Paper books still have an advantage

[Sirtel]

Originally Posted by John F

I thought that ebooks were published? An author submits a manuscript (something) to a publisher (normally) and the publisher does there magic and publishes it in all it forms: pbook, ebook, abook, braille, ...

By your definition a pbook isn't a book, a pbook requires some sort of device to turn the page?

And what if there is no paper edition? All those indie authors publishing ebooks and saying "I have written/published 5, 10, 15... books"? By this definition, they haven't actually written/published any books at all.

[Quoth]

Originally Posted by Renate

I got microwave this year for 10 Mbps down, 1 Mbps up and I'm grateful.
Before that there have been times that dialup Morse code would have been an improvement.

I consider myself a fairly "hard-core" computer user and still can't think of ways where >10 Mbps would be that much of an improvement for me. (YMMV)

1) There is more than 1 of us.
2) Unlimited is a myth. See Fair Usage. Initially the Microwave link had a 20Gbyte rolling 30 days cap. Then 6OG, then 350Gbyte, no doubt as more users migrated to adsl, vdsl and fibre. The Fibre has a 3500Gbyte "fair use" rolling 30 days. If you occasionally go over likely nothing happens. If you are making a copy of the Internet or selfhosting a popular site, then there are likely to be sanctions.

Mostly the 8/1 Mbyte package and the cap was fine, because none of us watched videos or subscribed to streaming.

I did download a free Steam Game at over 40Gbytes. It was under 10 minutes and could have been 30 days on dial-up. But how much can you download before running out of local storage?

I've considered downloading ALL of Gutenberg and having sync, feasible if you pick one format.

Multiple people in a shared dwelling with HD streaming subs would certainly need fibre.

[ownedbycats]

Originally Posted by Quoth

I did download a free Steam Game at over 40Gbytes. It was under 10 minutes and could have been 30 days on dial-up. But how much can you download before running out of local storage?

Black Desert Online? I know it was recently on giveaway and is around 40gb.

A friend of mine has like 5 terabytes of games on a WD Black. But to be fair, games are getting pretty big these days -- 350 gb for ARK: Survival Evolved, for instance.

[Quoth]

Originally Posted by ownedbycats

Black Desert Online? I know it was recently on giveaway and is around 40gb.

Dota2 60Gbyte space required. MacOS, Linux, Windows
Linux:

Minimum:
OS: Ubuntu 12.04 or newer
Processor: Dual core from Intel or AMD at 2.8 GHz
Memory: 4 GB RAM
Graphics: AMD GCN+, NVIDIA Kepler+, or Intel HD 5000-series or newer
Network: Broadband Internet connection
Storage: 60 GB available space
Sound Card: OpenAL Compatible Sound Card

It was recommended as a more interesting way to see GPU working on Linux than the devkit utilities of Vulkan.

[DNSB]

Originally Posted by Renate

I consider myself a fairly "hard-core" computer user and still can't think of ways where >10 Mbps would be that much of an improvement for me. (YMMV)

For me, streaming and downloading files (some of the files I download are in the 25-50GB range) for system updates, etc. (work has a 2GB up/down speed.) For my wife, streaming and video chats, for the kids, gaming is the bandwidth hog. The latest games on the XBox or PS machines chew up bandwidth like we got it for free. A recent check while watching a 4K NHL game clocked in at 43MBps just for that one connection.

[rkomar]

Originally Posted by SleepyBob

Except, the traditional definition of book has been tied to the container for centuries. A magazine is different than a book. A leaflet is different than a book. A billboard is different than a book. A radio show is different than a book.

For centuries a "book" was defined as a number of flat things bound together on one side. It was 100% about the container and 0% about the contents. We still have match books, coupon books, note books, books of paint or carpet samples,... none of which are sold as reading material. Now, I have read the opposite definition right in this thread, that books are 0% about the container and 100% about the contents. I think things got confused when books became the ubiquitous way of distributing reading material, and people started using the name of the container for the contents. I always feel a bit sad when language evolves towards less information, but I guess I can't complain when the information that is disappearing doesn't matter to most people anymore.

[Quoth]

What we call a book was called a Codex and replaced the scroll. It allowed random access and easier use of both sides of the material.
The scrolls replaced clay tablets, which have survived better. Burning down the town makes the tablets more durable.

Strictly speaking the content isn't a book. The content is a novel, play, poetry, short stories, recipes, reports, catalogues, patterns, learning material etc.

A book has leaves and a binding.
An ebook is an electronic format content that could be printed, which is why if it's interactive, has audio or video it's not an ebook, it's multimedia. An ebook has no concept of matching a printed page, or it's broken. It must be dynamically paginated to match the window or screen size. Web sites ought to have this as an option. Blame Tim Berners-Lee (1989-1992) for not properly copying earlier hypertext systems that did dynamically paginate. Concept from 1968 and implementations from 1980s.
A PDF is an electronic document intended to be exactly printed or exactly match the printed version. The page size is the paper page size.

For a long time newspapers and books were archive on roll film and then microfiche. I used a microfiche display unit made by Bell & Howell and it made the tiny image about 12" square using a strong lamp and back-projection.

There were also laser disk archives for a while. The Laser disk player was controlled by a PC. They used analogue video.

The first ebooks were distributed on floppies, then CDs and then sometimes on DVD. Finally downloads replaced physical distribution though some sites do still sell CD, DVD and USB sticks.

An Album was originally a book of blank pages for clippings. Then photos. It was used from 1890s to mean a book of card envelopes for the 4 to 10 disks of a concert recording, then from 1931 for the 33 rpm large disks played from centre with 78rpm style material for the sound track of movies.
1948 or 1947 was the release of the microgroove LP that could hold an entire album of 78s on its two sides, so it was called an Album. The RCA 45rpm EP replaced 78 singles at home and in juke boxes from about 1949.

Words change their meanings.

A computer used to be a person that did sums all day.
A typewriter was the person that used a typing machine (Victorian).
A facsimile was originally any kind of exact copy of a document, but from 1851 was applied to documents sent by wire, eventually abbreviated to fax.

[ownedbycats]

Originally Posted by Quoth

The scrolls replaced clay tablets, which have survived better. Burning down the town makes the tablets more durable.

See the saga of Ea-nasir

I'm not sure which thought is funnier - that people were pissed off enough to burn down his house (and thus accidentally fire the tablets), or that he wanted to preserve the tablets...

[rcentros]

Originally Posted by Sirtel

For you, a book is its content printed on paper. For me, a book is the content, regardless of the container. So, our basic definition of a book is different. For me there's no such thing as a real book. As soon as the content exists, it's a book and it doesn't matter whether it has a container or not. For you, a book apparently doesn't exist until it's been printed on paper.

The main definition of "book" is...

1. A collection of sheets of paper, or similar material, blank, written, or printed, bound together; commonly, many folded and bound sheets containing continuous printing or writing

(My emphasis on "blank.")

The word "book" comes from an ancient Saxon word for "beech" (the tree) because the ancient Germans and Saxons wrote runes on pieces of "beechen" board.

An eBook (when read with a computer) simulates a book, but it's not the same, and an eBook doesn't stand on its own.

The reason I'm going through all this is that I'm trying to make you understand why people refer to paper books as "real books." And that, to them, it's almost never intended to be snarky — it's just that a paper book is tangible — they can hold it in their hands.

And that's all I'm trying to say.

[rcentros]

Originally Posted by John F

I thought that ebooks were published? An author submits a manuscript (something) to a publisher (normally) and the publisher does there magic and publishes it in all it forms: pbook, ebook, abook, braille, ...

So, if I give you an eBook (on a thumb drive) how do you read it? If you don't have some kind of computer (including an eReader) you can't. An eBook can not be read on its own, it requires an intermediate device. It doesn't even have words, it's just a long string of ones and zeroes if you don't have a computer.

Originally Posted by John F

By your definition a pbook isn't a book, a pbook requires some sort of device to turn the page?

No, a book is a book (and remains a book until crumbles into dust or is destroyed). It's existence doesn't depend on whether someone reads it or not. Just as a tree remains a tree whether or not anyone sees it.

[Quoth]

Originally Posted by Quoth

A book has leaves and a binding.
An ebook is an electronic format content that could be printed, which is why if it's interactive, has audio or video it's not an ebook, it's multimedia. An ebook has no concept of matching a printed page, or it's broken. It must be dynamically paginated to match the window or screen size. Web sites ought to have this as an option. Blame Tim Berners-Lee (1989-1992) for not properly copying earlier hypertext systems that did dynamically paginate. Concept from 1968 and implementations from 1980s.
A PDF is an electronic document intended to be exactly printed or exactly match the printed version. The page size is the paper page size.

And audiobooks were shipped in albums (multiple 78 rpm disks) for the Blind from the late 1890s.
Oddly a cassette tape based audio book is handier for users than a CD, because it inherently has position moved between players. Of course a cassette has to be recorded but a CD is pressed, a digital version of the 1890s disks and like 1930s sound track disks has a single spiral groove played from the centre end.

[John F]

Originally Posted by rcentros

So, if I give you an eBook (on a thumb drive) how do you read it? If you don't have some kind of computer (including an eReader) you can't. An eBook can not be read on its own, it requires an intermediate device. It doesn't even have words, it's just a long string of ones and zeroes if you don't have a computer.



No, a book is a book (and remains a book until crumbles into dust or is destroyed). It's existence doesn't depend on whether someone reads it or not. Just as a tree remains a tree whether or not anyone sees it.

Your reasoning still seems inconsistent.

No, a book is a book (and remains a book until crumbles into dust or is destroyed).

No, an ebook is a book (and remains an book until it isn't, file is erased or storage is destroyed).

It's existence doesn't depend on whether someone reads it or not.

I don't see how this differs from an ebook.

So, if I give you an eBook (on a thumb drive) how do you read it? If you don't have some kind of computer (including an eReader) you can't.

So if I give someone an ereader with a single ebook on it, then you have a book.

An eBook can not be read on its own, it requires an intermediate device.

Why does that matter I thought part of your argument is:

It's existence doesn't depend on whether someone reads it or not.

It doesn't even have words, it's just a long string of ones and zeroes if you don't have a computer.

A book doesn't have words either. It has strokes that are interpreted as glyphs. Or has dots of ink that are interpreted as glyphs. Or toner that is interpreted as glyphs, ...

I have no problem with the dictionary definition of book. Here is another one:

a written text that can be published in printed or electronic form:

Have you read any good books recently?
He has a new book out (= published).
She wrote a book on car maintenance.

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/...y/english/book

But if you are talking about a book on MR, or in a modern context, "a book is a pbook" seems like an archaic definition.

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by rcentros

The reason I'm going through all this is that I'm trying to make you understand why people refer to paper books as "real books." And that, to them, it's almost never intended to be snarky — it's just that a paper book is tangible — they can hold it in their hands.

In my experience, it's almost always been meant to be snarky when brought up. I' m not exaggerating. When people go all "real book" on me in conversation, it's nearly always in conjunction with the opinion that I'm somehow "wrong" for favoring ebooks. They then proceed to defend their position with completely non-readery reasons. I'd take absolutely no issue with people sharing their personal preference for pbooks with me. I don't care what they prefer themselves. It's when they cross the line from "I don't care for ebooks myself" to taking issue with me because I do that I feel justified in getting a little cranky with them. And that's happened to me more than a little. Often enough to not be able to be explained away by misunderstandings over a definition of terms.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by theducks

I also had a 56K , but in the US, that was not possible on a public network.
42-48K was pretty common for me in the heart of Silicon Valley.

I went with DSL in 2000, (I can't remember how fast, but it was not the number quoted in the UP TO ads). I used to PCAnywhere into the local office and the via ,56K FD tie-line to the Boston office.

56k worked for me in the US and we had nothing special for a phone line.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by Sirtel

For you, a book is its content printed on paper. For me, a book is the content, regardless of the container. So, our basic definition of a book is different. For me there's no such thing as a real book. As soon as the content exists, it's a book and it doesn't matter whether it has a container or not. For you, a book apparently doesn't exist until it's been printed on paper.

Unless it's PDF and then it's just a waste of words.