BookONO wants to be a Calibre alternative

[Istvan diVega]

Originally Posted by EowynCarter

calibre is unusable for me.

Can I ask what makes it unusable for you? I usually use it only in the most basic way possible myself (drop in book, edit details/convert format as needed, end of story), so I can't really see what might make it unusable to someone else.

[Mivo]

Competition is generally good, but this is a clear "don't change a winning team" situation for me. Calibre (plus CC and the plugins) does everything I need, and probably a lot more that I haven't even tapped into.

I can't think of anything that it could offer that would make me want to switch.

[Katsunami]

Originally Posted by Istvan diVega

Can I ask what makes it unusable for you? I usually use it only in the most basic way possible myself (drop in book, edit details/convert format as needed, end of story), so I can't really see what might make it unusable to someone else.

I can't speak for EowynCarter of course, but I've seen (and heard) many discussions about Calibre go like this:

New e-reading dude: "How would I manage all these books? Is there something like Windows Media Player or iTunes that can do it?"
Old e-reading dude: "Use Calibre. It's a great e-book manager and it converts to anything you want."
New e-reading dude: *install Calibre... start program....*
New e-reading dude: WTF@#$!#%#, I can't use that! It's ugly! And it looks old!

*uninstall*

Then, after trying "alternatives" such as Kobo Desktop, ADE, Sony Reader, Kindle for PC, maybe some others, or even just folders and drag-and-drop, they (grudgingly) return to Calibre as soon as they need metadata changed, or books converted, or something must be de-DRM'd... or anything else beside reading the book.

When I started e-reading at first, Calibre was just starting out as well (2007), but it was not very powerful yet. I actually quit e-reading because there weren't any (adequate) tools tools to edit or manage existing books, at least not in my opinion.

I first looked into the software available before getting my second e-reader in 2011 (Kindle Touch this time), mainly because I wanted to de-DRM stuff, and Calibre actually surprised me a great deal. Its only disadvantage is that it doesn't look good, but that one goes for a lot of open source software IMHO... and I don't care for looks, if the software gets done what needs to be done.

[OtterBooks]

It was only a matter of time, really. There will be others. I wouldnt even be surprised if we see an application developed by a large firm with big resources.

[EowynCarter]

Originally Posted by Istvan diVega

Can I ask what makes it unusable for you? I usually use it only in the most basic way possible myself (drop in book, edit details/convert format as needed, end of story), so I can't really see what might make it unusable to someone else.

Basicly, it lack the possibility for user to said where the file are, how they should be named.
And it's a must have for me. So i just don't use calibre, but some DIY program. Won't do as much as calibre, but will do what me myself and I want / need.

[jlynton]

BookONO may be to literature what YokoONO has been to music, vurtually insignificant!

[DiapDealer]

The ability for users to use their own pre-existing, personalized directory structures and filenames (without duplication upon import to library management software) is one that some people seem to find very important. Have for quite a while. I don't share that need (and have no idea how big of a demographic they represent), but the desire for that ability is real nonetheless. And for better or worse, it IS quite clear that calibre is probably not going to move in that direction. That's not a judgement, that's an observation.

So I see no reason not to be happy for those people that someone may have taken up their cause and created a library management system that satisfies their needs -- regardless if it continues to use calibre for the (optional) non-library management features that already seem to work perfectly well for them, should they want to use them.

[Katsunami]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

The ability for users to use their own pre-existing, personalized directory structures and filenames (without duplication upon import to library management software) is one that some people seem to find very important. Have for quite a while. I don't share that need (and have no idea how big of a demographic they represent), but the desire for that ability is real nonetheless. And for better or worse, it IS quite clear that calibre is probably not going to move in that direction. That's not a judgement, that's an observation.

For me, it depends on the program and the media in it. Take music for example. I have all of it in a directory structure:

\Music\Artist\Album [Genre]\Disk 1-5\01 - Title.flac.

The stuff is tagged correctly to the last bit (as far as I can see). I use Foobar to play that music. The only thing I do is to point Foobar to the \Music folder. It reads the folder, and creates a database with tags. If I find a song and want to play it, Foobar plays it, and that's that. Should I need or want to have some metadata inside the song changed, I change it (inside the song), and have Foobar update its database. (So it works exactly the other way around as compared to Calibre.) Same if I have a new album. I rip it to FLAC, tag it, drop it into the folder, and have Foobar take a look at it for the metadata. Done.

However, if one wants to have a library of FLAC files (for the audio system), MP3's (for in the car) and AAC (for the iPod), Foobar's way of working becomes very cumbersome: if you change metadata, you need to change it in three places.

Calibre does exactly that: it needs to keep track of several different files, all having the same metadata. It needs to be able to convert from one format to another. It needs to be able to keep those conversions somewhere. If the metadata changes, it must not only change for one file, but possibly also for 15 conversions. If that happens, would Calibre need to change the metadata in the base files, and then reconvert? That would be inefficient. It's much better that it stores all files by itself and manages them in the background, and keeping a database with all information needed. It's more efficient.

That said, I don't want to be 100% dependent on Calibre. First, I also save the "raw" de-DRM'd original file. Second, I now have a workflow that provides me with a fixed/optimized version of every book I acquire, seperate from the one in the Calibre library.

If you are interested in that workflow...

Spoiler:

1. I have a Calibre library called "Workplace". All books I acquire go there. Before doing anything, I save them to disk, so I have a de-DRM'd version. I stash that away safely.

2. I use Modify EPUB to take out all stuff like DRM artifacts, destroy built-in fonts (which I hate), remove any non-DC metadata, and so on. I then consider the file to be clean.

3. I fix the tags, authors, titles, series, series index, publication date and so on... all the basic stuff I want to have correct. After that is correct, I use Polish Books to update the metadata in the books.

4. I save the books to a folder on the hard drive. ("Update Metadata on export" is turned off. I don't want Calibre doing that behind my back.) Everything is also renamed to:

"\Lastname, Firstname\Series [Index]\Lastname, Firstname - Series [Index] - Title.epub"

5. In this folder, I make a quick run of the books and fix the layout where necessary using Sigil. With many bought books nowadays, that comes down to removing whitespace between paragraphs and maybe updating the cover to a better one.

6. Last, I remove the books from the Workplace library, and import the books from disk again (the ones I just ran through Sigil, obviously). If all is well, I move them to my main Calibre library.

So, the books in the save/import are the fixed/optimized versions of the original files, and they are the basis for my Calibre library. They go into a backup folder. Calibre or Sigil will never touch them again, except if I have a very good reason for that.

This seems a lot of work, but it really isn't, if the original books don't need a lot of fixing with Sigil. I mostly acquire books in series, so Calibre's plugins and bulk metadata change takes care of most of the work. Running the books throuhg Sigil takes me maybe 30 seconds per book.

The end result:
1. Original file without DRM (never used again, normally)
2. To my liking optimized/Fixed original file (never used again, normally)
3. That file, and all conversions, in the Calibre database

And I have backups of all three.

===

After the books are in my main Calibre library, I couldn't care less what Calibre does to them. If anything goes wrong with one or more of those books, I can just re-import them from my base files, including all metadata that is most important to me.

This way, I have all advantages: everything Calibre provides *and* a completely clean Calibre-independent base library. The only three things in those books that refers to Calibre are the meta-data tags for series, index, and dc:contributor which is set to "Calibre <version>". If another program that I may use in the future does not read the series and index tags, then they'll be ignored.

[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by AlbertaCowboy

Not just big shoes to fill, but also socks, pants, shirt and hat!

I know it is fashionable these days for celebrities to go out in public without underwear, but... Eeewwwww!

[DiapDealer]

@Katsunami: I know the technical reasons/benefits behind why calibre has chosen the unyielding, underlying structure it has. And I happen to agree with the decision Kovid made and the direction he took. It works for me. But that doesn't preclude me from recognizing that others may have valid needs that aren't currently being satisfied by that decision. Or from being pleased that options that will satisfy those people might be forthcoming.

[Katsunami]

I understand that you understand; I already knew that

It's just that with some programs I prefer a folder structure (as with FooBar, as I use only one music format), and with others I prefer a library structure (as with Calibre, as it needs to manage at least two formats: my base EPUB, and currently, AZW3 for the Kindle).

I think it's good that you actually can extract "normal" files from Calibre's library without using the program, if you ever need to for some reason. There are some backup programs for example, that stash your backup into a proprietary database, which you can only access using said program. I hate that. If you need that backup, who says you actually have that program available to read it? I'd never trust my data to a program that works in such a fashion.

[Istvan diVega]

Originally Posted by Katsunami

I've seen (and heard) many discussions about Calibre go like this:

Hmmm, I can't say Calibre's looks have ever been a factor in the four or five years I've used it. Like you I don't care about its looks, but looking at it now I don't really think it looks all that bad either. Oh well, their loss I guess and good luck finding something better.

Originally Posted by EowynCarter

Basicly, it lack the possibility for user to said where the file are, how they should be named.
And it's a must have for me. So i just don't use calibre, but some DIY program. Won't do as much as calibre, but will do what me myself and I want / need.

I'm still not sure I quite understand, since I can decide myself where the Calibre library is located. Or do you mean you want to have files located in numerous locations and have them all appear as a unified library?

File names I understand, although since I have full control of how the files are named once they're exported I have trouble seeing how it can matter particularly much. But then that's just from my own perspective.

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

The ability for users to use their own pre-existing, personalized directory structures and filenames (without duplication upon import to library management software) is one that some people seem to find very important.

Thanks, I can see how that might be a feature one would want. I share that desire very strongly in regards to readers, where I absolutely need a prospective new reader to support folders. In the case of Calibre I've never actually thought about it at all, but that's probably because I began using it at the same time that I began ereading. Hence I never had a large, established collection that I needed to import.

In any case Calibre is the one and only decent ebook management programs I'm aware of, so a little competition and diversification can only be good and I agree it should be welcomed.

[AlbertaCowboy]

Originally Posted by fjtorres

I know it is fashionable these days for celebrities to go out in public without underwear, but... Eeewwwww!

Hey, Calibre hasn't worn underwear since it met Alf...

[Katsunami]

Originally Posted by Istvan diVega

Thanks, I can see how that might be a feature one would want. I share that desire very strongly in regards to readers, where I absolutely need a prospective new reader to support folders.

I had the same thought. Therefore I never put a lot of books onto my Kindle; it is just not possible to choose a book based on the author, title, and series.

A few days ago I decided to look into the catalog option of Calibre, just because I had never used it before. It generates a book of everything you select in your library.

You can browse that catalog by author, genre/tags, seies, read book descriptions, and so on. After you find the book you want to read, you can search for it by searching for the author's name and one or two words from the title.

That catalog is *almost* having Calibre on the device itself.

I like it so much that I've put all my currently unread books onto the reader, together with a catalog that lists all those books.

(I have created a custom column with book lengths, such as "A: 1-100 (Short Stories), and have it included in the book's description. The exact page count is put into the book's title, using a plugboard. That way, I even have this information available without actually opening the book.)

[wundrbee]

It took me forever to learn how to use Calibre, and set up my books to my liking. Why worry about the file structure. I understand why it's set up the way it is.

You can access your books from the application, filter the view, etc...and when you find what you like you just tell calibre where to put it on your device. There is no need to access the file structure where the books are stored.

I just don't see this new program catching up to Calibre anytime soon. Even if it did, Calibre works just fine for me. If it's not broke, it doesn't need fixing

Wundrbee