The Reading Vent & Rant Thread

[ownedbycats]

Multiple authors who share the same name really messes up searches.

[JSWolf]

Authors who use the same book title as an already existing book title by another author. Just pick an original title.

[Renate]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

Just pick an original title.

That's getting harder and harder to do.

[John F]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

I think they've all been taken in by the lies. Discworld is meant to be read through once in order and then it's any order after that.

I wonder who is spreading lies?

[ownedbycats]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

Authors who use the same book title as an already existing book title by another author. Just pick an original title.

just start appending random numbers to the titles, problem solved

[DNSB]

Originally Posted by ownedbycats

just start appending random numbers to the titles, problem solved

Sounds like why Kobo has identifiers ending in up to -24.

[theducks]

Originally Posted by ownedbycats

just start appending random numbers to the titles, problem solved

That is why you use {authors}-{title} in calibre.

But my peeve is when a book is reissued and they drop (or add) the middle initial.
Now {Series} is a real pain. Using {Authors} as a tie breaker does not always work (a Universe where many play). I resorted to adding The initials of the initial author to the series name 'Duplicate name (JB)'

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by John F

I wonder who is spreading lies?

Well, I can say whoever made the reading order chart is spreading lie big time. That chart should be marketed as for a second read of Discworld, not a Discworld can be read the first time in any order chart.

[Quoth]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

Authors who use the same book title as an already existing book title by another author. Just pick an original title.

It's annoying but legal. Also it may not be obvious on an internet search at the time of choice. It's rarely deliberate.

I believe a lot of people bought the wrong author of "The Girl on the Train", or whatever it is called.

Some quite high profile authors have similar titles, "Magician".

Also there are similar titles "The <insert occupation>'s Daughter"

[astrangerhere]

Originally Posted by theducks

That is why you use {authors}-{title} in calibre.

But my peeve is when a book is reissued and they drop (or add) the middle initial.
Now {Series} is a real pain. Using {Authors} as a tie breaker does not always work (a Universe where many play). I resorted to adding The initials of the initial author to the series name 'Duplicate name (JB)'

There are several YA authors who also write non-YA who will use Initials for the YA stuff and full names for the adult material. I believe V.E. Schwab/Victoria Schwab is one example. I've never read any of her work, but I saw it discussed in a book blog.

[andyh2000]

Originally Posted by astrangerhere

There are several YA authors who also write non-YA who will use Initials for the YA stuff and full names for the adult material. I believe V.E. Schwab/Victoria Schwab is one example. I've never read any of her work, but I saw it discussed in a book blog.

The most famous example I know was Iain M Banks for Sci-Fi and Iain Banks for more mainstream books (using the term loosely).

Andrew

[arjaybe]

Originally Posted by Quoth

It's annoying but legal. Also it may not be obvious on an internet search at the time of choice. It's rarely deliberate.

I believe a lot of people bought the wrong author of "The Girl on the Train", or whatever it is called.

Some quite high profile authors have similar titles, "Magician".

Also there are similar titles "The <insert occupation>'s Daughter"

"The Invisible Man" works here.

[John F]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

Well, I can say whoever made the reading order chart is spreading lie big time. That chart should be marketed as for a second read of Discworld, not a Discworld can be read the first time in any order chart.

Maybe the people who say that the Discworld can only be read in published order (for the first read through) are the liars.

[DrNefario]

Originally Posted by ZodWallop

I don't think any of those things is making an ereader into a bad tablet.

The lit screens mean they don't look especially different to an LCD tablet screen. The reflective performance of eInk is wasted.

As they make the interfaces more like phones/tablets then they need the sceen to update more often. Kindles used to page through the library, now they scroll, which means they need to update constantly as you move your finger. It's just a bad use of the technology.

[Sirtel]

Originally Posted by DrNefario

As they make the interfaces more like phones/tablets then they need the sceen to update more often. Kindles used to page through the library, now they scroll, which means they need to update constantly as you move your finger. It's just a bad use of the technology.

Maybe that's why Amazon has ditched buttons on any of their Kindles...

On my Kobos I can still page.