Ereaders: the final chapter for the book?

[jerryleejr]

Originally Posted by zelda_pinwheel

it is, to the degree that *anything* about ebooks is in daily use, since the majority of people still have not heard of them (especially in France). but i first encountered it on a french blog quite some time ago, that is where i learned it, and have seen it used in several different places (always by people who know something about ebooks, of course, so i admit it does remain rather confidential for the moment). also we are making quite a big of progress propagating the word completely artificially in english in this forum.

secret goal : liseuse world domination !!

Well I am going to use it, I work with a couple guys that are pretty fluent in french so I try to pick up a little each day to confuse the hell out of them, I am probably way off on the pronunciation (to much Redneck in me).

JJ

[zelda_pinwheel]

Originally Posted by jerryleejr

Well I am going to use it, I work with a couple guys that are pretty fluent in french so I try to pick up a little each day to confuse the hell out of them, I am probably way off on the pronunciation (to much Redneck in me).

JJ

well i'm just thrilled to hear that. the pronunciation is like "leezeuz", and the "eu" sound is like the "e" sound in the word "her". i'm sure your francophone colleagues could help you out with that though.

[Steven Lyle Jordan]

It's rather a pointless article. The author is basically saying, "book technology sucks. But iPods... they're cool. Book technology will never be cool like iPods." It's a short-sighted premise, based on existing e-book reader tech, which is actually more like a Walkman than an iPod in terms of development.

Gent's use of terms like "pliable and warm" for reams of paper, and "soulless" for CDs, merely illustrates his essential technophobia. Moving on.

[M.H.]

I don't believe the comparison with iPods is valid anyway. Vinyl records, cassette tapes and CDs have always required additional hardware in order to play back the recording so needing an iPod for MP3s was seen as acceptable. It has always been necessary to spend money on this hardware. With paper books, however, you buy the reading hardware with the content and you get get new hardware every time you buy a paper book. For ebooks the hardware is an additional cost that wasn't required before and much higher than it is for the paper book. Anybody who only reads occasionally is going to balk at spending £200+ on an ebook reader. You need to either read a lot or have a need to carry several books at once before it becomes attractive or, what I think is the real barrier, the price has to come down.

[nekokami]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

How can you take an article seriously when the author cannot even use the term eReader properly?

Some might take this as evidence that the term has passed out of the proprietary ownership and entered the common culture as a general term, like "band aid." (But I suppose others will continue to rail against the inevitable. Oh well, I suppose tilting at windmills is a perfectly acceptable hobby.)

I think paperbacks, especially mass-market paperbacks, are doomed to be replaced by ebooks (though probably not until convergent devices capable of reading ebooks AND performing other common functions become popular). The whole paperback distribution process is incredibly wasteful. Hardcovers will probably be around for a very long time, but may get even more expensive than they are currently as they become a specialty item.

But that's just me pretending to be psychic (another popular hobby .)

[Alisa]

Originally Posted by M.H.

I don't believe the comparison with iPods is valid anyway. Vinyl records, cassette tapes and CDs have always required additional hardware in order to play back the recording so needing an iPod for MP3s was seen as acceptable. It has always been necessary to spend money on this hardware. With paper books, however, you buy the reading hardware with the content and you get get new hardware every time you buy a paper book. For ebooks the hardware is an additional cost that wasn't required before and much higher than it is for the paper book. Anybody who only reads occasionally is going to balk at spending £200+ on an ebook reader. You need to either read a lot or have a need to carry several books at once before it becomes attractive or, what I think is the real barrier, the price has to come down.

I agree and I do believe, as with most things techie, the price will drop and the screen technology will improve to the point it's usable for a wider range of content and applications. As this happens, the market for these devices will broaden beyond us book-lovers.

Like most of us here, I do read a lot and I've found quite a few ways in which my reading device saves me money even though that wasn't why I bought it. One of the basic savings is with storage. People may not need extra hardware to read a book but if you want to keep them, you need to store them. My Kindle is pretty cheap as bookshelves go, doesn't take up much space and never needs dusting. As with digital audio players, the portability is a great advantage, the one people usually think of first, but clearing out the clutter from my home has been another huge benefit from both these technologies.

[Argel]

I wonder if it would be more economical to have just one thread for all these articles. It would make it easier for journalists to copy the previous ones. We would even include some simple instructions for a successful article, such as:

1) Vague statistics that have been done to death - no need to check latest figures.
2) Apocalyptic quotes from publishers.
3) Sentence including the words “booksellers” and “worried” or “panic”.
4) Comparison with the iPod.
5) But wait ... blah ... expense ... fragile ... ugly ... nerd ...
6) Praise for the book. Include selection from permitted adjective list: proven, tactile, cherished, friendly, inexpensive, convenient, perfect, time-honoured etc.
7) Conclusion – paper is a long way from dead.
8) Send article across the network to be published on the newspaper’s web-site.

[zelda_pinwheel]

Originally Posted by Argel

I wonder if it would be more economical to have just one thread for all these articles. It would make it easier for journalists to copy the previous ones. We would even include some simple instructions for a successful article, such as:

1) Vague statistics that have been done to death - no need to check latest figures.
2) Apocalyptic quotes from publishers.
3) Sentence including the words “booksellers” and “worried” or “panic”.
4) Comparison with the iPod.
5) But wait ... blah ... expense ... fragile ... ugly ... nerd ...
6) Praise for the book. Include selection from permitted adjective list: proven, tactile, cherished, friendly, inexpensive, convenient, perfect, time-honoured etc.
7) Conclusion – paper is a long way from dead.
8) Send article across the network to be published on the newspaper’s web-site.

it's a good idea, we should do it. journalistes everywhere will thank us.

[Format C:]

Originally Posted by Argel

I wonder if it would be more economical to have just one thread for all these articles. It would make it easier for journalists to copy the previous ones. We would even include some simple instructions for a successful article, such as:

1) Vague statistics that have been done to death - no need to check latest figures.
2) Apocalyptic quotes from National Geographic.
3) Sentence including the words “photograph” and “worried” or “panic”.
4) Comparison with the iPhone.
5) But wait ... blah ... expense ... fragile ... ugly ... nerd ...
6) Praise for the Slide film. Include selection from permitted adjective list: proven, tactile, cherished, friendly, inexpensive, convenient, perfect, time-honoured etc. and nouns like: Fuji Velvia, Ilford, Delta...
7) Conclusion – film photography is a long way from dead.
8) Send article across the network to be published on the newspaper’s web-site.

Where did I heard it?
:chinscratc h: