Quote:
Originally Posted by ficbot
I keep hearing about how worried the publishers are about the ebooks because they think the people who bought ebook readers are the people who used to buy the hardbacks, but I have yet to encounter a single reader for whom this is true. Most ebook readers seem to be one of two types:
1) They did used to buy books, but never/seldom new hardbacks. They used to buy paperbacks, remaindered hardbacks or used book store books
2) They never bought any books and did all their reading from the library or from books they borrowed off other people
|
The poll could use another option: people who buy hardcovers
and ebooks.
I fit that that category. I have a large number of hardcovers, and still buy them. Some are remaindered editions, and some are book club versions, but some are regular trade editions.
For me, ebooks are an
additional format, and not a replacement for paper volumes. I like ebooks because I can carry a library in my pocket, the ability to use them for archival storage, and the fact that some things, like computer tech volumes, are far more useful in a searchable electronic form.
But some things
aren't a good fit for ebooks. I collect some children's books, for example, and have found electronic editions of books illustraded by people like Caldecott and Rackham. They have color illustrations. Current ebook readers using eInk screens don't support color. Sorry, but Arthur Rackham converted to gray scale just doesn't cut it.
Another example are "coffee table" volumes, like some of the photography books put out by people like Aperature. They really need a large display area, and the detail and fidelity provided by things like 300 DPI printing. Again, even for B&W work, extant ereaders simply can't do the work justice.
For folks for whom ebooks are an acceptable solution for everything they read, ebooks might cut into hardcover sales. I'm not one of them.
______
Dennis