Slashdot Mirror
The eBook, Mark 2
Selanit writes "David Pogue recently published a review of the Sony Reader, under the title Trying Again to Make Books Obsolete. Though he likes the device in general, he concludes that it's not destined to replace the book any time soon. Well worth a read."
The paper book will be obsolete at around the same time as existing technology succeeds in supplanting other more-or-less longstanding mainstays like the pocket knife, the pencil, the match, the internal combustion engine, corrective lenses, transparent glass windows, tumbler locks, zippers, analog clocks, shoes with laces, the wheel -- well, I think you get the idea.
How can a post be modded "overrated" or "underrated" when it hasn't been rated yet?
You do realize the quote you are including already made this joke, only much more subtly, right? Right?
pulp books do not need electricity
That's the only advantage you can think of for traditional books? They also have no DRM; they have to be treated pretty badly before they stop working; they contain both the data and everything necessary to read it.
I have a fifty odd year old book I bought second hand recently. It has one or two holes in it where it got torn up pretty badly. However, I can still read it. I probably couldn't say the same thing about a fifty year old computer text file, as it would pre-date ASCII and likely be written on some old format like a punch card, so I'd probably need to buy some specialist hardware like a punch card reader, then write a program to translate the data into a modern format.
Of course, digitised books have advantages too, such as not taking up space, and being easily searchable. It seems like an ideal format for non-fiction reference books such as encyclopedias and guides, but not very good for fiction.
I guess I'm not the first to figure out that maybe e-books have an uphill battle to market, because a book or two is already portable. Which means that maybe the marketing effort should focus on commercial users of piles of books -- mechanics, doctors, computer technicians, etc. (When I had a service call from Sun recently, the technician was lugging around a laptop to read service manuals.)
you had me at #!
Unfortunately, we won't replace the text book until our professors stop telling us that we have to do questions 1 through 47 on page 394 of the book that comes out with a new edition every other year. I know a few people who bought very few textbooks in university. Many courses are easy to get through without them. Some courses it's impossible without it. Making that decision is quite hard. I know my professors often told us which ones we would need, and which we could do without. Although some of my professors said, "this book is extremely good, and it costs $150, so I'm not going to base the course on it, so don't buy it if you don't have the money, or buy it later after you graduate and have a job".
Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
- resolution
- ease of use
- DRM
there are at least three more things that are big issues, IMO:- cost of readers -- They cost hundreds of dollars.
- expected obsolescence of readers -- probably 2 years until the reader you paid hundreds of dollars for is obsolete
- cost of books -- Most publishers have been selling e-books for the same price as printed books, which is nuts.
The way that e-books have really taken off is in the world of free books -- see my sig.Find free books.
Honestly, the primary uses of Wikipedia by folks in higher ed (faculty, students and staff) are probably 1) settling pop culture arguments that can't be settled via IMDB and 2) doing research about things like Wikipedia. Sorry, but they still haven't figured out a good way to deal with the kooks. Anyone who actually knows something is always going to give up before the kooks, because they almost certainly have better things to do in "real life". The great thing about the internet, of course, is it gives the kooks a sense of community - it's an echo chamber. You see the same thing with the neocons in the Bush administration, talk radio, and here on Slashdot, where a lot of folks are convinced that Linux must count for a third of the desktops out there, and it'll overtake Windows any day now.
I have a fifty odd year old book. . .
.
i.e., a fairly new book (about half of my thousands of books and magazines are between 50 and 100 years old, a few rather older); whereas the standard eternity for computerized gear is three years.
I probably couldn't say the same thing about a fifty year old computer text file, as it would pre-date ASCII
Of course ASCII is moving in on 39 years old and is fairly stable. With a bit of work it's even human translatable, even from certain kinds of computer storage media.
Of course, digitised books have advantages too, such as not taking up space, and being easily searchable. .
And being considerably easier to move. Trust me on this one. Did I mention that I have thousands of books and magazines? I also have thousands of ebooks/documents. They slip into my pocket.
KFG
KFG
>> pulp books do not need electricity
Unless it's dark. And where I live, it's dark about half the time. Farther north, planetary motion is even less compliant with readers' needs. Fix that, and you've got something!
I happen to split my time between web development and book design and typesetting, and I can't imagine that the old, er, analog format can't live in harmony with the new digital formats. I prefer to read print on paper, but I do keep several reference and classic books on my PDA. I don't find them as easy on the eyes, but that's details -- the fact is, I have more data than I could ever carry in print form in a little box the size of my wallet, and I can refer to it when the chips are down (the U.S. Constitution is getting quite a workout these days, for example). And if I have something digitally that I'm reading at home on paper, I can wait out a dentist or something and just move my physical bookmark when I get home. Moreover, you can't run a global search on a hardcover from the library. But you can hold it and smell it and enjoy all the tactile magnificence of a well-manufactured book.
Working in publishing, I hear a lot of either/or -- people strongly believe that the advent of eBooks spells the end of print books. They can live together and compliment each other, as long as the proponents of each don't think the other is a mortal threat to their bottom line. No different from a lot of other digital-vs-analog arguments, really. People freak out far too easily when they think something that will compliment their industry will actually replace it. Whereas the smart people (read: the ones who will still be there at the end) get involved in both.
It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
Paper books have a pretty solid copyright protection built in, which is circumventable only through extensive effort and then the copied result is generally of much lower quality than the original.
If you give a paper book to someone, you no longer have it.
This signature intentionally left blank