E-book Privilege

Feb 02, 2010 09:30


I’ve been thinking about e-books a lot lately, for some reason.  (Amazon still hasn’t restored Macmillan titles, last I checked.)  In particular, there’s a debate in the SFWA Lounge about the shift from printed books to electronic.

I think we’re in a very dynamic time.  E-books are changing, and we’re waiting to see who’s going to be the dinosaurs ( Read more... )

publishing

Leave a comment

cathshaffer February 2 2010, 14:42:04 UTC
I don't think paperback books are going to "go away," but I think a lot of people misunderstand how fast the media can change. There are millions of cell phones in-hands already that can handle ebook formats. A dedicated ebook reader is only one of several options for reading ebooks.

As for people not being able to afford them--how many people do you know that do not have a TV? How many people do you know who have not upgraded to some kind of HD TV? And the cost of electronic devices does come down pretty fast. I just gave my mother an MP3 player for Christmas that cost $30. That device is technically capable of displaying an ebook, as well, though I wouldn't want to read on its screen. I think we need to imagine and prepare for a world where ebooks are popular and common, and not artificially dominated by any one format or supplier.

Reply

suricattus February 2 2010, 14:45:40 UTC
The thought of reading an entire book on my phone... no thanks. Short fiction and e-mail and essays and newspapers, yes. An entire book? I'd have a raging headache before chapter three.

Reply

cathshaffer February 2 2010, 14:48:24 UTC
So?

Reply

suricattus February 2 2010, 14:52:14 UTC
So, I'm hardly alone in that, and therefore there is a large percentage of the worldwide population to whom cell phone reading isn't an option, requiring the purchase of a separate ebook reader.

You brought the subject up; I was merely responding with a different datapoint.

Reply

oldcharliebrown February 2 2010, 14:59:36 UTC
Going by the fact that Harlequin is doing gangbusters on selling short novels for the Iphone / Touch, I have to think that there is already broader appeal to reading material on smaller devices.

Reply

autopope February 2 2010, 15:06:20 UTC
There were doubtless objectors in the 1920s when the first cheap paperback bindings came in, who thought reading small print on cheap paper would hurt their eyes.

These things become normalized over time. I've read an entire book on my iphone; I've been reading ebooks on PDAs since about 1997, when the display quality was infinitely worse than it is today.

Reply

cathshaffer February 2 2010, 15:10:46 UTC
For one thing, you should try it. I thought I would never want to or be able to read a book on a cell phone, but once I tried it, it wasn't so bad. You never need a bookmark, it has its own light, and you can make the font as big as you like. I like ereaders better, but I'm not going to pay $249 for one. I did buy one for my husband and he LOVES it. Ultimately, it will be a lot like a toaster or a blender or an espresso machine--not out of reach for the average person and an enjoyable indulgence for people who loves books. We'll probably see a mix of people who read on cell phones, people who read on something like an ereader or an ipad, people who read on their computers, and people who only read paper books. The question is how fast? I think it could happen pretty darn fast. As Jim said, there's already been a shift in places like Japan that are less conservative about taking up new technology ( ... )

Reply

suricattus February 2 2010, 15:17:35 UTC
For one thing, you should try it.

You start from the assumption that I haven't. I have. I use my G1 to read a great deal of material. Just not for anything longer than a few screens.

And you also assume that I'm not interested in ebooks -- I am. I read them on my netbook, because I haven't decided which e-reader I will buy, once I can afford one.

I am also a member of BookView Cafe, which is specializing in making work available on-line, directly from the authors.

It is quite possible to say "I think you're wrong" with some actual experience in the topics being discussed.

Reply

cathshaffer February 2 2010, 15:32:27 UTC
But I'm not wrong. :-) Not trying to argue here. Just saying that your personal preferences--whatever they may be and whatever they may be based on--don't negate the shift that is happening in the technology and the markets. I'm sorry if it sounds like I'm making assumptions or whatever.

Reply

jimhines February 2 2010, 14:52:26 UTC
You and me both. Don't know if that's a generational thing or what. On the other hand, I'm told that in Japan, cell phone books are not making major bestseller lists...

Reply

jimhines February 2 2010, 14:51:36 UTC
"How many people do you know that do not have a TV? How many people do you know who have not upgraded to some kind of HD TV?"

Very few, but that's kind of my point. The people I usually interact with fall into the broad category of "like me." Just as most of the debates and discussions on the issue.

It's a trap I fall into a lot. I start to see the online/blog discussions as representative of readers or the SF/F community as a whole, but it's not. My guess is that it's still a minority, for the most part.

"And the cost of electronic devices does come down pretty fast."

True. I do think e-books are going to continue to grow and take a larger market share. But I don't see it going anywhere near 100% as some folks propose.

Reply

matociquala February 2 2010, 14:54:49 UTC
Hi. I don't have an HD-TV, or even a digital one, and I have no plans to buy one. For at least ten years, I didn't have a TV at all.

And many of my friends are in the same place.

Seriously. Single-use technology? How 20th century.

Reply

hawkwing_lb February 2 2010, 15:07:27 UTC
The television in our household is about twenty years old and gets five channels. Since it only gets trotted out to play the odd dvd or videogame... What matociquala said.

(Why bother with a television when you can get the stuff on your laptop? So you loose maybe some of the communal aspect of tv-watching. On the other hand, laptop is a far more versatile device, and costs about the same as a mid-range television anyway.)

Reply

cathshaffer February 2 2010, 14:56:38 UTC
Actually, anybody who doesn't have a TV at all doesn't want one. And there aren't many left who haven't made the switch to a high def, even though you can get a converter box for the signal. And cell phones are common even in third world countries where people *really* shouldn't be able to afford them.

Reply

arkessian February 2 2010, 15:06:15 UTC
Cell-phones are common in countries that don't have a fixed-wire infrastructure. But how many of them are being used there as anything other than phones? I don't know...

Reply

akiko February 2 2010, 15:21:21 UTC
I've read stories (in the Economist, frex) about people in, say, Kenya using their mobile phones for paying bills, wiring money, and that sort of thing.

Cell phones can be cheap, and there's little reason to assume that plans cost the same (proportionally or quantitatively) in emerging economies.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up