Kindles yet to woo University users

[brecklundin]

Originally Posted by LDBoblo

I'd actually prefer if paper producers would stop using their own benign, sustainable forests of bamboo-like trees designed for rapid renewal and would start cutting down some real growth again to improve some of the paper quality. Displace all those silly slash/burners in Africa and South America who are just putting all that good wood to waste. Of course, it'd be nice to make paper out of some other materials too, since some varieties are quite superior to wood-based in terms of durability.

As far as ebooks...the devices suck. They are not good enough for anything outside of a very narrow window of usage. The technology needs to fundamentally improve before feasibility for mass adoption comes into play. There is no need, except when desperate, to adapt to the inferior nature of these devices unless their only 2 advantages are absolutely essential (space conservation, keyword search). I will take a widescreen high-resolution notebook with PDFs long long before I will even consider using any of the e-ink garbage for anything remotely resembling scholarly research. Having to find a power outlet and deal with a backlit LCD (Heaven forbid! A superior screen technology for small text!) are worthwhile for the incredibly massive step up in usability.

Adaptation is necessary, but adaptation to superior methodology and superior technology. The current crop of E-ink readers qualifies as neither. Most of us here are already early adopters in some way; that does not mean we should be in any way contented to reduce our standards and shrug it off with "well we have to adapt!" That's nothing more than a cop-out.

I will use just about anything OTHER than an ebook reader for research. I've had to do research working from bamboo slat scrolls, and I find those to be a superior technology to ebook readers at the moment. In another few generations of device, some of the technological kinks should be ironed out (hopefully not "adapted to" by apologists)...but I'm not going to waste my money on it now.

Best paper you will find is made from hemp...but even the non-Marijuana (has no THC/cannaboids) species is illegal to grow in the US w/o a special permit which they won't give out...but I have no idea why so many countries that have problems growing other stuff do not go into the hemp paper and fiber business...it grows about as well as bamboo and as easily.

But, funny you mention using old growth trees because I have been trying to find if old growth trees are "greener" than new growth trees. Meaning which age is more efficient at doing what it is supposed to do?

[davidspitzer]

Originally Posted by LDBoblo

I'd actually prefer if paper producers would stop using their own benign, sustainable forests of bamboo-like trees designed for rapid renewal and would start cutting down some real growth again to improve some of the paper quality. Displace all those silly slash/burners in Africa and South America who are just putting all that good wood to waste. Of course, it'd be nice to make paper out of some other materials too, since some varieties are quite superior to wood-based in terms of durability.

As far as ebooks...the devices suck. They are not good enough for anything outside of a very narrow window of usage. The technology needs to fundamentally improve before feasibility for mass adoption comes into play. There is no need, except when desperate, to adapt to the inferior nature of these devices unless their only 2 advantages are absolutely essential (space conservation, keyword search). I will take a widescreen high-resolution notebook with PDFs long long before I will even consider using any of the e-ink garbage for anything remotely resembling scholarly research. Having to find a power outlet and deal with a backlit LCD (Heaven forbid! A superior screen technology for small text!) are worthwhile for the incredibly massive step up in usability.

Adaptation is necessary, but adaptation to superior methodology and superior technology. The current crop of E-ink readers qualifies as neither. Most of us here are already early adopters in some way; that does not mean we should be in any way contented to reduce our standards and shrug it off with "well we have to adapt!" That's nothing more than a cop-out.

I will use just about anything OTHER than an ebook reader for research. I've had to do research working from bamboo slat scrolls, and I find those to be a superior technology to ebook readers at the moment. In another few generations of device, some of the technological kinks should be ironed out (hopefully not "adapted to" by apologists)...but I'm not going to waste my money on it now.

but who is to drive improvements other than us? The manufacturers and publishers are not going to expend any effort unless they see commitment. Sitting back and complaining will not achieve this goal.

Adopting and using is not settling - the first men and woman who flew biplanes did it with zeal and excitement because they knew that the only way to drive improvement was with skin in the game. They did not sit on the sidelines and complain that the airframe was to weak and that that planes sucked because they were laden with flaws; no they jumped in and drove the improvements literally by sheer will and commitment

Those people did not compromise their standards and neither do we by trying to leverage this technology, even if it does have flaws. If you truly believe in its potential then you are either a bystander or flyer - I wish to be a flyer and I think the only way we are going to see quantum changes for the better is if we are willing to take some pain, work through the issues and show the hardware producers that it can work and that we want them to put more time, energy and money into this field.

Yes it's easier to read a paperbound academic book, yes its easier to print out a paper and read it rather then copy it to my ebook reader, but I do it because thats what we should be doing and like the early aviators, the fact that the technology is lacking in many ways will not detract me from doing it .

I must admit I am a little shocked and disappointed at the attitude displayed here and I'll be honest I hope you are in the minority, because if we, as early adopters and supposed pundents of this this technology can not rally support among our own ranks how do we expect others to do so. It should come as no surprise when we hear negative reports like the one from Princeton.

Is this the best enthusiasm we can muster? Has our attention span so waned nowadays that we are unwilling to work through any adversity? Have we degenerated to only gravitating towards instant gratification pursuing only the path of least resistance?

Where have all the barnstormers gone?

[LDBoblo]

Originally Posted by brecklundin

Best paper you will find is made from hemp...but even the non-Marijuana (has no THC/cannaboids) species is illegal to grow in the US w/o a special permit which they won't give out...but I have no idea why so many countries that have problems growing other stuff do not go into the hemp paper and fiber business...it grows about as well as bamboo and as easily.

Yeah I know there are a few really neat alternatives to wood paper, but wood paper is nice still...except the cheapest recycled stuff...blech.

But, funny you mention using old growth trees because I have been trying to find if old growth trees are "greener" than new growth trees. Meaning which age is more efficient at doing what it is supposed to do?

You mean water efficiency? I'm not certain about efficiency...I just know they use a lot of water.

Nice points to pick out of my post in any event...thought they'd be ignored and my more inflammatory points would be addressed

[LDBoblo]

Originally Posted by davidspitzer

but who is to drive improvements other than us? The manufacturers and publishers are not going to expend any effort unless they see commitment. Sitting back and complaining will not achieve this goal.

Adopting and using is not settling - the first men and woman who flew biplanes did it with zeal and excitement because they knew that the only way to drive improvement was with skin in the game. They did not sit on the sidelines and complain that the airframe was to weak and that that planes sucked because they were laden with flaws; no they jumped in and drove the improvements literally by sheer will and commitment

Those people did not compromise their standards and neither do we by trying to leverage this technology, even if it does have flaws. If you truly believe in its potential then you are either a bystander or flyer - I wish to be a flyer and I think the only way we are going to see quantum changes for the better is if we are willing to take some pain, work through the issues and show the hardware producers that it can work and that we want them to put more time, energy and money into this field.

Yes it's easier to read a paperbound academic book, yes its easier to print out a paper and read it rather then copy it to my ebook reader, but I do it because thats what we should be doing and like the early aviators, the fact that the technology is lacking in many ways will not detract me from doing it .

I must admit I am a little shocked and disappointed at the attitude displayed here and I'll be honest I hope you are in the minority, because if we, as early adopters and supposed pundents of this this technology can not rally support among our own ranks how do we expect others to do so. It should come as no surprise when we hear negative reports like the one from Princeton.

Is this the best enthusiasm we can muster? Has our attention span so waned nowadays that we are unwilling to work through any adversity? Have we degenerated to only gravitating towards instant gratification pursuing only the path of least resistance?

Where have all the barnstormers gone?

Laptops are a better choice for this. Desktop computers are a better choice for this. etextbooks can develop for these platforms, while the ebook reader devices remain stagnant. Most ebook reading is still done on computer, mind you, not on the niche (but growing) devices that people like me like to disparage.

When ebook reader devices become more usable, then their adoption rates will be higher. That will be the result of market-driven innovation and competition. A forum of early adopters easily impressed and with a proclivity towards mediocrity will not dictate the market that much, or at least I hope.

[Grauheim]

Originally Posted by ahi

Have you generated multiple PDFs from a single LaTeX source document before?

The accuracy of your statement wholly depends on how low one's expectations are of the output.
- Ahi

Well, actually yes I have, and I'm not sure what you're getting at.

To be clear, I'm not suggesting that to support textbooks, we should be replacing ePub with Latex.

What I am saying is that (1) ePub is inadequate for textbooks because it does not support vector graphics, which are needed for graphs, mathematics and diagrams in general, and that (2) Latex shows that it's possible to create a reflowable markup language that supports vector-based content.

So we can complain all we like, but PDF is currently the only document format that's suitable for textbooks, and the fact that PDF is inherently a poor format for eReaders is holding things back. This needs to be solved.

[Jellby]

Originally Posted by Grauheim

What I am saying is that (1) ePub is inadequate for textbooks because it does not support vector graphics

Well, that is not true. ePUB includes SVG (Scalable Vector Graphics) as an integral part of the standard, so ePUB supports vector graphics.

[dmaul1114]

Originally Posted by davidspitzer

If you are talking about highlighters on paper - then I don't feel that we can assume that that will translate directly to ebooks.

It can work very much the same. Make a nice 10" or so tablet device (can be LCD--I don't have eyestrain issues or need super long battery life) with a nice touch screen with a stylus that works extremely well (better than past tablet PCs etc.) and lets you high light, write notes in the margins etc.

That's what it will take to get me to make the e-switch for academic books and scholarly journal articles. I MUST be able to mark them up so I NEVER have to read them again and can just skim highlights and notes in the margins. And it takes too much time to scan them, type up notes etc. Time is a premium in academia.

Originally Posted by davidspitzer

In order to effect change there have to be a few brave and dedicated soles that are willing to blaze the way so that others will follow

I've never been one of those. I wait for technology to do what I need and be at a price I consider reasonable. I don't wait as long as the Joe Six Packs, but I'm not a super early adopter either.

I got a used K1 when the K2 came out as I was able to get 1 for $200 and it does all I need in terms of replacing paperbacks/hardbacks/hassling with the library for books I just read a bit before sleeping every night and never touch again after finishing them.

For my work, I'll wait for a nice tablet device that does all I need. I don't feel any need to waste money on something that makes my work more difficult and wastes more of my precious time.

I care about the environment, but I do more than enough on that front with recycling aggressively, using re-usable shopping bags, using compact fluorescent light bulbs, living close to work. So I'm not going to go piss away money, and make my work more difficult, just to save some friggin' trees when there are no shortage of those and they're a renewable resource. And it's not like I'm chucking books and printouts in the garbage. They get kept, given away or recycled.

But in general, my life (and especially career related aspects) are focused on what is most efficient and most convenient. So it' would be pretty friggin' dumb to waste time and money on a crappy product that makes my work more difficult. If some treehuggers want to do it, they can knock themselves out. I'm not going to waste time and money on inferior methods of doing my work. If that means there is never an e-option, then I really couldn't care less. The paper method gives me really no problems whatsoever.

[ahi]

Originally Posted by davidspitzer

there have to be a few brave and dedicated soles

They may not be brave, or dedicated... but they are...



- Ahi

[Grauheim]

Originally Posted by Jellby

Well, that is not true. ePUB includes SVG (Scalable Vector Graphics) as an integral part of the standard, so ePUB supports vector graphics.

That's very interesting. Thanks!

I poked around the SVG standard a bit. It seems a little low-level, like you'd have to express mathematics in terms of low-level stroke diagrams. This is going to be as bad as PDF in terms of reflowing, since the device wouldn't know the semantics behind the strokes. I was thinking of something more like MathML.

Is there something I'm missing?

[frabjous]

In this thread, Dawn Falcon suggested that ePub may get support for MathML down the line.

I'm all with you that it would be great to have a technically-apt mark-up langauge with some tweaks for reflowable ebooks. I don't care much whether it were LaTeX-based or (X)(HT)(Math)ML based, though from what I've seen of MathML, TeX markup is a lot less messy and easier to compose in. There would have to be some changes and additions though.

The idea of Kindles being used for textbooks when most of them don't even support ePubs much less PDFs is at present a kind of lunacy. The .mobi format and similar just can't do what needs to be done.

[zerospinboson]

Originally Posted by frabjous

In this thread, Dawn Falcon suggested that ePub may get support for MathML down the line.

I'm all with you that it would be great to have a technically-apt mark-up langauge with some tweaks for reflowable ebooks. I don't care much whether it were LaTeX-based or (X)(HT)(Math)ML based, though from what I've seen of MathML, TeX markup is a lot less messy and easier to compose in. There would have to be some changes and additions though.

The idea of Kindles being used for textbooks when most of them don't even support ePubs much less PDFs is at present a kind of lunacy. The .mobi format and similar just can't do what needs to be done.

It is also said that ePub will one day get dynamically rendered footnote support ;-) (Although, while using MS Word recently, I noticed that redrawing those on the fly became very slow after the 200th or so footnote already, so there might be a reason for that).
In any case, Irex

[Jellby]

Originally Posted by Grauheim

I was thinking of something more like MathML.

MathML is supported in the form of "XML islands". Reading systems are not required to support MathML, but they could. For those systems that don't support MathML, the ePUB should contain alternate content, like SVG or PNG graphics.

Requiring MathML support is currently being considered for a future version of the ePUB spec.

[Phogg]

Originally Posted by davidspitzer

I did not explain well enough - or perhaps inferred to much. I think that we need to start embracing ebooks, so that the publishers see that there is a profitable market, and then less trees will die and the publishers and the hardware manufacturers will put more effort into making ebooks great as they all scramble for their piece of the money pie

I am not naive I know that real change is driven by supply and demand - My position is that if we generate more demand then the supply will increase in quality as competition ramps.

While we are saving trees, let's save corn and wheat. They are just as endangered, you know.

[zerospinboson]

Originally Posted by Phogg

While we are saving trees, let's save corn and wheat. They are just as endangered, you know.

You mean save them from being wiped out by their patented-by-Monsanto cousins? Because that's the only extinction threat they face..

[davidspitzer]

Originally Posted by Phogg

While we are saving trees, let's save corn and wheat. They are just as endangered, you know.

I debated even answering such an obviously trollish response, but I think the point is, which I am sure you got, that there is a alternative to using so much wood just for reading purposes, namely the very objects of discussion on this forum.

There are plenty that would argue that the extinction of the overly hybridized and arguably unhealthy corn that we see now, would perhaps, be a good thing, but forgetting that argument there is not a ready alternative to eating for humans rights now, like there is for reading paper books. Also the growth of corn being sub 1 year does really compare to somtimes multi-decade growth needed for some timber

I am not advocating also as the only direct benefit of using ereaders, being the reduction of our timber consumption, but rather a nice side benefit.

We can be flippant about it, but we continue to consume without regard for the future or our children becuase it is convenient for us. Whether it is wood, oil, food or a myriad of other things its really the same story, and I am proposing that we need to start somewhere.

I will try to do my small part and I will fall far short of what I can really do but its a start