Poll: 3 out of 4 Americans prefer paper books

[BearMountainBooks]

Originally Posted by faithbw

This describes me. I borrow most of the books I read. Since the library usually has more paper copies of books, the waiting list is usually shorter on paper copies of popular books and the library often doesn't have ebook versions of certain books or gets the ebook version much later, I still read more paper books than ebooks. Also, I prefer to read non-fiction in paper format since I find it easier to highlight, bookmark and flip back and forth in paper books. I used my e-reader often when I first bought it. However, the novelty has worn off since then and I rarely use it.

Just out of curiosity, what made you choose the Sony over other models? I see that a lot more in Europe than the US (although I think they are spiffy.) And I have no shoe in the race; I'm just curious. Was it that libraries were lending first/primarily to ePUB type devices? It's also none of my business so feel free to not answer.

[Tony1988]

Originally Posted by MikeB1972

Well, yes, but people rode horses for years and don't need any of the advantages of these new fangled auto-mo-beeles.

Comparing the advancement of transportation to a simple thing like reading a book is uneven to say the least.

[jmilica]

Originally Posted by BearMountainBooks

Just out of curiosity, what made you choose the Sony over other models? I see that a lot more in Europe than the US (although I think they are spiffy.) And I have no shoe in the race; I'm just curious. Was it that libraries were lending first/primarily to ePUB type devices? It's also none of my business so feel free to not answer.

Kindle books are available only in US libraries.
For now at least.

[Sregener]

A properly formatted chess eBook is much better than a paper copy. The ease of setting down the book without losing your place (and gee, why in the world would a chess player want to analyze a chess board while they're looking at a book?) is invaluable. And storing them is much easier in an eBook format as well.

So why are all my chess books paper? Because you can't sell an eBook, and it would end up costing me much more in net cost to buy them as eBooks, even with a dollar or two discount off the electronic version. And most chess eBooks are poorly formatted. Look at a sample of Irving Chernev's 200 Endgames, and you'll see that the puzzle and answer are on the same screen! Who covers up part of their ereader screen when a page break would be much better? That's actually harder than with a book.

So while I prefer a properly formatted eBook for chess, I only purchase paper. How would that compute in the survey?

[faithbw]

Originally Posted by BearMountainBooks

Just out of curiosity, what made you choose the Sony over other models? I see that a lot more in Europe than the US (although I think they are spiffy.) And I have no shoe in the race; I'm just curious. Was it that libraries were lending first/primarily to ePUB type devices? It's also none of my business so feel free to not answer.

Oh, I don't mind responding. At the time I was shopping for e-readers, one of my requirements was that I would be able to read borrowed library e-books on it. Since the Kindle wasn't able to read library e-books yet, it was eliminated from my list. I didn't choose the Kobo because the model available at that time didn't seem very durable to me. That left the Nook classic and the Sony Reader. I initially purchased the Nook Classic. It was ok but the screen wasn't nearly as crisp as the Pearl screen used on the Sony or the Kindle. Also, I found the lcd screen at the bottom used for navigation to lag at times. I bought it because it was cheaper than the cheapest Sony model (which was $179.00 then). I found the Sony PRS-350 on sale at a closing Borders for half price, decided to buy it and gave away the Nook. It is much easier to use than the old Nook I had.

[gwpurnell]

A book is a book. What format it is published in (or on) is immaterial to its contents, with the exception of large format art books, in my opinion. For works of literature, biography and history etc. where the word is king, it simply doesn't matter.

"You can't judge a book by its cover" seems to be a phrase tailor-made for this particular discussion.

[Katsunami]

Originally Posted by Tony1988

All of which are not needed to read a book.

Changing font sizes and types is definitely required for some people to be able to read books. I can get by with normal books, but just barely. My eyesight is very poor, and paperbacks often have very small print and/or bad fonts.

An e-reader displays all books with the same quality and same font size.

The front-light is a godsend as it greatly improves contrast of the screen, especially in mediocre lighting condition. For someone with my eyesight, basically every lighting condition except a sunny day is mediocre.

The size of an e-reader is much smaller than that of many books, even when including a cover, making it easier to hold it for long amounts of time.

Maybe it sounds strange, but the older people get, the more advantages an e-reader brings. There is one old man that I support in using an e-reader. He read many books in his earlier days, but stopped reading for several reasons.

1. His "old peoples home" is too small to store many books.
2. His eyesight is too bad to read paperbacks.
3. He needs a lot of light to read.
4. He can't hold a hardcover for a long time.

I suggested an e-reader, but he was afraid that he wouldn't be able to use it. As he's a family friend, I told him I'd maintain the reader for him. Now, he just sends me an e-mail with the (mostly old) books he wants, in Dutch or German. If they are classics and free, I donwload them from somewhere. If not, I buy them for him, and de-DRM them.

(Of course, he re-imburses the costs of buying those books, and quite liberally too, as his pension is very good. He is quite good with computers, but is uncomfortable buying stuff over the internet.)

Then, I go over to his place, put the books into Calibre (to be 100% sure, I keep a backup as well) and side-load them to his Kindle. After the books are in Calbire, he can side-load them himself.

Mostly, this gives him enough to read for about two months or so, and when he starts the last or next-to-last book, he sends me another list and it repeats.

He's very happy with his e-reader, as he can read again without having to stash away many books, and he can read more easily because of the bigger fonts and lighting. Sometimes he's lucky and half of the books he wants are Dutch or German classics for which he doesn't need to pay. Such a message quite often nets me a good bottle of whiskey

[Katsunami]

Originally Posted by Catlady

Do you really think every reader religiously makes myriad backup copies of every book?

I often find this very strange. People religiously protect their physical stuff: special cases for photo camera's and lenses, safes for important papers, and so on. At the same time, they may have digital stuff that is possibly worth much more than any physical items they have, and they don't spend even a moment's thought on how to protect it.

I know quite some people who spend a great deal of time caring for their $500 Canon photo camera "because it was so expensive", but they don't think twice about backing up the 5000 pictures they took with it. It's as if they assume that if a picture is on the hard drive, it will be there forever. Strangely enough, the older photo albums, made before the time of digital camera's, are in a safe.

[BearMountainBooks]

Originally Posted by faithbw

Oh, I don't mind responding. At the time I was shopping for e-readers, one of my requirements was that I would be able to read borrowed library e-books on it. Since the Kindle wasn't able to read library e-books yet, it was eliminated from my list. I didn't choose the Kobo because the model available at that time didn't seem very durable to me. That left the Nook classic and the Sony Reader. I initially purchased the Nook Classic. It was ok but the screen wasn't nearly as crisp as the Pearl screen used on the Sony or the Kindle. Also, I found the lcd screen at the bottom used for navigation to lag at times. I bought it because it was cheaper than the cheapest Sony model (which was $179.00 then). I found the Sony PRS-350 on sale at a closing Borders for half price, decided to buy it and gave away the Nook. It is much easier to use than the old Nook I had.

I've heard really good things about sony. The people I know who have them do like them. Always good to see the various input!

[BearMountainBooks]

Originally Posted by Katsunami

Changing font sizes and types is definitely required for some people to be able to read books. I can get by with normal books, but just barely. My eyesight is very poor, and paperbacks often have very small print and/or bad fonts.

oks, even when including a cover, making it easier to hold it for long amounts of time.

Maybe it sounds strange, but the older people get, the more advantages an e-reader brings. There is one old man that I support in using an e-reader. He read many books in his earlier days, but stopped reading for several reasons.

1. His "old peoples home" is too small to store many books.
2. His eyesight is too bad to read paperbacks.
3. He needs a lot of light to read.
4. He can't hold a hardcover for a long time.

I suggested an e-reader, but he was afraid that he wouldn't be able to use it. As he's a family friend, I told him I'd maintain the reader for him. Now, he just sends me an e-mail with the (mostly old) books he wants, in Dutch or German. If they are classics and free, I donwload them from somewhere. If not, I buy them for him, and de-DRM them.

(Of course, he re-imburses the costs of buying those books, and quite liberally too, as his pension is very good. He is quite good with computers, but is uncomfortable buying stuff over the internet.)

Then, I go over to his place, put the books into Calibre (to be 100% sure, I keep a backup as well) and side-load them to his Kindle. After the books are in Calbire, he can side-load them himself.

Mostly, this gives him enough to read for about two months or so, and when he starts the last or next-to-last book, he sends me another list and it repeats.

He's very happy with his e-reader, as he can read again without having to stash away many books, and he can read more easily because of the bigger fonts and lighting. Sometimes he's lucky and half of the books he wants are Dutch or German classics for which he doesn't need to pay. Such a message quite often nets me a good bottle of whiskey

I know two or three people who manage a kindle for a parent/relative/friend. My mom has decided she wants me to do this (not that she's incapable, but she doesn't have wifi turned on except when I am there.) So theoretically I could "send" books to her kindle and then she could "pick them up in town" at the local mcd's wifi station. She's an avid reader (I wonder where I get it from...dad is the storyteller...) and I don't think it would matter to her if she was reading a story on the back of napkins at the dinner table.

[jgaiser]

Originally Posted by Katsunami

I know quite some people who spend a great deal of time caring for their $500 Canon photo camera "because it was so expensive", but they don't think twice about backing up the 5000 pictures they took with it. It's as if they assume that if a picture is on the hard drive, it will be there forever. Strangely enough, the older photo albums, made before the time of digital camera's, are in a safe.

A lot of years ago, when I wasn't as obsessive about backups, I had a hard-drive crash. That crash caused the loss of hundreds of megabytes of photographs. I now backup my systems religiously. *Anybody* who thinks their hard-drive is going to last forever is eventually in for a sad suprise.

[Catlady]

Originally Posted by Katsunami

I often find this very strange. People religiously protect their physical stuff: special cases for photo camera's and lenses, safes for important papers, and so on. At the same time, they may have digital stuff that is possibly worth much more than any physical items they have, and they don't spend even a moment's thought on how to protect it.

I know quite some people who spend a great deal of time caring for their $500 Canon photo camera "because it was so expensive", but they don't think twice about backing up the 5000 pictures they took with it. It's as if they assume that if a picture is on the hard drive, it will be there forever. Strangely enough, the older photo albums, made before the time of digital camera's, are in a safe.

It may be strange, but it's the way it is.

I think it's because you can't see the computer files as tangible items. You can see the pile of photos in a box, and that reminds you to do something about sorting them or storing them properly, or whatever. I don't think that it's that people have faith that digital items will last forever as much as that people don't get reminded of their existence.

[Katsunami]

Originally Posted by Catlady

It may be strange, but it's the way it is.

I think it's because you can't see the computer files as tangible items. You can see the pile of photos in a box, and that reminds you to do something about sorting them or storing them properly, or whatever. I don't think that it's that people have faith that digital items will last forever as much as that people don't get reminded of their existence.

I think you may be quite right in that observation. A tangible, physical object is something that can be damaged or destroyed. You can actually see this happening. With digital files, that is (often) not the case.

The strange thing is, compared to physical products, the digital ones are SO easy to protect. Just copy everything to an external drive, put it somewhere safe (in someone else's house, for example), and you're basically done.

Originally Posted by jgaiser

A lot of years ago, when I wasn't as obsessive about backups, I had a hard-drive crash. That crash caused the loss of hundreds of megabytes of photographs. I now backup my systems religiously. *Anybody* who thinks their hard-drive is going to last forever is eventually in for a sad suprise.

Many of the things that are on my computer, I could actually get back again, even without making backups; most notably, my CD-albums. But having to re-rip hundreds of CD's AGAIN... I... aarrggghh.... Just thinking about it makes me want to kill myself.

[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by Katsunami

But having to re-rip hundreds of CD's AGAIN... I... aarrggghh.... Just thinking about it makes me want to kill myself.

I hear you.
My to-do list includes re-ripping everything to a high bit-rate for the home audio systems. I keep running into interesting reads that derail that plan...

[Katsunami]

Originally Posted by fjtorres

I hear you.
My to-do list includes re-ripping everything to a high bit-rate for the home audio systems. I keep running into interesting reads that derail that plan...

It's off-topic... but hell. Maybe this post will help you a bit.

=== off topic stuff ===

I started ripping my first CD's almost 15 years ago. Being an audio n00b back then, I started out at 128 kBit MP3's, slowly climbing to 320 kBit VBR0. Even though FLAC and other lossless formats emerged at some point, I just didn't have the space. Now, I've decided that I want to be able to reconvert to any format I ever may need, without ever having to do a re-rip. Therefore I've started over, and I now rip everything in FLAC. To be especially safe, I only use the official libFLAC reference implementation. (It received an update, just 2 months ago, but it didn't change anything in the format.)

Look at these programs:
CUETools / CUERipper (Converter and secure ripper)
MP3Tag (Tagger. Does more than MP3.)
Album Art Downloader (Finds album art at many sources.)

Still, even when using the automation that these programs provide, it's a hell of a job.

My advice? Do 5 CD's a day, religiously. Not too much work, and eventually, you'll be done. (I actually do 10 a day, but I have two CD/DVD drives.)

Back to books again If need be, split off fjtorres' post and this reply into a new topic in the Off Topic forum or something

=== end off topic stuff ===