HI Billy, > Some kinds of books are best ( by FAR, almost infinitely far in "hard" format.
While I agree in principle, I find your choice of examples confusing. > Atlases are an obvious example. Atlases almost always are oversize > and, even when they are not, the level of detail available in high resolution > print exceeds > the best that computers can offer. And atlases, if they are professional, > require display > of hundreds or even thousands of place names per "page." Huh? Last I checked, all those atlases you rave about are produced on computers. That means that somewhere is a database and digital versions of all the information you enjoy reading in Atlases. If your point is that current e-readers are a poor substitute for an oversized, high-quality print book, I would agree 100%. But if you think that is an *intrinsic* advantage of print, I think your fooling yourself. Within five years there will be high-quality, large-screen, interactive displays that will put the best printed graphics to shame. *Especially* for data-driven documents like atlases, where physical constraints are excessively limiting. What you really want is to have all the raw information at your fingertips, so you can seamless scan across large scales and still zoom down to infinitely low-levels of detail. The eventual experience for a well-designed digital atlas (NOT mere Google Maps) should massively outperform both the economics and experience of their analog cousins. > History books are another. After all, random access is not a frill for an > historian, > in a discipline that rests on a foundation of cross-referencing and comparing > information about one era of time ( in chapter 3, say ) with information about > another era ( chapter 8 ) or even still another ( chapter 12 ). As well, the > way > any historical works, you are constantly comparing --or "mining"-- > information > from one book and another and another simultaneously ; it is very rare when > sequential information searches are relevant to an historian's task, which is > synthesizing information. Chronicle --one fact after another-- is the task > of > for example, a clerk of records, or maybe of a genealogist, but that is not > "history." > And art history is another example since an art historian ( can be a museum > curator > or art gallery proprietor or an art appraiser, etc ) also needs to make > simultaneous > comparisons on a regular basis. I completely agree, the current e-reader experience is vastly inferior to having a handful of books you know by heart open on a table before you. But again, that's a limitation of current technology, not a core advantage of paper. Even now, having a bunch of web pages and PDFs open on a computer -- while a worse tactile experience -- provides infinitely more information than even the best-stocked physical library. I completely agree we need better interaction models to handle the kinds of cross-referencing serious scholars want to do. And I too mourn the loss of page numbers as both a tactile and cognitive help in finding information. You're right, nobody is even attempting to tackle these sorts of issues right now. But where you see that as apparently some sort of major limitation, I see it as an opportunity for innovation... -- Ernie P. > > This manifestly does not say that e-texts / e-visuals are useless, the exact > opposite > is the case. The point is that for at least these fields there is no > substitute for > hard copy books. Have all the e-books you may want, but you cannot > live without hard copy atlases or history books or art history volumes. > And I would guess this is true for a good number of other disciplines. > > Then there is the nature of books sold. A really large segment of the book > trade > consists of types of books that, personally, I find utterly worthless. > > Take romance novels . How can anyone spend even 1 minute reading such crap ? > Yet the "Romance" category is a major seller in the book trade, and has > always been. > This is also true for mystery novels, about which I can understand something > of > their appeal, and for some people the same may be true for Westerns, or > sci-fi, but, still , mostly the books in question have little objective value. > > Sure, Louis L'Amor was a terrific writer, one of the greats in the history of > fiction, and > only an idiot would say that Mark Twain has little to say that is worth > reading, or > X number of other fiction authors of note. But this is like the popular music > business : > Either you are a top rated star or you are nobody, there is no middle ground. > > The question that matters most for book publishing would seem to be this : > How can you tell which types of books will retain their value into the future > ? > The corollary is : Which types of books are best read ( or looked at ) > in hard copy format vs e-book format ? > > "Real books," for me, offer objective value in terms of valuable information > presented or > outstanding literary merit ( think Dostoevsky or Shakespeare ). The rest > are fluff --or garbage-- with no objective value at all. > > All of this said, one of my heroes, Henri Saint-Simon , was addicted to cheap > novels > and was Dostoevsky himself. Maybe I am being too judgmental, but maybe not. > What explains some people's fascination with trash fiction ? There would > seem to > be some sort of lesson worth learning, if the answer could be found out. > > My humble opinion > Billy > > > ============================================== > > > > The Economist > The books business > > Great digital expectations > > Digitisation may have come late to book publishing, but it is transforming > the business in short order > > Sep 10th 2011 > > TO SEE how profoundly the book business is changing, watch the shelves. Next > month IKEA will introduce a new, deeper version of its ubiquitous “BILLY” > bookcase.[ what the heck is that ? Why can't the British speak good English ? > ] The flat-pack furniture giant is already promoting glass doors for its > bookshelves. The firm reckons customers will increasingly use them for > ornaments, tchotchkes [ huh ? ] and the odd coffee-table tome—anything, that > is, except books that are actually read. > > In the first five months of this year sales of consumer e-books in America > overtook those from adult hardback books. Just a year earlier hardbacks had > been worth more than three times as much as e-books, according to the > Association of American Publishers. Amazon now sells more copies of e-books > than paper books. The drift to digits will speed up as bookshops close. > Borders, once a retail behemoth, is liquidating all of its American stores. > > Having started rather late, books are swiftly following music and newspapers > into the digital world. Publishers believe their journey will be different, > and that they will not suffer the fate of those industries by going into slow > decline. Publishers’ experience will, indeed, be different—but not > necessarily better. > > In some ways the transition from paper to digital distribution is a boon. > E-books currently have high profit margins, and are free from many of the > drawbacks of print. Peter Osnos, the founder of PublicAffairs Books, says the > biggest challenge small publishers face is managing their inventories. Print > too many books, and lots of them will be returned by stores. Print too few > and publishers will forgo sales while they order reprints (at higher prices). > None of these problems exists when distributing books digitally. > > Bodice ripping > > Romance novels and crime blockbusters have proved particularly popular on > e-readers, perhaps because it is difficult to tell from across the aisle of a > bus whether someone is reading a bodice-ripper or Dostoevsky on their Kindle. > Donna Hayes, chief executive of Harlequin (which owns Mills & Boon), says > digitisation has given new life to old books. Serialised romance novels > generally have a shelf life of just four weeks. Now many are easily > available: Harlequin has digitised more than 13,000 of its books. The firm > has begun to publish some romances as e-books only, gauging customers’ > appetite for them before taking some into print. > > Yet these advantages are outweighed by several looming hazards. The first is > piracy. Digital-book files are tiny—much smaller than a film, and not even as > big as a music album. Book readers may be an unusually honest lot, but they > are not above getting stuff for nothing. E-books routinely pop up on > file-sharing websites like the Pirate Bay, both in their own right and as > part of vast anthologies with names like “2,500 Retail Quality E-books”. The > example of countries such as Spain suggests that media piracy can become > entrenched even among the middle-aged. In Russia, e-book piracy is already > rampant. > > Piracy is a particular threat because of a second, bigger problem: the > apparently arbitrary nature of e-book pricing. When Amazon began selling > e-books, it charged $9.99 for many of them, often selling at a loss to fire > Kindle sales. Gradually it became clear that Amazon was undermining the > perceived value of all books, digital and paper alike. So, last year, the > biggest publishers used the release of Apple’s iPad to push Amazon into > “agency” pricing. Publishers now set their own prices and give about 30% of > the sale to Amazon. > > That has meant higher prices for many new e-books. As some prices rise, > though, a tide of free and cheap product is flooding the market. > Self-published novelists, keen for attention and without agents or publishers > to share the proceeds with, often sell their works extremely cheaply. > Meanwhile publishers have moved to offer introductory discounts on some > books. As a result, Amazon’s list of 100 best-selling books has become a > pricing free-for-all. This week 21 books were selling for just 99 cents. > Others were priced at $4.98, $7.59 and $8.82. The most expensive single book, > at $16.99, was Dick Cheney’s memoir. There is none of the clarity of iTunes > in its early years, when the price of music tracks was fixed at 99 cents. > > Publishers point out that books have always sold for a wide variety of > different prices. Hardback books cost more than high-quality paperbacks, > which cost more than small, mass-market paperbacks—and everything is more > expensive than a dog-eared library book. But those books are physically > different from each other. E-books all look the same. And the popularity of > those 99-cent thrillers suggests readers are more price-sensitive, and less > quality-sensitive, than publishers care to admit. > > Another problem is Amazon’s market dominance. The firm accounts for less than > a quarter of physical book sales (see box). But Amazon sells 60-70% of > e-books in America and perhaps 90% in Britain, according to estimates by > Enders Analysis, a British outfit. In America, Barnes & Noble’s Nook is the > main competitor. Surprisingly, given the success of the iPad, Apple’s > iBookstore has lagged. James McQuivey of Forrester Research found in a survey > that only half of iPad owners read e-books—and two-thirds of them own or plan > to buy an e-reader especially for the purpose. Amazon appears set to launch a > tablet computer to take on the iPad. And Amazon is becoming a publisher in > its own right. It has a romance imprint, and has signed big writers like > Timothy Ferriss, author of “The 4-Hour Workweek”. This tightens its grip over > the e-book market. > > A book in the window > > Perhaps the biggest problem, though, is the gradual disappearance of the shop > window. Brian Murray, chief executive of HarperCollins, points out that a > film may be released with more than $100m of marketing behind it. Music > singles often receive radio promotion. Publishers, on the other hand, rely > heavily on bookstores to bring new releases to customers’ attention and to > steer them to books that they might not have considered buying. As stores > close, the industry loses much more than a retail outlet. Publishers are > increasingly trying to push books through online social networks. But Mr > Murray says he hasn’t seen anything that replicates the experience of > browsing a bookstore. > > Efforts are under way. This week a British outfit called aNobii released a > trial version of a website that it hopes will become a Wikipedia-style > community of book lovers, with an option to buy. The idea has potential. > Amazon’s recommendation engine, although helpful, is rather > impersonal—perhaps the retailer’s second-biggest weakness, after the > resentment publishers feel for it. > > The book business has long been suffused with gloom; Mr Osnos says that > booksellers have faced five or six supposedly fatal challenges during his > career. But this time the challenges are really daunting. Publishers have to > confront many of the problems that have afflicted other media industries that > have gone digital, as well as a few entirely new ones. The next few years > will be a thriller. > > > -- > Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community > <[email protected]> > Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism > Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org -- Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community <[email protected]> Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org
