Kindles yet to woo University users

[davidspitzer]

Originally Posted by ahi

David, I won't reply in detail as I've already ranted too much elsewhere about this topic (eBook quality) elsewhere.

Let me just say that while you are right about the environmental imperative, I think you (and many others) underestimate the possibilities offered by eBook reading devices due to the fundamentally ill-suited formats that most eBooks are offered in (along with the inattention with which they tend to be prepared with regardless of the choice of format).

- Ahi

I am just an eternal optimist ...

[davidspitzer]

Originally Posted by Kali Yuga

It doesn't seem to me like format is even an issue for the students.

The main issues cited by the students et al in the article are technological limitations, unrelated to format, that may be fixable in the future. The readers are slow, are harder to annotate than paper books, and can't be cited using standard page numbers. Not seeing how format has anything to do with these problems.

I also beleive its one of adaptation - I either buy all my school books electronically or make them electronic, whether they want to or not and then I extract salient points into a word document and then load that as a study guide on my ebook reader (circle of life) - it can be done but i think the fallacy is trying to replicate the workflow of a paper book. I beleive you need to stop and reinvent the way one uses books entirely

[dmaul1114]

Originally Posted by davidspitzer

.... it can be done but i think the fallacy is trying to replicate the workflow of a paper book. I beleive you need to stop and reinvent the way one uses books entirely

In that case, I'd stick with my paper books, journals, printouts of journal articles etc. for all my academic works.

I'm not going to change the way I work--ebooks have to be at least as functional for me as paper books or I won't use them. And I'm fine with that since I'm seldom paying for academic books, paper or ink to print them out etc. If something doesn't come along that fits my personal needs/wants, thats fine by me. I won't buy something that doesn't satisfy my needs.

[Hellmark]

Originally Posted by ahi

Depending the content, the 6" screen may be too small to properly set the content period.

But yes, PDF's are an option... but if they are not custom-made for the readers' display size(s), they are (rightly) not a viable product for those with eBook reading devices.

Yes, but the device would technically be able to use it, usefulness is entirely up to the opinion of the user.

Originally Posted by ahi

Also... for some bizarre Twilight Zone reason, today most publishers who take commercial eBooks seriously use something other than PDFs despite the result looking like ... well ... like what it looks like.

For most ebooks, reflow works fine. However, most text books, not so much. I really have no problem with reflow, except when it comes to math text, and similar studies.

[Kali Yuga]

Originally Posted by davidspitzer

I beleive you need to stop and reinvent the way one uses books entirely.

I disagree, mostly because restoring at least some of that functionality is merely a technical challenge, rather than a structural issue.

I see no reason why we need to abandon the idea of, for example, annotating an ebook just because the current crop of ebook readers isn't good at it.

[ahi]

Perhaps I'm unusual in wanting to read books in electronic form, not just eBooks (i.e.: whatever was easy enough to shove into an HTML container with a bare-minimum of effort, attention, forethought or professionalism).

eBooks, as envisioned by the forward-looking, are basically a civilizational step backwards from the ancient development of the scroll.

- Ahi

[davidspitzer]

Originally Posted by dmaul1114

In that case, I'd stick with my paper books, journals, printouts of journal articles etc. for all my academic works.

I'm not going to change the way I work--ebooks have to be at least as functional for me as paper books or I won't use them. And I'm fine with that since I'm seldom paying for academic books, paper or ink to print them out etc. If something doesn't come along that fits my personal needs/wants, thats fine by me. I won't buy something that doesn't satisfy my needs.

but doesn't evolution require change? - many people refused to give up their typewriters when word processors and eventually computers displaced them. It does not mean typewriters were bad or computers were good, its just a new way of doing things. I think most would agree though, except for nostalgic reasons, they would never use a typewriter now instead of computer?

You may not pay for textbooks and paper to print them up, but the forests do and the landfills do. I would not consider myself a treehugger in the classical sense, but iv'e had a realization of late that we have the means to curtail our paper addition, but we simply choose not to becuase it requires a little extra effort on our parts.

The human race show no signs of slowing down in it's population expansion and at the same time we increase our individual gross consumption.

I know its hard; we think that whatever one person does could not possibly make a difference,but if everyone takes the same stance then we are guaranteed not to make a difference. Change is hard, there is no doubt, but if we are all willing to just read that one paper, that one report, that one email, or that one book online instead of printing it, soon we will look back in amazement about how we used to cut down millions of trees a year and lug around reams of paper just to get our daily fix of information

[davidspitzer]

Originally Posted by Kali Yuga

I disagree, mostly because restoring at least some of that functionality is merely a technical challenge, rather than a structural issue.

I see no reason why we need to abandon the idea of, for example, annotating an ebook just because the current crop of ebook readers isn't good at it.

MS word can be said is merely an electronic typewriter, and while they share many traits, the fundamental way they are used and the workflow are vastly different. This is what I mean when I speak about reinventing when it comes to ebooks. Here we are on an ebook site ostensibly all of us ebook pundits, but still many (and I am not inferring you) still resist embracing a change from paper to reader. Think about how many time a week or a day we print out things to paper only to read them and then discard them. With just a little discipline and effort one can accomplish the same thing merely by reading it online, or copying it to your ebook reader.

I don't think annotation should be thrown out but I do believe it may have to be accomplished in a vastly different way then it is done today, given the change in medium and presentation and we should be open to exploring those new ways.

[ahi]

Originally Posted by Kali Yuga

I disagree, mostly because restoring at least some of that functionality is merely a technical challenge, rather than a structural issue.

It seems to me that often the push for reinvention comes strongest from people that have little understanding about how and why old books work (to facilitate ease of reading) to begin with... which ought to worry anybody that thinks the present state of the eBook world has any bearing whatsoever on what is to come.

Originally Posted by davidspitzer

but doesn't evolution require change? - many people refused to give up their typewriters when word processors and eventually computers displaced them. It does not mean typewriters were bad or computers were good, its just a new way of doing things. I think most would agree though, except for nostalgic reasons, they would never use a typewriter now instead of computer?

Correct. People's attitudes about those things don't mean a damn thing.

The typewriter however was a less useful device than a computer's word processor. Objectively.

Originally Posted by davidspitzer

You may not pay for textbooks and paper to print them up, but the forests do and the landfills do. I would not consider myself a treehugger in the classical sense, but iv'e had a realization of late that we have the means to curtail our paper addition, but we simply choose not to becuase it requires a little extra effort on our parts.

The human race show no signs of slowing down in it's population expansion and at the same time we increase our individual gross consumption.

I know its hard; we think that whatever one person does could not possibly make a difference,but if everyone takes the same stance then we are guaranteed not to make a difference. Change is hard, there is no doubt, but if we are all willing to just read that one paper, that one report, that one email, or that one book online instead of printing it, soon we will look back in amazement about how we used to cut down millions of trees a year and lug around reams of paper just to get our daily fix of information

Why do you keep arguing that forest depletion necessitates that people acquiesce to eBooks forever remaining the garbage that they are today? Or is that not your intended point?

- Ahi

[ahi]

Originally Posted by davidspitzer

I don't think annotation should be thrown out but I do believe it may have to be accomplished in a vastly different way then it is done today, given the change in medium and presentation and we should be open to exploring those new ways.

So... the way that it has already been solved and appears to work for people already (as evidenced by comments in this very thread) has to go out the window?

Change for change's sake?

- Ahi

[davidspitzer]

Originally Posted by ahi

It seems to me that often the push for reinvention comes strongest from people that have little understanding about how and why old books work (to facilitate ease of reading) to begin with... which ought to worry anybody that thinks the present state of the eBook world has any bearing whatsoever on what is to come.



Correct. People's attitudes about those things don't mean a damn thing.

The typewriter however was a less useful device than a computer's word processor. Objectively.



Why do you keep arguing that forest depletion necessitates that people acquiesce to eBooks forever remaining the garbage that they are today? Or is that not your intended point?

- Ahi

I did not explain well enough - or perhaps inferred to much. I think that we need to start embracing ebooks, so that the publishers see that there is a profitable market, and then less trees will die and the publishers and the hardware manufacturers will put more effort into making ebooks great as they all scramble for their piece of the money pie

I am not naive I know that real change is driven by supply and demand - My position is that if we generate more demand then the supply will increase in quality as competition ramps.

[dmaul1114]

Originally Posted by davidspitzer

but doesn't evolution require change? - many people refused to give up their typewriters when word processors and eventually computers displaced them. It does not mean typewriters were bad or computers were good, its just a new way of doing things. I think most would agree though, except for nostalgic reasons, they would never use a typewriter now instead of computer?

You may not pay for textbooks and paper to print them up, but the forests do and the landfills do. I would not consider myself a treehugger in the classical sense, but iv'e had a realization of late that we have the means to curtail our paper addition, but we simply choose not to becuase it requires a little extra effort on our parts.

The human race show no signs of slowing down in it's population expansion and at the same time we increase our individual gross consumption.

I know its hard; we think that whatever one person does could not possibly make a difference,but if everyone takes the same stance then we are guaranteed not to make a difference. Change is hard, there is no doubt, but if we are all willing to just read that one paper, that one report, that one email, or that one book online instead of printing it, soon we will look back in amazement about how we used to cut down millions of trees a year and lug around reams of paper just to get our daily fix of information

I'm all for change--if it makes my life/work easier. If it doesn't, then I won't change. People happily moved from type writers to Word Processors as they were much easier to use, easier to edit, cut and paste stuff etc. etc.

For the environmental angle, I just don't care enough. I already try to conserve and I'm very good about recycling everything I can, so I'm not going to lose sleep over paper books, printing out PDFs etc. I keep most of them indefinitely after I mark them up, the ones I don't I'll give away (books) or recycle (printed PDFs). Add in that trees are a renewable resource and I'm just not that concerned.

So it will take e-versions that work as well or better for what I need to do in my work. Working in academia means being constantly busy and I'm not going to embrace any adaptations that make things clunkier and slower.

If I can mark them up just as easily as I can a paper book or article, flip through them quickly etc. then I'll give it a shot.

I have embraced the web and e-books for all my disposable reading--novels, magazines, newspapers etc. No need to waste paper on something I don't need to mark up and will never touch again.

Scholarly works related to my research I need to be able to mark up and keep on the bookshelf or in the file cabinet (printed journal articles) for easy access to marked passages, notes etc. throw the years as I do more research related to those topics etc.

[davidspitzer]

Originally Posted by ahi

So... the way that it has already been solved and appears to work for people already (as evidenced by comments in this very thread) has to go out the window?

Change for change's sake?

- Ahi

I have heard that people are not happy with annotating on ebooks or did i miss something - hence if it is not working then yes there needs to be innovation and perhaps change.

If you are talking about highlighters on paper - then I don't feel that we can assume that that will translate directly to ebooks.

[davidspitzer]

Originally Posted by dmaul1114

I'm all for change--if it makes my life/work easier. If it doesn't, then I won't change. People happily moved from type writers to Word Processors as they were much easier to use, easier to edit, cut and paste stuff etc. etc.

For the environmental angle, I just don't care enough. I already try to conserve and I'm very good about recycling everything I can, so I'm not going to lose sleep over paper books, printing out PDFs etc. I keep most of them indefinitely after I mark them up, the ones I don't I'll give away (books) or recycle (printed PDFs). Add in that trees are a renewable resource and I'm just not that concerned.

So it will take e-versions that work as well or better for what I need to do in my work. Working in academia means being constantly busy and I'm not going to embrace any adaptations that make things clunkier and slower.

If I can mark them up just as easily as I can a paper book or article, flip through them quickly etc. then I'll give it a shot.

I have embraced the web and e-books for all my disposable reading--novels, magazines, newspapers etc. No need to waste paper on something I don't need to mark up and will never touch again.

Scholarly works related to my research I need to be able to mark up and keep on the bookshelf or in the file cabinet (printed journal articles) for easy access to marked passages, notes etc. throw the years as I do more research related to those topics etc.

Yes it is always easier to "get on board" once something has been perfected. I guess my hope was that since this is a forum where ebook enthusiasts exchange ideas that we would be the ones to set the example and take the first steps

Arthur O'Shaughnessy and Willy Wonka

We are the music-makers,
And we are the dreamers of dreams

In order to effect change there have to be a few brave and dedicated souls that are willing to blaze the way so that others will follow

[LDBoblo]

I'd actually prefer if paper producers would stop using their own benign, sustainable forests of bamboo-like trees designed for rapid renewal and would start cutting down some real growth again to improve some of the paper quality. Displace all those silly slash/burners in Africa and South America who are just putting all that good wood to waste. Of course, it'd be nice to make paper out of some other materials too, since some varieties are quite superior to wood-based in terms of durability.

As far as ebooks...the devices suck. They are not good enough for anything outside of a very narrow window of usage. The technology needs to fundamentally improve before feasibility for mass adoption comes into play. There is no need, except when desperate, to adapt to the inferior nature of these devices unless their only 2 advantages are absolutely essential (space conservation, keyword search). I will take a widescreen high-resolution notebook with PDFs long long before I will even consider using any of the e-ink garbage for anything remotely resembling scholarly research. Having to find a power outlet and deal with a backlit LCD (Heaven forbid! A superior screen technology for small text!) are worthwhile for the incredibly massive step up in usability.

Adaptation is necessary, but adaptation to superior methodology and superior technology. The current crop of E-ink readers qualifies as neither. Most of us here are already early adopters in some way; that does not mean we should be in any way contented to reduce our standards and shrug it off with "well we have to adapt!" That's nothing more than a cop-out.

I will use just about anything OTHER than an ebook reader for research. I've had to do research working from bamboo slat scrolls, and I find those to be a superior technology to ebook readers at the moment. In another few generations of device, some of the technological kinks should be ironed out (hopefully not "adapted to" by apologists)...but I'm not going to waste my money on it now.