Can JK Rowling bring on e-book standardization?

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by karunaji

You can call it usability but it is also influenced by cultural tradition which makes it somewhat subjective. Even the quotation marks are different in different languages and there are enough differences even between the UK and US typography traditions (in addition to minor linguistic differences). Preferring one over other may show your bias.

By no means, I am saying that good typography is no longer relevant in e-books. But it also doesn't have to copy the same standards that are currently used in print. For example, I question that using a special font for Hagrid's handwritten notes will have the same effect on a reader as in the printed book. Honestly, we don't know it because we don't have enough experience with e-readers yet. In the process of experimenting and assessing the results we may even discover new ways to improve readability.

I think it may even have more of an effect on the reader to have Hagrid's handwriting in a different font. I think it has the chance to stand out more. It has the chance to show off some of what ePub can do and does well.

All you want is a single font family and you don't seem to care about the reading experience for others. I have read the HP books and I have seen the typography used and I do see that it can translate well on an eink screen. Sure, it won't work well on a Kindle, but you have to blame Amazon for sticking with an obsolete eBook format. Have you ever read the HP books? If you did, did you like the typography or did you say to yourself, "I want Hagrid's handwriting in the same font as in the paragraph above."?

Why do you feel that doing it like it was done in the books (or as close as we can) is a bad thing? It's not a bad thing. In fact, it's a very good thing. It's the sort of thing that can maybe start a trend.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by Arrghus

Amen to that. It's a shame that this thread has been hijacked by those wishing to reduce the discussion to intellectual posturing about whose chosen format is better than whose. Reminds me of the silly arguments kids used to have in school about why Nintendo was better than Sega or vice-versa.

I read on my device because I do NOT wish to replicate the book experience. Some people like the feel, the smell, and suchlike of a book. I don't. But that's fine, that's why we have consumer choice. I like being able to read one-handed, to be able to adjust the font size, to be able to prop my device up in its case on the table (or my chest) using its leg feature; I like not having to inhale a musty mildewy smell, to have to put up with poor printing on cheap paper, to have to hold down the page to stop it blowing in the wind... etc., etc..

Others may be different, and that's why a happy medium would be allowing the user to choose between typesetting that more closely resembles the original if that is what they prefer, much like what JoeD (and I'm sure others) above have suggested.

Why are we not discussing the possibility to the abandonment of geographical restrictions in eBooks (if Pottermore really is an independent venture)? Wouldn't it be great if at the checkout one could choose to download the book in whatever language/dialect they want?

Why are we not discussing the possibility of the abandonment of the so-called 'Agency Model'? Some authors might be tied to their publishers when it comes to electronic distribution, but Rowling might provide a wake-up call for others (especially established authors) to not sign away their digital rights when it comes to contract renewal, and instead seek to negotiate directly with sellers like Amazon (and perhaps then promote their books on their own websites)?

Surely discussing aspects of the Pottermore development like those above is more interesting (and more open to the less tech-savvy) than debating the limits of a file format!

The problem is the limit of some minds here. You feel that to try to enrich the reading experience is going to do the exact opposite because you feel it's taking away your choices. You have a choice. Your choice is not to buy if you don't like it. But to say we have to keep it simple because if we make it more complex, it won't work. You would still have the ability to change the text size on your reader. It's just that the way it looks would more approximate the book in terms of fonts and that is not necessarily going to look bad as you seem to think.

By approximating the look of the book, we are not trying to replicate the smell or the feel. Just the look and in this case, there is a good reason to do so. Because the look is quite good.

This is not the thread to talk about the agency model. There are plenty of other threads on that topic.

You are going on about lots of nothing and helping to turn the flow of this thread. I don't see why you don't want the eBook to look nice. Unless it's so people using ePub won't have it better then those using Kindles?

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by murraypaul

Not for me. The point of eInk was that it gave me a device which would last long enough to complete a transatlantic flight, which my previous device (a Palm T3) could not do. Now that tablets can do that as well, I have no need for the eInk device.

But do you want the best reading experience you can get or do you just want words? if you just want words, a text file will do that for you. This is not about eink vs. LCD vs any other electronic reading system. It's about giving the reader the best reading experience. I'm sorry you don't care about that.

[EatingPie]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

Lack of a universal standard has not affected my reading one bit. Neither do I expect it to. Don't get me wrong, it would be nice, but I think we're a long way from one. And when it does eventually happen, I look for ePub(3) AND mobi to both be left swinging in the breeze.

An incredibly short-sighted post! Lack of standard has not affected your reading yet. Just wait until you like another e-Reader that supports ePUB, and all those mobi files you purchased won't work. (I'd also say "selfish," as you ignore all those other Kindle users who might one day want to switch, but have a library of useless mobi format books.)

Other than that, you just repeat your claim and offer no justification or evidence for your beliefs. It's purely "because I say so!" Sorry, but when there is one hold-out, we are indeed very close to a standard. If Rowling can force it (which is unlikely, unless she wants standardization too), the more power to her.

-Pie

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by EatingPie

An incredibly short-sighted post! Lack of standard has not affected your reading yet. Just wait until you like another e-Reader that supports ePUB, and all those mobi files you purchased won't work. (I'd also say "selfish," as you ignore all those other Kindle users who might one day want to switch, but have a library of useless mobi format books.)

You don't know me well, so I'll excuse your ignorance. Suffice to say that my previous purchases will never be orphaned because of an ereader platform change. And as for selfish... well let's just say that I feel pretty comfortable in the knowledge that I've done my part so NO kindle user (or any other device) ever has to lose their previous purchases because of a platform—or similar—change.

Other than that, you just repeat your claim and offer no justification or evidence for your beliefs. It's purely "because I say so!" Sorry, but when there is one hold-out, we are indeed very close to a standard. If Rowling can force it (which is unlikely, unless she wants standardization too), the more power to her.

Didn't know I needed to offer justification. I did qualify my statement with "I think." But if it makes you feel better... I agree with you: only one holdout is "very close to a standard." I just happen to think we're going to be "very close" for a good while yet.

[ApK]

Originally Posted by charleski

No. The vast majority of typographic principles apply perfectly well to reflowable systems. The fixed layout offered by PDF only really comes into play qith regard to complex designs.

But it seems, judging by Amazon's success and effect on the ereader industry, the "vast majority" of what readers want in their e-reading experience is already accommodated by even the smaller subset of feature that mobi offers on eink devices.

I would argue that there is far greater volume of work that is better served by a fixed layout (all the "...For Dummies" books come immediately to mind...I've now officially given up trying to read "Chess for Dummies" on my Kindle) than would be substantively served by only those features that ePub offers over mobi, as nice to have as they might be.
Put another way, when you are talking about works that are seriously diminished by lack of embeddable fonts and certain kinds of indents, or certain nested table structures, then you are most probably talking about complex designs.

if you are restricting yourself to some arbitrary subset that is ONLY needing those specific features to make the difference between a great experience and poor experience, I can only imagine that is a pretty darn small subset, and in those case, the publisher could always save the day by, say, including the critically indented and styled elements as images even in a mobi, if they were that important. I believe this is done now.

[ApK]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

I feel pretty comfortable in the knowledge that I've done my part so NO kindle user (or any other device) ever has to lose their previous purchases because of a platform—or similar—change.

That was YOU? I though it was that OTHER DiapDealer!

ApK

[EatingPie]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

You don't know me well, so I'll excuse your ignorance. Suffice to say that my previous purchases will never be orphaned because of an ereader platform change. And as for selfish... well let's just say that I feel pretty comfortable in the knowledge that I've done my part so NO kindle user (or any other device) ever has to lose their previous purchases because of a platform—or similar—change.

I figured you broke DRM actually, hence me adding the term "selfish." Even if you invented/implemented the DRM crack -- which I would thank you for if you did! -- I would still say you have a selfish attitude. As long as you are not inconvenienced, it's okay. This still leaves a massive amount of users in the dust, as breaking DRM is simply not a common practice; the majority of users likely do not even do it, let alone have the technical expertise to do so.

Many, many people are left spinning in the wind if it ever came to a change of e-Readers (in terms of their purchased content). That's what Amazon wants, because that's what lock-in is all about. And this is precisely why we need a universal format, and precisely why Amazon should be taken to task for holding out.

Didn't know I needed to offer justification. I did qualify my statement with "I think." But if it makes you feel better... I agree with you: only one holdout is "very close to a standard." I just happen to think we're going to be "very close" for a good while yet.

Well, you didn't need to offer justification in the existential sense.... unless the moderators demanded it, of course! But if you want to make a statement and defend it as valid, in that case you need something to support what you're saying. Otherwise we're just shooting our mouths (fingers?) off. Wait. Wait. This is the Internet, that's what we're doing anyway...

I suspect Amazon will continue to hold out, and in that sense, I too agree that we will be very close, but for a long while. There is just too much money involved in keeping customers locked in to the Kindle ecosystem. I suspect a payment ranking in the millions of dollars to Pottermore for mobi support would not even be out of the question.

-Pie

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by ApK

That was YOU? I though it was that OTHER DiapDealer!

Oops! I meant my identical internet cousin who borrows my name/avatar occasionally.

[Andrew H.]

Originally Posted by EatingPie

Many, many people are left spinning in the wind if it ever came to a change of e-Readers (in terms of their purchased content). That's what Amazon wants, because that's what lock-in is all about. And this is precisely why we need a universal format, and precisely why Amazon should be taken to task for holding out.

It is interesting to me how the Kindle readers don't seem to be the ones complaining about Amazon's "lock-in," but the Epub readers. If lock-in were really a problem, you would hear more Kindle users complaining about it, I think.

IMO, what's really going on is some epub readers feel locked out because they want to be able to buy from Amazon but can't because they bought an incompatible device. I don't think that's really Amazon's problem.

I suspect Amazon will continue to hold out, and in that sense, I too agree that we will be very close, but for a long while. There is just too much money involved in keeping customers locked in to the Kindle ecosystem.

We are fine, thanks.

I suspect a payment ranking in the millions of dollars to Pottermore for mobi support would not even be out of the question.

-Pie

Why would Rowlings even be tempted to ignore the dominant e-book format, particularly when she owns a Kindle. You should be pleased she even bothered with e-pub.

And of course all of this concern trolling about standards is completely misplaced. B&N uses Epub, but you still can't read a nookbook on a Kobo or Sony. Apple uses Epub, but you can't read an iBook on a nook or Sony or Kobo. Some standards.

And of course if Amazon did switch to Epub, they would use their own DRM (because there's no way that they are paying Adobe), and you *still* wouldn't be able to read it on other devices.

Unless the book did not have DRM...but if it doesn't have drm, converting formats if trivial now. Or if you didn't mind breaking drm...but again, you would be no better off than you are now.

[Hellmark]

Originally Posted by Andrew H.

It is interesting to me how the Kindle readers don't seem to be the ones complaining about Amazon's "lock-in," but the Epub readers. If lock-in were really a problem, you would hear more Kindle users complaining about it, I think.

And of course all of this concern trolling about standards is completely misplaced. B&N uses Epub, but you still can't read a nookbook on a Kobo or Sony. Apple uses Epub, but you can't read an iBook on a nook or Sony or Kobo. Some standards.

The book format is standardized, the DRM is not. Huge difference. On the lock in, most of the people who it does matter to, avoided the kindle and bought elsewhere.

[ApK]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

but you have to blame Amazon for sticking with an obsolete eBook format.

Funny, I've never seen 'obsolete' used to mean "still most popular, and best selling" like that before.

[ApK]

Originally Posted by Hellmark

The book format is standardized, the DRM is not. Huge difference. On the lock in, most of the people who it does matter to, avoided the kindle and bought elsewhere.

Most of the people who it does matter to are not locked in any sense to any reader, because thanks to people like that other DiapDealer, it's trivial to avoid. It seems the only time it's an issue at all is when non-kindle users try to convince prospective kindle users that they will have issue.

[Hellmark]

Originally Posted by ApK

..thanks to people like that other DiapDealer...

DiapDialer needs to go all Highlander and be "THERE CAN BE ONLY ONE!"

I mean, to have an evil twin like that....

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by Hellmark

DiapDialer needs to go all Highlander and be "THERE CAN BE ONLY ONE!"

I mean, to have an evil twin like that....

It's rough. Especially when the imposter seems more popular. I'm pretty meek, though and tend to let him have his way.