Charles Stross on eBooks

[ATimson]

Originally Posted by mr ploppy

What do they do when they want to reprint it, when someone makes a film/TV version, or there is some other reason there has been a rise in demand for it?

If they don't have the print-ready files anymore, it's possible to reprint the book as more or less 300 full-page images. THe quality's not as good as something that's fully typeset, obviously, but it's been done.

[tompe]

Originally Posted by mr ploppy

What do they do when they want to reprint it, when someone makes a film/TV version, or there is some other reason there has been a rise in demand for it? If they are really deleting print ready files, that is a pretty short sighted decision given the relatively low cost of storage space.

I though they saved the galley proofs in hard copy.

If they have not saved thing they can just retype the book.

[tompe]

Originally Posted by DawnFalcon

I don't know where he gets his ideas, period. It's laughable to suggest that the agency model is going to lead to more overall profits for the book publishers, and this will speed anything.

Good then that it was not suggested than. It was an if-statement and no valuation of what was going to happen.

[tompe]

Originally Posted by EricLandes

Stross pretty consistently slants his writing as anti-Amazon. I don't know from where this (un-?)intentional bias originates.

Why do you think it is just anti-Amazon. From what I read it is anti-"big inflexible entities that uses their bigness in bad ways". It is anti-drm (which is anti-big publishers) and so on.

And as was pointed out in this thread Amazon have a long history of behaving badly. So I really do not get why people here seem not to remember this. Remember for example the threat of a DMCA takedown against MR.

[mr ploppy]

Originally Posted by tompe

Remember for example the threat of a DMCA takedown against MR.

What was that about?

[tompe]

Originally Posted by mr ploppy

What was that about?

The demanded that information about the script that got the PID from a Kindle be removed since that enabled people to buy books from other places than Amazon.

[Catire]

Originally Posted by mr ploppy

What was that about?

Link

[DawnFalcon]

Originally Posted by tompe

Good then that it was not suggested than. It was an if-statement and no valuation of what was going to happen.

Oh come off it, the entire piece was cheerleader for the major publishers print business, and some whining (which he won't change publishers because of) about the ebook side.

(I used to like Mr. Stross, then he basically told me to not)

[dadioflex]

Edit.

[HansTWN]

Originally Posted by tompe

The demanded that information about the script that got the PID from a Kindle be removed since that enabled people to buy books from other places than Amazon.

It is the other way around, it enabled books that were bought from Amazon to be read on other devices. You could always read non-DRM mobi files (and later PDF files) on the Kindle.

[tompe]

Originally Posted by HansTWN

It is the other way around, it enabled books that were bought from Amazon to be read on other devices. You could always read non-DRM mobi files (and later PDF files) on the Kindle.

Only together with DRM removal tools. The script alone did what I said.

[calvin-c]

Originally Posted by tompe

Only together with DRM removal tools. The script alone did what I said.

It's always seemed to me that Amazon was more interested in selling Kindles than ebooks. That's what the big fuss with the publishers was-they were selling ebooks for less than they were paying the publishers, taking a loss in order to grow the market for Kindles.

So I really don't think Amazon was concerned that people were buying Kindles to read books from other sources-I think they were concerned that they were buying the cheaper Kindle books to read on other devices.

[kjk]

Originally Posted by calvin-c

It's always seemed to me that Amazon was more interested in selling Kindles than ebooks. That's what the big fuss with the publishers was-they were selling ebooks for less than they were paying the publishers, taking a loss in order to grow the market for Kindles.

So I really don't think Amazon was concerned that people were buying Kindles to read books from other sources-I think they were concerned that they were buying the cheaper Kindle books to read on other devices.

Really? I think the exact opposite. I think Amazon is happy to have their eBooks on as many devices as possible...the Kindle was just the easiest and quickest way to get the platform established.

Which is why there are now Kindle Readers for the iPhone, iPad, Windows, and Mac platforms.

[Elfwreck]

Originally Posted by kjk

Really? I think the exact opposite. I think Amazon is happy to have their eBooks on as many devices as possible...the Kindle was just the easiest and quickest way to get the platform established.

If they wanted them on as many devices as possible, they'd release them as .mobi/.pdb, and not require the Kindle app at all. The non-DRM'd ones are .mobi with a different extension; the DRM'd ones use a different ID system than mobi, but it's still the same type of file.

[Sonist]

Originally Posted by Elfwreck

If they wanted them on as many devices as possible, they'd release them as .mobi/.pdb, and not require the Kindle app at all. The non-DRM'd ones are .mobi with a different extension; the DRM'd ones use a different ID system than mobi, but it's still the same type of file.

I would think they are more interested in selling ebooks.

If Amazon had not released Kindle apps for the iPhone/iPad, Blackberry and soon for Android, they probably would have sold more Kindles.

At least some avid readers would have chosen a Kindle over an iPad, if they didn't have access to Amazon's ebook store.