Is new PW imminent?

[HoraceWimp]

Originally Posted by HarryT

Or perhaps most people genuinely just don't care.

They don't care because they don't know any better. Ignorance is bliss for many people.

It's natural to assume that what you've purchased in the form of an ebook and an eReader to read it on are naturally 'fit for purpose'. Consumers don't question whether they're fit for purpose because if they function as intended, in other words they recognise the ebook loaded onto the eReader and it presents text for the consumer to read it must by association be working as intended and be 'fit for purpose'.

Whether the text of the ebook is presented in an 'easy to read and aesthetically pleasing way' is clearly not something the majority of ebook readers/consumers concern themselves with. Presumably because they know that if the text is not presented to them 'according to their own personal taste' they can easily change it.

Prolonged reading of difficult or poorly formatted and laid out text produces eyestrain. Is it a surprise therefore that many people seem to complain of eyestrain and naturally point the finger at the ereader itself when in many/most cases it's likely to be the actual poor presentation of the text itself?

Originally Posted by HarryT

I've never bought paper books on the basis of what typeface they use...

Of course you wouldn't and no-one would because when you buy a paper book, part of the cost of that book or part of the overheads involved in producing that book, is the cost of the services of a professional book designer who will ensure that the text and layout is produced in a way that is easy to read.

As a consumer of a paper book you naturally assume that the product you're buying is fit for purpose.

Originally Posted by HarryT

...and I would never base my decision on what ebook reader to buy on that consideration either. I simply don't care about it.

Again, of course you wouldn't, because you're still in the 'paper book' mindset that what you've purchased is de facto fit for purpose. When in many instances it actually isn't - because you're no longer paying for the services of a book designer to ensure that the text and layout you read is not going to lead to possible eyestrain and/or gradual deterioration in your eye sight.

[DuckieTigger]

^^^ I take it you never seen a paper book that is plain aweful looking. Or even more annoying and distracting a paper magazine that randomly changes the font and style on different articles - in the same issue.

I very much appreciate my books looking exactly the same ( font, size, margins, line spacing ) on my ereader.

P.S.: I am using Caecilia condensed, granted it is not the default (non condensed is I believe). Never change it.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by HoraceWimp

They don't care because they don't know any better. Ignorance is bliss for many people.

I am certainly not ignorant on the matter; I simply don't care about it.

[pidgeon92]

Originally Posted by HarryT

I am certainly not ignorant on the matter; I simply don't care about it.

Me neither.

[eschwartz]

</raises hand>

I will edit my books just to get a uniform default back if the book is offensive enough. I can assure you I am neither ignorant nor uncaring; I actively enjoy and crave the ubiquity of a simple basic typeface. And Amazon has done a brilliant job at that.

[dickloraine]

It should be possible, to make ebooks look more like paper books. But to do this, a simple change of font size could produce the need to reprocess the entire book. It could also be, that the code of the books need to be more complicated. Maybe one would need instructions not only for the text but for the rendering also.

I don't know of a single reader (app or device) that does this. Most tools for something like this do exist. One could for example use latex and render with it. Simplest would be to just produce a pdf with the desired look.

[DuckieTigger]

Originally Posted by dickloraine

I don't know of a single reader (app or device) that does this. Most tools for something like this do exist. One could for example use latex and render with it. Simplest would be to just produce a pdf with the desired look.

LaTeX has one huge disadvantage for rendering: it is very slow. Way beyound the processing power of an ereader in reasonable time. On a fast computer it does not even work on the fly. Going from source to finished renderable output usually requires multiple passes. Pregenerating 8 different versions of the book should work though (to allow changes in text size for the 8 settings on Kindle). You will still be in trouble when trying to change fonts.

[krazy4katz]

I find it difficult to believe that people will get eyestrain because of the selection of fonts on their kindle. The size of the type, yes, but the fonts are fairly normal, though perhaps not elegant.

[meeera]

I'm gonna put my hand up at this point and confess that yes, typography/text presentation has influenced my purchasing choices when it comes to paper. It's not the only factor, but it has switched me from an 'ok, sure' to a 'no'.

[dickloraine]

Originally Posted by DuckieTigger

LaTeX has one huge disadvantage for rendering: it is very slow. Way beyound the processing power of an ereader in reasonable time. On a fast computer it does not even work on the fly. Going from source to finished renderable output usually requires multiple passes. Pregenerating 8 different versions of the book should work though (to allow changes in text size for the 8 settings on Kindle). You will still be in trouble when trying to change fonts.

Yes. I wasn't that clear, but that's what I meant by the need to rerender at a simple font size change. I think most people are fine with the way the text is shown now. For people who are indifferent to this, they will never realize. But very long wait times for simple changes, maybe even for opening a book the first time (or every time. If the rendered book is saved, this would use additional disk space) would be perceived by everyone. So of course no manufacturer chooses to do this type of rendering.

[Glorfindel]

Originally Posted by HoraceWimp

They don't care because they don't know any better. Ignorance is bliss for many people.
It's natural to assume that what you've purchased in the form of an ebook and an eReader to read it on are naturally 'fit for purpose'. Consumers don't question whether they're fit for purpose because if they function as intended, in other words they recognise the ebook loaded onto the eReader and it presents text for the consumer to read it must by association be working as intended and be 'fit for purpose'.
Whether the text of the ebook is presented in an 'easy to read and aesthetically pleasing way' is clearly not something the majority of ebook readers/consumers concern themselves with. Presumably because they know that if the text is not presented to them 'according to their own personal taste' they can easily change it.
Prolonged reading of difficult or poorly formatted and laid out text produces eyestrain. Is it a surprise therefore that many people seem to complain of eyestrain and naturally point the finger at the ereader itself when in many/most cases it's likely to be the actual poor presentation of the text itself?
Of course you wouldn't and no-one would because when you buy a paper book, part of the cost of that book or part of the overheads involved in producing that book, is the cost of the services of a professional book designer who will ensure that the text and layout is produced in a way that is easy to read.
As a consumer of a paper book you naturally assume that the product you're buying is fit for purpose.
Again, of course you wouldn't, because you're still in the 'paper book' mindset that what you've purchased is de facto fit for purpose. When in many instances it actually isn't - because you're no longer paying for the services of a book designer to ensure that the text and layout you read is not going to lead to possible eyestrain and/or gradual deterioration in your eye sight.

So basically, if someone doesn't care, (and thus dissagreeing with you) they are 'ignorant'?

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by Glorfindel

So basically, if someone doesn't care, (and thus dissagreeing with you) they are 'ignorant'?

It would appear that, in Horace's view, I am indeed ignorant. Clearly, creating many hundreds of ebooks, and reading them since the mid 1980s has taught me nothing about them .

[Glorfindel]

Guess so

[HoraceWimp]

Originally Posted by Glorfindel

So basically, if someone doesn't care, (and thus dissagreeing with you) they are 'ignorant'?

I don't think you can assume that from my reply. Everyone is entitled to express an opinion regardless of whether I happen to agree with it or not.

However, I believe (as is my prerogative to do so, based on my experience as a typographic designer working within the publishing industry for many years) that many consumers of printed material whether in paper or electronic format are ignorant of the dangers to their eyesight of prolonged periods of reading poorly formatted layouts using inappropriate typefaces.

If on the other hand you feel that the majority of these consumers are indeed aware of the potential dangers to their eyesight then I would agree that my use of the term ignorant would be most inappropriate.

[HoraceWimp]

Originally Posted by HarryT

Clearly, creating many hundreds of ebooks, and reading them since the mid 1980s has taught me nothing about them .

But it doesn't make you an expert on how the human eye interprets letters, words and sentences into meanings either does it?