The future of bookshelves

[taustin]

Originally Posted by QuantumIguana

I don't think they will go the way of vinyl records. Most people couldn't tell if they were listening to a CD, an MP3 or a good quality vinyl record. Hardcore audiophiles might be able to tell the difference, but for most people, the experience is essentially the same. It's obvious whether you are reading a paper book or an e-book. They offer different experiences and people's preferences differ. I do think that the percentage of the market taken by paper books will decrease, but not to the level that vinyl has.

While it's true that most people can't tell the difference betwen a CD, MP3 and LP (including most audio engineers, as it turns out), most people think they can. If you play an LP in front of someone, then play the same song in an MP3 player, they'll tell you the LP sounds so much better. If you play the MP3 while appearing to play the LP, then play the LP while appearing to play the MP3, they'll tell you what they think is the LP sounds better. And they'll mean it. [1]

The same applies to reading. Yeah, some people will enjoy paper books more, but only because they expect to. The reading experience is the same either way, aside from the expectations.

[1] (One test involving wine affcionados had the same bottle of wine poured in to two glasses. Test subjects were told one glass was from a $10 bottle of wine, the other from a $90 bottle. Test subjects drank both glasses while in an fMRI machine, which measured blood flow in the part of the brain that experiences pleasure from taste. The test subjects physically enjoyed the same wine more when they thought it was more expensive.[2])

[2] Audiophiles are the same. People spend hundreds, even thousands of dollars on speaker wire, in the belief that it will sounds better. Bose, a major player in the manufacture of speakers, recommends you go to your local hardware store and buy lamp cord. In double blind tests, audio engineers (and reps from the manufacturers of expensive speaker wire) can't tell the difference between the most expensive speaker wire made and wire coat hangers.

[taustin]

Originally Posted by apbschmitz

As dad to a 25-year-old sorta hipster who buys loads of vinyl that she plays on a retro turntable, I'd bet more heavily on the kids of the future rediscovering the physical book and applying to old fetishizer to it. First editions will be big. Ditto for illustrated books. And bookcases — lookout! They'll have anti-sag reinforcement and glass doors to better concentrate that old musty smell. The proud owner will open the doors and invite guests to inhale the mold of decades past.

Indeed. Paper books will be reduced to a niche market, with nearly all books being published as ebooks only. But, like LPs, that market will never, ever go away. Many recording artists sill release new work on LPs, sometimes on LPs only initially.

[taustin]

Originally Posted by Catlady

But the trend now is a return to vinyl.

The niche for LPs is growing at the moment, but it's still a fraction of a percent of the overall market, and always will be in the future. For every LP sold, there are hundreds of MP3 downloads.

[Kumabjorn]

I would love to see the proof for [2]. I have a friend that spent $12,000 for speaker wires (nope, not a typo). I wouldn't shove it in his face, but I would just love to have that little nugget available in case he gets to be obnoxious about it.

[taustin]

Originally Posted by charlesatan

I'm from a developing country, so while this might be true for privileged nations/citizens, not necessarily the case everywhere in the world.

Even in the "developing world," you will live to see the day when book readers cost less than a single book, especially text books.

[QuantumIguana]

The reading experience on an e-book vs. a paper book is not the same. Some people prefer one, some the other. If those who like paper books only think they like paper books, you could just as easily say that those who like e-books only think they like e-books. You can tell people that the same glass of wine is cheap or it is expensive, but the wine is the same. The e-reader and the paper book aren't the same, it is obvious which is which. We don't have any basis for claiming that those who prefer paper books only think they do.

[teh603]

Originally Posted by taustin

Even in the "developing world," you will live to see the day when book readers cost less than a single book, especially text books.

That would require a device to be made with the developing world in mind. We've seen a few tries- the One Laptop Per Child program, India's attempt at a super-cheap Linux tablet, and the like; but nothing that has really caught on. You also have to deal with illiteracy rates in the developing world.

Back to bookshelves as a whole, without them how will people hide secret doors? Behind expensive tapestries?

[taustin]

Originally Posted by QuantumIguana

The reading experience on an e-book vs. a paper book is not the same.

The reading part is. It's the same words, in the same order, read in the same way.

Originally Posted by QuantumIguana

Some people prefer one, some the other. If those who like paper books only think they like paper books, you could just as easily say that those who like e-books only think they like e-books.

Yes, you could. But if you read the footnote, you'll find that there is objective proof that it isn't a matter of "they think they like xxx more" as it is "they like xxx more because they think they like it more." The expectation produces the greater enjoyment.

Originally Posted by QuantumIguana

You can tell people that the same glass of wine is cheap or it is expensive, but the wine is the same.

And yet, there is proof that people who believe the wine is expensive physically enjoy it more, despite it being the same wine. That's the point.

Originally Posted by QuantumIguana

The e-reader and the paper book aren't the same, it is obvious which is which. We don't have any basis for claiming that those who prefer paper books only think they do.

The book is the wine. The reader, or paper, is the glass the wine is served it. (And, BTW, there is a whole subset of wine culture that believes that the shape of the glass affects the taste, as well. Seriously. And the objective tests show that it's the same thing again: yes, if you get wine in a special glass, you enjoy it more - because you expect to, not because of the special shape of the glass.)

The expectation produces measureable, objective results. People who prefer paper books do enjoy paper books more, in measurable, objective ways. But the source of the enjoyment isn't the paper books, it's the expectation of enjoying paper books more.

Doesn't make it less real, but it's why ebooks are taking over the market - people who get that effect are a small part of the market. To most people, wine is wine, retardless of the shape of the glass (or the cost, over about $3 per bottle, according to survey data - Three Buck Chuck consistently scores as one of the best wines on the market in double blind taste tests), and clever words are words, regardless of whether they are on paper or on a screen.

[5thWiggle]

Originally Posted by Kumabjorn

I would love to see the proof for [2]. I have a friend that spent $12,000 for speaker wires (nope, not a typo). I wouldn't shove it in his face, but I would just love to have that little nugget available in case he gets to be obnoxious about it.

Here you go!

[QuantumIguana]

There's every reason to think that e-readers will get cheaper. Back in 1985, I bought a portable CD player, and it cost $250. Now, you can buy a portable CD player for about $10, less then the cost of a CD. MP3 players can be had pretty cheaply as well.

Of course, more expensive CD and MP3 players sell quite well. So long as someone can deliver added value, people will pay more. But for those who don't care about the added value, there's always the cheaper model.

I think it will be the same for e-readers, there will be a low-priced model, and more expensive ones for people who want additional features.

[taustin]

Originally Posted by teh603

That would require a device to be made with the developing world in mind. We've seen a few tries- the One Laptop Per Child program, India's attempt at a super-cheap Linux tablet, and the like; but nothing that has really caught on.

Does the "developing world" still rely on hand copied manuscripts by monks in monasteries? Or does the "developing world" have mass printed books just like the "developed world"? No, the technology isn't there yet, but it's clearly headed that way. Cell phones are ubiquitious everywhere these days, even some very undeveloped parts of the world, becaus the technology is there, and it is now superior to old land-line technology - there's a lot less infrastructure to build.

Eventually, ebook readers will cost less to make than a - single - paper book to print. Partly, this will be the increasing price of paper books as quantities go down, but mostly, it will be the price of the electronics going down (as they have cnosistently for the last 3/4 of a century). And the needed local infrastructure to produce and distribute ebooks is significantly less than paper books. You have to ship each paper book out to West Nowhere with no roads individually, but an ebook reader can hold thousands of books, and only has to be shipped once. The books can be downloaded over the cell phones they probably already have today.

Originally Posted by teh603

You also have to deal with illiteracy rates in the developing world.

How is that an ebook issue? How is that not exactly the same issue as with paper books?

[taustin]

Originally Posted by Kumabjorn

I would love to see the proof for [2]. I have a friend that spent $12,000 for speaker wires (nope, not a typo). I wouldn't shove it in his face, but I would just love to have that little nugget available in case he gets to be obnoxious about it.

Type "Monster cable vs. " into Google and the top (most popular) search in the auto-fill if "coat hanger."

It produces nearly 10,000 results.

Better yet, set up your own test. Tell him you can get him in to a product test group for a new speaker wire technology (that will retail for even more, say, $50,000 per pair), and if he participates, he gets a free set. And do a double blind test with his current wires and wire coat hanger. And he won't be able to tell the different himself. Or, better yet, a non-double blind test, where you tell him "this is your current wires," and "this is the new technology," and he will be able to tell the difference, and the "new technology" will be better.

If you live in southern California, I'll help you. Seriously. (And if he can tell the difference, I'll give him a wire coat hanger.)

[QuantumIguana]

The wine example is irrelevant to e-books vs. paper books. The wine example only works because you can eliminate every other factor except what the subject thought the price was. You can therefore conclude that the perception of the price was the reason for their preference.

With books, you cannot eliminate the medium on which the books are read, so you can't draw the same conclusion. Words don't just float in the air, they are on some sort of medium. Most people would prefer to read a book on clean white paper vs. reading a book on old yellowed paper. If the medium doesn't matter, they wouldn't prefer one over the other.

We simply cannot conclude that the reason some people prefer paper books over e-books is because they think they like it more. That could only be done if there were some way for the subject to be unaware of whether the book was an e-book or a paper book.

There are many people who did not like to read books on computers, and thought that they would therefore not like an e-reader. Yet on trying an e-reader, they were hooked. If the medium didn't matter, why would they change their mind upon trying a different medium?

[theducks]

Originally Posted by taustin

While it's true that most people can't tell the difference betwen a CD, MP3 and LP (including most audio engineers, as it turns out), most people think they can. If you play an LP in front of someone, then play the same song in an MP3 player, they'll tell you the LP sounds so much better. If you play the MP3 while appearing to play the LP, then play the LP while appearing to play the MP3, they'll tell you what they think is the LP sounds better. And they'll mean it.

Most people can't hear 18KHz let alone 22KHz (the theoretical top limit on regular CD's due to sampling) so they don't miss the lack of overtones. OTOH CD's have better dynamic levels over vinyl discs (no grove deformation).

[2] Audiophiles are the same. People spend hundreds, even thousands of dollars on speaker wire, in the belief that it will sounds better. Bose, a major player in the manufacture of speakers, recommends you go to your local hardware store and buy lamp cord. In double blind tests, audio engineers (and reps from the manufacturers of expensive speaker wire) can't tell the difference between the most expensive speaker wire made and wire coat hangers.

Resistance and Characteristic impedance count most.

Amplifiers (damping factor) driving the wire+Speakers also can have an audible effect. Getting the wrong combinations will be noticeable
(See how easy it is to start a Holy War )

BTW I use 14Ga Low Voltage Lighting Cable

[Kumabjorn]

Originally Posted by taustin

Type "Monster cable vs. " into Google and the top (most popular) search in the auto-fill if "coat hanger."

It produces nearly 10,000 results.

If you live in southern California, I'll help you. Seriously. (And if he can tell the difference, I'll give him a wire coat hanger.)

I'm in Sweden so that would be a geographical challenge. But at least I now have some facts, should he start to breg too much about his expensive cables.