Can't really do that with e-books. Even if you set up your collection to be displayed that way, you're not going to look at it several times every day as you move around your house. Won't be effective—probably just annoying.
[EDIT] slackism for italicizing to HNism.
Paper books are mostly read and dispose of for me anyway, and I don't typically re-read books, so e-books just give me the flexibility of not needing to bring 5-6 big logs when I go on vacation, and mean I dont need to run to the book shop when I need something new to read.It is also cheaper by a significant margin.
For me - having access to a huge library at the click of a button, and less weight to carry around far outweighs any disadvantages of screen light, battery time etc.
- http://history.hanover.edu/marginalia.php - http://www.levenger.com/ABOUT-LEVENGER-536/How-To-s-679/Mast... - http://www.levenger.com/ABOUT-LEVENGER-536/How-To-s-679/Writ...
If you are one of the do not desecrate my book types you would not find this palatable. For me reading a book means having an outline of the chapter, section and the entire book on paper. Creating marginalia and annotating is in their infant state in the electronic form (epub).
If I've to consume something electronically, always prefer the PDF any day as they look gorgeous — the design, and the typography especially, though reading on very small screens are problematic.
Thanks for the links, they look useful.
https://play.google.com/apps/testing/ca.goeiebook.montreal.p...
Its easy to criticize ebooks; there's much to criticize there. But lets be careful not to claim that means ebooks are worse than paper. Because paper can do none of the many things that ebooks can do.
I agree with the ease of use of the paper version though.
I don't want piles of dead trees with outdated information taking up space.
Plus with ebooks I find right away the information I am looking for.
For other types of books, yes paper rules.
Ebooks make it easy to read anywhere and anytime you have spare time without lugging physical books around
"Oh this random place I happen to be is a perfect place to read, if only I had my library with me to pick a book".
If people know they'll be traveling, they pack a few books to have with them (or buy at the airport). If they're commuting (e.g. to work on a train or long bus ride) then they bring along the book they are reading at that point in time. But usually they just read at their house/study/office.
As for casual reading, there's always tons of stuff on the web.
For me, ebooks make it possible to replace much of the casual reading I do on the web with books. I've been happy with the change and I read significantly more books.
Since moving to ebooks my book consumption has increased 4x. I've replaced random phone scrolling during downtimes with books and it has been fantastic.
I'm to the point now where I actually prefer reading books on my phone even when a larger display device is nearby.
Especially since they haven't implemented all the features that would make them handier than books:
a) Copying excerpts (most DRM readers either forbid this or make it a time consuming BS process)
b) Adding notes (ditto)
d) Easy access to all your bookmarks and notes across your whole book collection.
e) Proper, book quality typography and layout (not markup BS that looks like a webpage), with overrides/re-layouts for larger font-size etc only as an additional option not as the main way to read.
d)
ebooks make it easier to turn this around. Digital media is reliable, easy to transport and distribute.
These days I find I can focus much better with a physical book, maybe I've trained myself. With digital reading I'm automatically in skim mode - though I might be obtaining a broader sense of knowledge.
If amazon goes out of business and your kindle breaks, good luck getting your books back.
I can't imagine trusting any service that I don't host with data as important as the contents of books.
I have some books that have been passed down to me by my grandpa from Russia. I wouldn't be able to do that with an ebook that I don't host myself.
TL;DR: When it gets less proprietary and I can use my own device and storage medium I'll buy into it.
The same in reverse - I have a lot of books, and visitors will often go straight to the bookshelves and start browsing. Lots of interesting conversation starters right there.
But until ebooks have an equivalent of "used" ebooks, I'm going to continue buying used paper books. $1 or $3 for a beautiful break from backlighting, as well as the opportunity to [gasp] use my hands, is the way I'll go. Ebooks, no matter how old, are an order of magnitude higher in price. No thanks!
And although this has nothing to do with my personal consumption, publishers need to figure out how they're going to stop ripping off libraries. It's part of the reason I'm personally against subsidizing the ebook industry in any form (for now).