B & N Nook labelled "Unrevolutionary"

[DMcCunney]

Originally Posted by kennyc

ah the ol' glass half-full or half-empty thing.

Yep.

So very true. I guess my thought on this though is that it's not more likely to generate a sale than would be the ability to download or read an excerpt from the book. I suspect that most readers would read the book (i.e. finish it) and not bother to purchase it themselves. Currently like borrowing from the library. In some case of course it would result in an additional sale, but probably not as many as from the excerpt kind of thing.

I think the "one-time" lone thing is messed up.

I think the reasoning is that lending once may not generate a sale, as the person the book is lent to may read then not buy a copy of their own. But the likely biggest form of marketing for any book is personal recommendations, and if I like the book well enough to think you will too and lend it to you, you may then like the book well enough, and two people will be saying to their friends "You gotta read this!" That, the publisher hopes, will generate sales.
______
Dennis

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by DawnFalcon

Yea, but per Baen, that can generate sales of other titles by the same author and other titles in the same series (even if by different authors).

True.

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by DMcCunney

Yep.


I think the reasoning is that lending once may not generate a sale, as the person the book is lent to may read then not buy a copy of their own. But the likely biggest form of marketing for any book is personal recommendations, and if I like the book well enough to think you will too and lend it to you, you may then like the book well enough, and two people will be saying to their friends "You gotta read this!" That, the publisher hopes, will generate sales.
______
Dennis

Also true.....this if probably the biggest reason most people buy a book. Personal recommendations and good reviews.

[ahi]

Originally Posted by jasonkchapman

flaws as seen from the perspective of the paper-only crowd, that is.

Are you suggesting that:

• poor contrast,
• poor resolution,
• poor refresh rate,
• poor content quality,
• poor content selection,
• and artificial limitations on the full exercise of the rights of ownership, among other things

are just in paper book readers' heads?

- Ahi

[Kali Yuga]

Originally Posted by ahi

Are you suggesting that [a list of flaws] are just in paper book readers' heads?

If he won't, I will. To a limited extent.

I have a fairly new device; contrast, resolution, refresh rate are fine.

Content selection is improving constantly. The more momentum ebooks get, and the more big retailers get into the ebook game, the more content will be available.

Content quality (i.e. proofreading) can use some improvement. I've seen my fair share of poorly formatted documents, but I've also read many books -- rather obscure titles I might add -- that were properly formatted and proofread. Again, I expect that as ebooks gain more market share (and/or as more users complain about it), publishers and retailers will wise up about this.

As for DRM, obviously "none" is better. However, the ability to lend out a DRM'ed ebook definitely restores a key right to users. And since we're talking about digital products, the entire process is "artificial," so I don't see that as a valid characterization. Even if you want to get rid of DRM altogether, you'd have to be slightly bitter and/or cranky in order to think this is a bad thing.

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by ahi

Are you suggesting that:

• poor contrast,
• poor resolution,
• poor refresh rate,
• poor content quality,
• poor content selection,
• and artificial limitations on the full exercise of the rights of ownership, among other things

are just in paper book readers' heads?

- Ahi

So please enlighten me. Why are you here?

[DMcCunney]

Originally Posted by Kali Yuga

Content quality (i.e. proofreading) can use some improvement. I've seen my fair share of poorly formatted documents, but I've also read many books -- rather obscure titles I might add -- that were properly formatted and proofread. Again, I expect that as ebooks gain more market share (and/or as more users complain about it), publishers and retailers will wise up about this.

We hope. Poor production quality is not specific to ebooks. Current ebook volumes are normally derived from the same manuscript as the printed version, and will have the same proofreading or lack of it. What we are suffering from currently are moves by some publishers to cut expenses by not doing things like proofreading. A spell check on the manuscript is deemed sufficient.

Where it can really bite in ebooks are things like Amazon Kindle editions. When enough people click the "I'd like to read this book in a Kindle edition" button to convince Amazon to try to make one, an electronic source file may not exist. The Kindle edition will be created by by scan and OCR of a paper copy. Copy editing and proofreading generally aren't done. Cost savings again...
______
Dennis

[Kali Yuga]

Originally Posted by kennyc

So please enlighten me. Why are you here?

By the way, while I don't necessarily agree with Ahi, I fully support his right to critique ebooks and contribute to discussions.

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by DMcCunney

We hope. Poor production quality is not specific to ebooks. Current ebook volumes are normally derived from the same manuscript as the printed version, and will have the same proofreading or lack of it. What we are suffering from currently are moves by some publishers to cut expenses by not doing things like proofreading. A spell check on the manuscript is deemed sufficient.

Where it can really bite in ebooks are things like Amazon Kindle editions. When enough people click the "I'd like to read this book in a Kindle edition" button to convince Amazon to try to make one, an electronic source file may not exist. The Kindle edition will be created by by scan and OCR of a paper copy. Copy editing and proofreading generally aren't done. Cost savings again...
______
Dennis

Yep, definitely some potential issues with this, particularly with older "classic" books that were not processed/developed as books currently are.
One cool thing about these though is that they are generally in the public domain and the good people (like our wonderful book uploaders here) that have an interest (read: obsession ). With these spent their valuable time creating, proofing, and editing them to share with everyone!

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by Kali Yuga

By the way, while I don't necessarily agree with Ahi, I fully support his right to critique ebooks and contribute to discussions.

As do I, but as I said I'm just looking for a better understand as to where he's coming from.

[Haesslich]

Originally Posted by ahi

Are you suggesting that:

• poor contrast,
• poor resolution,
• poor refresh rate,
• poor content quality,
• poor content selection,
• and artificial limitations on the full exercise of the rights of ownership, among other things

are just in paper book readers' heads?

- Ahi

Hmm. Let me pick up my paper book to compare it to those features.

• Contrast: This depends on the quality of the paper. Some have great contrast; others using more 'artsy' designs or poorer paper, aren't as good. I've got a few with printing errors from the publisher which have awful contrast ratios.
• Resolution: Depends on the book again. Most have good resolution, and compared to an eBook reader in the store they've got better resolution than an iPod Touch when it comes to reading, or many PDA's. Pictures also look fairly good on them, albeit in grayscale.
• Refresh Rate: This page isn't refreshing... ah, a zero-frame-per-second refresh rate. This paper book's refresh rate is awful! Turning the page takes a second! What a gyp!
• Poor Content Quality: Well, this Maxim magazine sure has some poor content. This National Enquirer ditto, and damn... why do so many of these paper books SUCK with content quality? The printing errors are horrible!
• Poor Content Selection: Yes, this eBook Reader has horrible content selection. I mean, all these books from Amazon just don't exist on the Kindle... and you can't get anything from major publishers, nor can you get new books like that new Dan Brown tale. I think it's called The Secret Code or something...
• Artificial Limitations on Full Exercise of the Rights of Ownership: I'm sure the people of Singapore, Saudi Arabia, Malaysia, and other strict Islamic nations (or countries run under dictatorships) would agree with you that there aren't any artificial limitations on the rights of ownership. Hell, there are two people in Halifax, N.S., Canada, who were sentenced for possessing illegal materials (manga), who'd agree with you that there aren't any artificial limitations on the full rights of ownership given that the judge ruled that owning manga depicting certain activities was illegal.

I suspect some of those issues are JUST in your head, yes. Many of these things aren't just issues with eBooks or eBook readers.

[pilotbob]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

I have to agree that the Nook is not revolutionary. The revolutionary reader was the Sony Libre as it was the first commercially available eink reader.

Was the Libre eInk? I thought the PRS500 was the first eInk device.

BOb

[AnemicOak]

Originally Posted by pilotbob

Was the Libre eInk? I thought the PRS500 was the first eInk device.

BOb

Libre was eInk.


Librie, the 500 and the Hanlin v2 all came out in '06 IIRC. Not sure which was first, but the 500 didn't come out until Sept or Oct.

EDIT: It looks like the Librie actually came out in 2005 so it's the first AFAIK.

[pilotbob]

Originally Posted by AnemicOak

Libre was eInk.

Yep, just checked that... I had thought that was an LCD device.

BOb

[Avarwen]

Originally Posted by ahi

Are you suggesting that:

• poor contrast,
• poor resolution,
• poor refresh rate,
• poor content quality,
• poor content selection,
• and artificial limitations on the full exercise of the rights of ownership, among other things

are just in paper book readers' heads?

- Ahi

You have to take into account that ebooks have only just become TRULY mainstream. Before this improving on problems was more then likely not though about much. Seeing as how not many people were buying ebooks. Again I'll use MP3 players as an example. The first players had boring old school screens that only displayed the song title that was playing and menu that only displayed basic info. That was good when MP3 players first came out and not many people owned them. But as more people got into them MP3 players had to evolve to meet consumers needs.

Ereaders are the same as more people buy them ereaders will have to change in order to get more users. Give it time I don't think we are too far off from an affordable and much improved ereader.