Report: Readers absorb less on Kindles than on Paper

[Yapyap]

And joy of joys, there are already extremely anti-ebook authors out there using the study to justify their hatred of ebooks (while not showing an awful lot of comprehension about what the study actually said, or being able to tell the difference between eInk readers and tablets).

Well, I now know to stop ruining this author's career and not buy more of his books, since I'd have bought them as ebooks (he makes it very clear in the comment replies he doesn't want people to buy his books as ebooks since that is financially bad for him, but also, ebooks make you stupid!! see, this study says so!!).

[Yolina]

Originally Posted by Yapyap

And joy of joys, there are already extremely anti-ebook authors out there using the study to justify their hatred of ebooks (while not showing an awful lot of comprehension about what the study actually said, or being able to tell the difference between eInk readers and tablets).

Well, I now know to stop ruining this author's career and not buy more of his books, since I'd have bought them as ebooks (he makes it very clear in the comment replies he doesn't want people to buy his books as ebooks since that is financially bad for him, but also, ebooks make you stupid!! see, this study says so!!).

Well he's welcome to buy me a bigger place so that I can have the space for a "proper" library Never heard of the guy before, let alone read any of is books anyway. But Jeeez the attitude... I'm perfectly happy with my ereader but I still buy pbooks as well when stuff I want to read isn't available in e-format.

[meeera]

He's welcome to cure my disability so I can hold massive paper tomes, and to extend my house for me and buy me new shelves, and to carry my bags for me so I have all the books I want with me when I go out...

Ignorant twonk. You'd think a writer who prides himself on his opinions would actually learn a little more about his own industry.

[Crowl]

Originally Posted by mr_nihilism

What I know for certain is that since owning a ereader I have been reading far and away more than I ever did before. Much of which is from authors I never would have discovered otherwise. This can only be a good thing.

Screw the study. It was most likely set up to fulfill a agenda anyways.

This is definitely my experience too, the convenience of being able to take my current book and my next book everywhere with me results in me reading so much more than I had for years.

I was buying a new jacket yesterday and one of the final things I did was the kindle test on the pockets to make sure it would fit, a test that would be quite a lot trickier if you tend to read these 500+ page novels that seem all too common in some genres.

[Crowl]

Originally Posted by Anthem

I see this comment a lot and I think it is interesting. My reading frequency really hasn't changed. But instead of having paperbacks and hardcover books littered all over my apartment and in my bag... I have a Kindle and tablets laying all over the place or in my bag!

There are lots of little factors that added up for me that resulted in me reading a lot more when I got an ereader because I got back into the habit of reading a lot:

I used to lose bookmarks so I'd waste time finding my page again, so I wouldn't bother if I only had time to get in half a dozen pages.

I tend to read longer books, so carrying them around everywhere was not always very convenient.

If I was near the end of a book, I wouldn't take it or my next one with me as that's doubling the amount of space they took up and one would unused all the time.

When I travelled a lot with work you often weren't around for Amazon etc to deliver new books so you ended up with a much smaller selection at the local bookshop or worse still at the airport, any books you took with you also took up plenty of luggage space.

[Tarana]

Of course there is the varying absorbability of the test subjects.

That is easily accounted for by selecting test subjects of similar aptitude. Not as hard as you think especially if you are selecting from a current college crowd.

There are texts that simply do not translate well to ebook, not because they are harder to read but referencing back and forth between pages is difficult and time consuming. Hard enough in deadtree. However, these are generally not novels. Being able to go back some pages to reread something is still the hardest thing I do on an ebook. With a book, you have location memory, but not so much with an ebook.

To make this study actually reasonably well done, the researchers could have saved a lot of effort by requesting subjects bring their OWN ereaders. Presumably, those persons would already be comfortable with their own devices. The idea that you would get different results depending on whether you have a Kindle, Nook Glo, old beat-up Sony or an Ipad is nominal unless the light source in the room is very poor. If you don't own an ereader, you aren't part of the study. It certainly would give better results than their current claims.

[j.p.s]

Originally Posted by Yapyap

(he makes it very clear in the comment replies he doesn't want people to buy his books as ebooks since that is financially bad for him, but also, ebooks make you stupid!! see, this study says so!!).

So, why does he allow his books to be available electronically?

[Anthem]

Originally Posted by Yapyap

And joy of joys, there are already extremely anti-ebook authors out there using the study to justify their hatred of ebooks (while not showing an awful lot of comprehension about what the study actually said, or being able to tell the difference between eInk readers and tablets).

Say it ain't so!

[Yapyap]

Originally Posted by j.p.s

So, why does he allow his books to be available electronically?

Beats me.

He went into some depth about "explaining" how "his contract allows the ebook stores to give him an enormously tiny royalty" (going from memory as he seems to have deleted most of the comments now) and how bad ebook sales are for him, so. Well. I can only assume his contract with his publisher has given the ebook rights to the publisher.

I suspect some authors are just so very vehemently anti-ebook that they'll grasp at anything that shows how "inferior" these things are. And they probably wish they'd never allowed them to be sold. I mean, imagine the horrors of people (who didn't buy their books before, in print) suddenly buying the dreaded ebooks - it'll ruin any author's livelihood.

[Catlady]

Why do authors think readers should care about their royalties?

[Zombater]

This is dumb. My twelve year old self thinks maybe Kindle readers absorb less, but readers don't absorb less on kindles. This looks like it was set to fulfill an agenda.

Generally I think of these before believing statistics. Let's say A is reading on a kindle and B is not absorbing information. Then, we have some MAIN alternatives though there are others.

A causes B - what the media is trying to say.

B causes A - so absolutely retarded nobody can even consider this a rational thought

A and B are both consequences of something.

A and B are manipulated and the study is too flexible to judge either way.

A and B are coincidental.

[Anthem]

Originally Posted by Catlady

Why do authors think readers should care about their royalties?

Interesting. I care about reading good stories and having access to good stories.

This may sound crass: but the royalties are the authors problem and the publishers problem, not mine.

If a book is worth it, I pay the price they are asking, and that is the end of my obligations, as far as I am concerned.

[eschwartz]

Originally Posted by AnotherCat

@eschwartz

I go for the "Eau, You have cats" Smell of Books myself but have found a cheap substitute is to just get one of our furry critters to pee on the back of my ereader .

I don't believe books should smell, of anything. (Except maybe Middle-Earth. )

(PS: You been away completing teshuva ?)

Sadly, no. I spent the time I should've been saying Vidui, helping my mother's school move to a new building. It not only overlapped, but also extended past my Days of Awe.

On which note, the actual Days of Awe are coming up soon. Today is the first day of Elul.

[bullet]

Repeatedly dropping one of Ken Follet's 10 lb. missives while falling asleep in bed drove me to using a tablet (nooks and nexus not kindles). Dropping the tablet does not wake me up.
I still absorb very little.

[AlbertaCowboy]

Originally Posted by Catlady

Why do authors think readers should care about their royalties?

Originally Posted by Anthem

Interesting. I care about reading good stories and having access to good stories.

This may sound crass: but the royalties are the authors problem and the publishers problem, not mine.

If a book is worth it, I pay the price they are asking, and that is the end of my obligations, as far as I am concerned.

This this this. ^

I don't give a flying crap about how much an author makes. I don't care what his royalty deal is. I don't care if he can make a living by writing or not. Those are the author's issues, not mine.
If he can get a better deal by going strictly paper, hey good for him. He's lost me as a reader, because I don't buy paper books anymore. He doesn't owe me an electronic copy, but I don't owe it to him to buy a paper copy either.
Don't tell me a sob story about your ridiculously low royalty rates on ebooks. I care less about your profit than I do about the skin flakes left on my pillow every morning.