Digital Books Start A New Chapter

conq writes "BusinessWeek has a piece on the latest advancements in eBooks, and how this time they might just take off. From the article: 'Portable devices are becoming lighter and more appealing. The most important step forward may be in digital ink, the technology used for displaying letters on a screen. A small company called E Ink has created a method for arranging tiny black and white capsules into words and images with an electronic charge. Because no power is used unless the reader changes the page, devices with the technology could go as long as 20 books between battery charges'."

Comments

This crap again?

[dnixon112]

How many freakin articles about this do we have to read before it's actually in production? Wake me up when it's ready.

Re:This crap again?

[ucblockhead]

It's been ready for many years. I've been reading books on Palm devices for a decade and O'Reilly has a great web-based subscription service.

The only issue has been that the "real" ebook readers have all utterly sucked because the idiots that make them are so concerned with controlling what their users read that they produce a product no one wants to buy.

The good and bad

[nizo]

The good:

The text also looks just as sharp as ink on a printed page, since each capsule is the size and pigment of a grain of laser-jet toner.
Sony is the first major player to take advantage of the technology. This spring, it will debut the Sony Reader, which uses E Ink and closely mimics the size, weight, and feel of a book.

And the bad:

The Reader will sell for about $400.

Having to spend $400 before getting any actual content is pretty harsh. The readability and low power consumption are a step in the right direction, but until the price drops considerably this won't be mainstream thats for sure.

But what is needed is...

[WindBourne]

the

• The ability to mark up the book.
• The ability to write a note in the side.
• The ability to have very low-power back-lighting (reading in bed).

Re:But what is needed is...

[Goyuix]

You forgot to add: The ability to transfer any text file to it for reading.

Whether it supports PDF, HTML, whatever more rich format - I don't particularly care as most (open) content can be moved between formats without a lot of effort. Just allow me to put on whatever I want, and if you have a store that works with it, great. But that CAN NOT be the only method.

Can I Take It Into The Bath?

[Cranky Weasel]

I only care about e-books if the following conditions are met:

1 - The image has to be inert - no glow effect of any kind. Ideally it should look just like paper.

2 - The "book" has to be waterproof. I read in the tub.

3 - The technology has to be sturdy. ANY portable technology should be sturdy.

4 - It has to be affordable.

5 - In the event of a crash I need to be able to replace the books in it without charge.

If I'm going to read, oh, say 100 books over the life of the product, it better cost me less for the unit plus the e-copies of the books than it would to buy the books outright. Otherwise there is no point.

"DRM"-hobbled garbage

[massysett]

Says the article:

"Every other form of media has gone digital -- music, newspapers, movies,"

True. Music has gone digital, mostly because people take their un-copy-restricted CDs and rip them into MP3s. Then they can use the MP3 on as many computers and devices as they want, give it to friends, and have backups. Newspapers exist as un-copy-restricted HTML pages, which may be printed, sent to friends, and stored digitally without restriction.

What the publishing industry is peddling right now is copy-restricted garbage. It will be locked to a particular computer or device. I can't have backups of the text or lend it to a friend. Often I can't even print it. If the Microsoft operating system that stores the text wipes it out, oh well, go buy another one. Meanwhile the publishing industry salivates at the thought of copy-restricted electronic textbooks that expire after a single semester!

This copy-restricted garbage will not take off. If I want digital content, I'll go for something that does not have these ridiculous restrictions. Such unrestricted media can and will take off, because it has advantages--i.e. it's searchable, and cheap to distribute. For example, Wikipedia is far superior to its dead-tree equivalents for these two reasons alone. Also, the Amazon Shorts model looks promising. But I'll take a dead tree over copy-restricted garbage anyday.