Kindle vs Paperback: Where's The Advantage?

[Quasimodem]

Checked the price of Baldacci's new one out in paperback today at the grocery store. Price: $10.99. A Kindle download of the same book:$12.99.

I thought Kindle/Amazon were in competition with the booksellers?

If I'm at the store anyway, I may as well pick up the paperback, right?

Sounds a little like what Netflix is doing: not giving a shit.

Thanks

Q

[DigitalC]

The advantage is in not having to have the book.

[ZipperJJ]

Checked the price of Baldacci's new one out in paperback today at the grocery store. Price: $10.99. A Kindle download of the same book:$12.99.

I thought Kindle/Amazon were in competition with the booksellers?

If I'm at the store anyway, I may as well pick up the paperback, right?

Sounds a little like what Netflix is doing: not giving a shit.

Thanks

Q

Yeah but you can pay the extra $2 and have the book alongside 100 other books in one tiny device. You can read it one-handed laying in bed. You can buy it while sitting on the toilet. It won't end up in a landfill. You won't lose it in a fire or a flood.

You don't scratch your head and wonder why a loaf of bread is more expensive at the gas station than the grocery store do you? Convenience is the name of the game!

[Peremensoe]

You can read it one-handed laying in bed. You can buy it while sitting on the toilet.

I can certainly do these things with paperbacks.

You won't lose it in a fire or a flood.

...you really hope.

[Sudden Kestrel]

Kindles (and other e-readers, I assume) are great for those of us who have eyes bigger than libraries; we don't have to provide shelf space for all of those books. I'm always running out of room due to my visits to the secondhand stores' book departments as it is. The other advantage for me is that I read a lot of books that are large and heavy, and since I have repetitive stress injuries to my hands I would have a much harder time reading them in physical book form than I do on my Kindle.

I haven't run into any books so far that are more expensive in the Kindle store than otherwise, but that probably has something to do with the type of books I buy. I suppose it's like anything else in retail: they charge more for the things more people are likely to want.

[Peremensoe]

You can buy it while sitting on the toilet.

Oh, buy it. I thought that was "read it."

[Der Trihs]

Yeah but you can pay the extra $2 and have the book alongside 100 other books in one tiny device. You can read it one-handed laying in bed. You can buy it while sitting on the toilet. It won't end up in a landfill. You won't lose it in a fire or a flood.Sure you can, e-readers aren't indestructible. And Amazon can decide to reach out and delete or censor "your" books whenever they want because they aren't actually yours.

[Two Many Cats]

The ebook in my online class wasn't uploading. It took 2 emails and a tech call to fix the problem.

This is why paper books rule.

And I love having 2000+ books around my place. Gives it tone.

[Two Many Cats]

You can read it one-handed laying in bed.

Nah, the picture quality isn't that good.

[obfusciatrist]

They could, but I'm not too worried about it. And if they do I can then go out and buy a paper copy of the book if I need one.

I'd pay the same price as paper for the convenience of not having the physical object to deal with (since 99% of all the books I ever bought were of no value to me after I finished reading it).

That said, Amazon doesn't get to set their prices in a vacuum, the publisher has something to say about it. Amazon's eBook edition is likely from the hardcover publisher and priced in relation to that. Eventually the price will likely come down. If you look at the other Baldacci titles that have been out in paperback for more than a couple weeks the prices are all similar to the paperback price.

[aruvqan]

You can load NONAMAZON books in a kindle as well. I have every book Baen has published to date, which includes a bunch of free books, all sorts of stuff from Gutenberg, and there are other places to get free books, or to buy books that are not amazon and not locked with DRM. [My roomie currently carries my kindle, I prefer to read on my droid. I would not have bought the kindle but it was a christmas present]

[Der Trihs]

And I love having 2000+ books around my place. Gives it tone.
That too. A place just doesn't feel like home to me until I have my bookcases all up and filled.

[DrFidelius]

That too. A place just doesn't feel like home to me until I have my bookcases all up and filled.

Up and filled and those unsorted piles that I'm really going to get around to in odd corners. (I shop thrift stores for books almost exclusively, and I like science fiction and fantasy series. The unpredicatable availability means I have several series with Book 1, Book 2, and books 5 through 7 waiting until I find books 3 and 4. Jim Butcher readers don't donate their copies anywhere near quickly enough.)

[Gyrate]

The ebook in my online class wasn't uploading. It took 2 emails and a tech call to fix the problem.My argument against electronic textbooks is the phrase "I couldn't do the assignment - my book crashed."

Amazon can decide to reach out and delete or censor "your" books whenever they want because they aren't actually yours. This was actually a plot point in one of Jasper Fforde's Tuesday next books, which predated the Kindle by several years - the proposal to limit books to three readings to stop people from sharing them. Scary.

[Dangerosa]

I love my Kindle, but that doesn't mean I have to give up paperback or hardcover books. Or the library.

Some books are worth having physically. Some are cheaper in physical form. Most are cheaper in ebook form and most aren't worth owning physically. I have a 3500 square foot house and too many books already - plenty of bookcases up and filled, plenty of stacks of books in corners and we are constantly giving away books because we have no more room for them. But the nice thing about the Kindle is that when I leave for lunch and get finished with the book I read, I have 40 sitting on my Kindle I can reread. Or, as long as I'm near an open wifi, I can buy another one. And there are TONS of really cheap books out there.

The kindle is - surprisingly - a better reading experience. Its lighter than a paperback. It has a better form factor. I find it easier to read. And, when my 44 year old eyes get tired, I can change the text size. Mine fell into my hands for free, I would have NEVER thought I'd like one and only gave it a try because I had one and thought I'd try it before I gave it away.

[Spoke]

If they're not going to pass along the savings they get by eliminating publication and distribution costs, I'll just keep buying paperbacks, thanks.

[NAF1138]

The kindle is - surprisingly - a better reading experience. Its lighter than a paperback. It has a better form factor. I find it easier to read.

This. I only have 4 or 5 actual amazon books on my kindle, everything else is public domain or purchased from the publisher (like Baen). I have a few hundred books on my Kindle. I read it all the time, at the gym, in line at the grocery store, in bed before going to sleep. Hell if my wife wants to go to sleep I switch to the kindle app on my phone (or for non Amazon books a different ebook reader, the kindle app has limitations).

Then the new George R R Martin book A Dance With Dragons came out. I really want to read this book. I have been waiting for six years to read this book. I was given a copy of this book in hardcover (I have them all in hardcover) when it was released. It's frustrating to read the damn thing! It's not portable enough. It's heavy, and clumsy and huge. I can't take it with me easily to the store or the gym, and I can't read it in the dark on my phone. When my wife wants to go to bed I have to go to the living room to keep reading. I know these are petty things, and it's not like I am not reading the book, but the eBook experience is nicer in a lot of ways. I am not going to buy it again on eBook, but if I could get a copy of the eBook with the hardcover for free (like Baen does) I would probably be reading that version instead and using the paper version just to look at maps and reference appendices.

Edit: the pricing thing is stupid though. All eBooks used to be $9.99 on Amazon until book publishers stepped in and started mandating their own prices. This is a large part of the reason why I won't by Amazon eBooks if I can help it. There are enough good eBooks to be found elsewhere and non price gouging prices.

[Shakester]

Amazon can decide to reach out and delete or censor "your" books whenever they want because they aren't actually yours.

I'm pretty sure we've been over this before. I strip the DRM from all my eBooks. It's quite simple to do. I have secure back-ups of all of my eBooks, including the ones I bought from Amazon. In fact I have backups of all my important data in completely separate locations, so even if my house burned down or was carried away by a flood, I'd still have copies of my ebooks. Can you say that of your dead-tree books?

I don't use the wi-fi thing on my Kindle anyway, and I haven't registered it with Amazon. That means that Big Brother Amazon couldn't delete anything from my Kindle even if they wanted to.

So, no, you are wrong. I own my eBooks and they're completely secure.

[NAF1138]

I'm pretty sure we've been over this before. I strip the DRM from all my eBooks. It's quite simple to do. I have secure back-ups of all of my eBooks, including the ones I bought from Amazon. In fact I have backups of all my important data in completely separate locations, so even if my house burned down or was carried away by a flood, I'd still have copies of my ebooks. Can you say that of your dead-tree books?

I don't use the wi-fi thing on my Kindle anyway, and I haven't registered it with Amazon. That means that Big Brother Amazon couldn't delete anything from my Kindle even if they wanted to.

So, no, you are wrong. I own my eBooks and they're completely secure.

How do you strip the DRM from the eBooks? PM me if this gets into questionable legal territory.

[Anaamika]

I love my Kindle, but that doesn't mean I have to give up paperback or hardcover books. Or the library.



Ditto. I own a Kindle. At this point I have 70+ books on it, slowly building up my library. And yet I still have a whole bunch of books at home, and I went to the library on Wednesday.

It's not a replacement for books. It's an addition. I just don't have the space for all those books.

And I also have secure backups for all of my e-books. I never download from Amazon straight onto my Kindle; I use the interim step of my computer and then I backup my computer.

[Athena]

Sure you can, e-readers aren't indestructible. And Amazon can decide to reach out and delete or censor "your" books whenever they want because they aren't actually yours.

As Shakester points out, this argument has been proven wrong about a thousand times. No, e-readers aren't indestructible, but they're cheap enough that you can buy a new one for relatively low cost if you happen to drop yours in the toilet.

Amazon ONCE deleted a book off people's readers when it was discovered that it was sold in violation of the copyright. They also refunded their money. Not a bad deal, if you ask me. And even if you disagree, it's very easy to make it so that nothing is ever removed; simply turn off the internet connection on the Kindle, and use a USB cord to transfer items from your computer to the Kindle. There ya go; Amazon will never, ever, ever be able to remove things from your Kindle.

I'm hip to not liking e-readers, but the above reason is flat out incorrect.

[Shakester]

I travel light. I have to move every few years. Storage space is something I can't afford. I eBayed most of my physical dead-tree books before my last move. The ones I didn't sell I donated. I kept less than 10 books.

The Kindle is a WONDERFUL thing for a person in my position. Until I bought my Kindle, I was only reading books from the library, because I didn't want to start buying books again. I don't have the space and I'm sick of schlepping big heavy boxes full of books everywhere.

So I'd have to do without if I finished my books before going back to the library, and I had to make sure my books weren't overdue, and I had to carry the damned heavy things around in my backpack, often while also carrying shopping bags etc on public transport.

You folks with cars and houses and unlimited storage space have NO IDEA what and absolute BOON the Kindle is to someone like me.

[LurkMeister]

Just about all the books on my Kindle are ones I got free or discounted, so cost of the books is one advantage; I have the complete works of Mark Twain for (IIRC) $2.99. When I travel, I used to have to spend time trying to decide what books I might want to read during the trip, then pack them all into my carry on bag. Now I just take my Kindle, which has a wide selection of books, takes up much less space, and is easier to read from than a bulky book.

[Onomatopoeia]

You folks with cars and houses and unlimited storage space have NO IDEA what and absolute BOON the Kindle is to someone like me.I have houses and cars (heh) and I find my Kindle to be invaluable. I have a few hundred books on it at this point and have, to my knowledge, never paid more for a book than its printed version.

More important than the price of books, however, for me is the convenience. I love being able to take my library wherever I go. I love being able to buy a book, 24-hours a day, wherever I happen to be at the moment. I love being able to want a book and have it literally 2 minutes later. I love not having to go to a bookstore only to find they don't have the book I want.

[Spoke]

I have a few hundred books on it at this point and have, to my knowledge, never paid more for a book than its printed version.

They should cost considerably less than the printed version, given the savings in publication and distribution costs.

And for those playing the bleeding heart "dead tree" card, why not let your heart bleed for the jobs lost because of these readers? Pine trees grow back. (Pretty quickly, actually.) Jobs do not.

Or if you want to think more selfishly about it, corporations are eliminating thousands of jobs and loads of costs...and are keeping the savings all to their greedy selves. Hell, at least Wal-Mart passes the savings along when it destroys jobs.

[Anaamika]

I don't have the space and I'm sick of schlepping big heavy boxes full of books everywhere.


Yeah, I don't move a lot, but you only have to move twice in two years to start thinking "Simplify, simplify." And those huge piles of books are the worst.

[Shakester]

I have houses and cars (heh) and I find my Kindle to be invaluable. I have a few hundred books on it at this point and have, to my knowledge, never paid more for a book than its printed version.

More important than the price of books, however, for me is the convenience. I love being able to take my library wherever I go. I love being able to buy a book, 24-hours a day, wherever I happen to be at the moment. I love being able to want a book and have it literally 2 minutes later. I love not having to go to a bookstore only to find they don't have the book I want.

Sorry, didn't mean to imply that your perspective on them is any less valid than mine. There are many reasons to love the Kindle. :)

[Nightfall1]

As Ray Bradbury said "If it doesn't look like a book, feel like a book or smell like a book, I don't want it" Not word for word but close enough to get the meaning.

[silenus]

Ray Bradbury is also a reactionary old grouch.

Kindle Über Alles!

At the speed I read, I used to have to carry 10 lbs. of books with me if I was going away for a weekend. Now, I just toss the Kindle in the backpack and I'm good. My paperback copy of "Chesapeake" alone weighs twice what the Kindle does.

[Peremensoe]

The kindle is - surprisingly - a better reading experience. Its lighter than a paperback. It has a better form factor.

Of course I understand this from a convenience perspective when one wishes to carry (many) books around. But for being ensconced at home, my clear preference is for (moderately) heavy hardcovers. Heavy paper with a little texture to it, big sturdy bindings. It makes the act of reading feel... well, more substantial, more purposeful. Just like reading a good physical newspaper feels better than clicking around news sites.

[SpoilerVirgin]

Instant gratification.

Old method: I read about a book that interests me. If its an older book that's already out in paperback, I go to the bookstore or the library to see if its available. I may have to search several stores, or ask that it be ordered for me. More recently, I might order it online. It may take days or weeks to obtain the book.

If it's a new book that isn't out in paperback yet, I add it to the paperback list. I also do this if I'm in a bookstore and see a new hardback that I want. Then I keep checking back online or at the bookstore to see when the paperback will be released. Months later, I pick up the paperback in the store.

Kindle method: I read about a book that interests me, or see a new hardback that I want. In 2 minutes I'm reading the book.

The convenience of carrying multiple books, the ease of reading on the Kindle, and not needing to store 100s of books at home are all good too, but nothing beats "that book sounds interesting -- and now I'm reading it."

[Shakester]

I find it interesting that eBooks and eReaders have so many haters. They really seem to bring out the Luddite in some folks. You realise you're using computers to write your anti-new-technology rants, and that you're posting them on the internet, right?

Personally, I'm interested in the words, not the package. Fetishising the delivery system seems a bit like you're missing the point to me. I value the knowledge, not the physical object.

[Prelude to Fascination]

[snip]
It's not a replacement for books. It's an addition.

I don't have an e-reader of any type, and will probably be among the last to get one. But I can accept this argument for it instead of the "print is dead" movement (not that I'd have a choice anyway if/when paper books go the way of the diplodocus -- I've gone to my local car lot to buy a 2011 Model T, but dammit, they just don't have any!)

Besides, as others have said, showing off your books in your house is part of the experience of having books. Even if you're not "showing off," the books are part of the decor. Not to mention how the hell are authors supposed to autograph e-books at signings?

[salinqmind]

I brought home a stack of interesting old paperbacks from a library book sale for a dollar. The price was certainly right, but the printing is near-microscopic on dessicated darkened pages, and it's a real chore to read them.

[Lobohan]

Not to mention how the hell are authors supposed to autograph e-books at signings?They can tweet you a message.

[Anaamika]

Not to mention how the hell are authors supposed to autograph e-books at signings?

If I loved an author enough to get his autograph, I'd damn well get his real hardcover book!

Unlike others I don't think books are actually going anywhere anytime soon. There are just too many readers out there, and not enough books on Kindle yet. But Kindle is a great addition to my library.

[silenus]

Not to mention how the hell are authors supposed to autograph e-books at signings?

If you really care, there are ways (http://yfrog.com/kf6szdj). :p

[Peremensoe]

I find it interesting that eBooks and eReaders have so many haters.

Am I included here? I don't hate them, I said I recognized some ways in which they were convenient.

Personally, I'm interested in the words, not the package. Fetishising the delivery system seems a bit like you're missing the point to me. I value the knowledge, not the physical object.

I value both. Look, do you care what your clothes look like, or just how warm and dry they keep you? Do you care how your dishes look and feel, or just how effectively they contain your food?

[Exapno Mapcase]

I find it interesting that eBooks and eReaders have so many haters. They really seem to bring out the Luddite in some folks. You realise you're using computers to write your anti-new-technology rants, and that you're posting them on the internet, right?

Personally, I'm interested in the words, not the package. Fetishising the delivery system seems a bit like you're missing the point to me. I value the knowledge, not the physical object.

Physical books are an evolved technology. Their design, from the covers to paper they're printed on down to the font and leading, have evolved over time to give the best possible reading experience.

E-books are new technology. For many people, the physical act of reading them is less pleasant than the physical act of reading ink on paper. Or the physical act of holding the e-reader. Or the physical act of looking at a computer screen.

There is nothing remotely luddite about this. Different technologies appeal to different people because they satisfy different needs. A desktop is a different technology from a tablet. Heck, a stove is a different technology from a microwave. They both do about the same thing for many foods, but they aren't identical and one will give superior results over the other in specific cases. That's exactly true for e-readers and print books. For a long while most people will want both, just as right now most people have a stove and a microwave.

The argument that people who like print books are somehow backward or hypocritical is a remarkably stupid one. I can say this on a computer because that is in this instance the best way to communicate with you. If you were in the same room and I used a computer instead of talking to you, that would be stupid indeed. But talking wouldn't make me a luddite. Just the opposite; it would mean I'm using the best tool for the job.

Print books will live as long as they are the best tools. We may yet see e-readers evolve to equal them for most purposes, but we're not anywhere near that point. Nobody cares that you prefer them. It only crosses the line when you tell the rest of us that we are wrong about our own understanding of our own needs and preferences.

[Anaamika]

The argument that people who like print books are somehow backward or hypocritical is a remarkably stupid one. I can say this on a computer because that is in this instance the best way to communicate with you. If you were in the same room and I used a computer instead of talking to you, that would be stupid indeed. But talking wouldn't make me a luddite. Just the opposite; it would mean I'm using the best tool for the job.



But the argument that e-readers suck automatically is just as foolish, isn't it? They have their place just as books do.

[Son of a Rich]

nm

[Drunky Smurf]

Oh, buy it. I thought that was "read it."

I can buy books on the toilet with my smart phone.

I agree that both paper books and Kindles have their advantages and can meet different needs for different people.

[Thudlow Boink]

We've had long and heated discussions before about the pricing of Kindle books, and why/whether they're more expensive than print editions. Kindle bait and switch (What? Book for $14.99!) (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=607086)

To answer the thread title's question, there are quite a few advantages to having a Kindle edition vs. a paperback, as well as some disadvantages.

A few advantages to Kindle books (some of which have already been noted):
* You can easily carry many books with you when you're traveling or out and about.
* Kindle books don't take up shelf space and clutter up your home.
* You can adjust the text size, so (if necessary) any book can be a large-print edition.
* You can access your book on multiple devices (Kindle itself & Kindle apps for PCs and mobile devices).
* You can underline and make annotations, and have these electronically saved for you (and you can see what other readers have highlited).
* You can search through the book for words or phrases.
* You can easily look up definitions of unfamiliar words with the built-in dictionary.
* Many people find Kindles easier to hold and read than at least some books: you can lay them flat on the table, or hold them and turn pages with one hand.
* You can have the Kindle's text-to-speech option read the book to you. [Not well enough that I'd want to do much "reading" that way, but I can see how it could be a boon for those with vision issues.]
* Even if your device itself gets lost, broken, or stolen, you can still access all the books you've bought from Amazon.
* Kindle books don't get torn, worn, or stained.

Some disadvantages:
* Any features of the print edition beyond plain text, like pictures, color, or special layouts, may not show up as well, or may be missing entirely, in the Kindle edition.
* You can't flip through a Kindle book as easily, or flip back and forth from one part of the book to another.
* Some Kindle books have significant errors (typographical, etc.) as artifacts of the OCR conversion process.
* You don't really have the option to re-sell, trade, or give away a book you've bought after you're done with it, as you can with physical books.
* You miss the look, feel, and smell of holding a physical book.
* You don't have the book sitting on your shelf, reminding you of or enticing you to the pleasure of reading it.
* The downside of carrying all those books around on one device is that if something happens to it, you can be stuck with nothing to read.

And that's just comparing the books themselves. The process of shopping for/obtaining them also has its upsides and downsides.

[Bosstone]

If I loved an author enough to get his autograph, I'd damn well get his real hardcover book!Too right. I bought an audio version of a book and later met the author at a convention. I told him I loved the book and would love an autograph, but it's kind of hard to do that with an audiobook. He pointed me at the vendor who was selling his stuff, and I gladly snatched up a copy just for his signature.

I'm perfectly content to have a device stuffed with thousands of ebooks for reading, but keep a bookshelf of special books: signed copies, first editions, textbooks, that kind of thing.

[Shakester]

Print books will live as long as they are the best tools. We may yet see e-readers evolve to equal them for most purposes, but we're not anywhere near that point.

I'm not the only person in this thread that prefers reading on a Kindle to using a paper book.

OK, it's your opinion that eReaders are not as good as real books, but my opinion is the exact opposite. And since it's all opinion, you can't make a sweeping statement about print books being "the best tools". Because, for me and for many others, they're not.

All this makes me wonder if you've actually tried a Kindle. Not iPads and those sorts of things, not mini-computers with backlit screens, something with a proper e-ink screen. Have you actually tried reading something on a Kindle, or are you basing your opinion on what you imagine them to be like?

[mlees]

I'm not the only person in this thread that prefers reading on a Kindle to using a paper book.

OK, it's your opinion that eReaders are not as good as real books, but my opinion is the exact opposite. And since it's all opinion, you can't make a sweeping statement about print books being "the best tools". Because, for me and for many others, they're not.

All this makes me wonder if you've actually tried a Kindle. Not iPads and those sorts of things, not mini-computers with backlit screens, something with a proper e-ink screen. Have you actually tried reading something on a Kindle, or are you basing your opinion on what you imagine them to be like?

I read your arguments as "If you prefer paper books, you're stoopid." and "you can't have tried it, because if you did, you would be luvin it like I do".

I think this approach is counter productive, if your goal is to actually win someone over to the kindle.

[Hello Again]

OK, it's your opinion that eReaders are not as good as real books, but my opinion is the exact opposite. And since it's all opinion, you can't make a sweeping statement about print books being "the best tools". Because, for me and for many others, they're not.

I think the point was that a physical book is still the best tool for some uses while a e-book is the best tool for different uses -- and that it is not the case that a e-book reader can do everything a book can do. They have overlapping, but not identical, utility, and a big area where physical books win is in durability. As long as the utility remains different, physical books will not be eliminated.

Like, can you still read an ebook after you dropped the reader in the bathtub? Can you leave a Kindle in the backseat of your car, in the blazing sun without damaging it? (or inviting theft). Is it a good idea to put a Kindle face down in the sand if you're at the beach?

Physical books also have the property of being highly exchangable. Can you give e-books to a charitable cause when you're done with them? Does an e-book have any resale value? Can you make friends with someone on the train, and swap ebooks with them?

[Morbo]

I prefer books.

For one, the moment I sit down in my seat on the plane, I'm reading. I don't care if the plane is delayed, I don't care if we're not at 10,000 feet, I don't care that we're landing, I'm reading my book.

For another, I can read it on the beach and not care if I get it slightly wet and sandy.

For another, when I'm on vacation I kinda like leaving a book and grabbing another knowing nothing about it. I've found more than one author that way I would have never found otherwise.

Finally, I have the luxury of having a pretty damn decent library system, as well as a branch right by my house that can have books shipped to it from the main branch. For free of course.

[Lynn Bodoni]

I'm slowly, slowly becoming a fan of my Nook.

I don't buy any ebook that costs more than a new paperback book. I'm not saying that I'll never do this, but there's quite a selection of books that are competitively priced. I've found that I can buy some old, old books on the Nook that are almost impossible to find. For instance, I just finished re-reading Cats in the Belfry by Doreen Tovey, which was written the year I was born. This book is definitely fluffy, but I think it's hilarious. And it's almost impossible to find a decent copy of it in dead tree edition for a reasonable price. Most of the copies I've bought are rather battered. My e-book copy, though, is in great shape. I've bought many other ebooks, mostly as replacements of paperbacks that I already own, but which are really too battered to handle for very much longer. I've gone through several (new) volumes of the Windrose Chronicles by Barbara Hambly, for instance, because I keep re-reading them. It's not just Hambly, there are many other authors and books that I reread.

I find the Nook so handy now. I always tuck it into my purse when I go out, and I generally read for half an hour or so before I go to bed. I used to take at least two or three paperbacks in my purse, but now I take the Nook, and it's smaller and lighter than multiple paperbacks. The next time I have to go into the hospital, the Nook and its power cord are definitely going with me. I don't watch much TV, and if I don't have access to a game console, I'll go through several books a day, which can add up to some serious weight.

However, I have the original Nook, which means that I won't see color in the text, only black and white. And even the B&W images are greatly reduced in size. That's one drawback. Another drawback is that it's a lot harder to flip back and forth between one scene and another, if I want to go back to see the foreshadowing, for instance. The page turning function doesn't work nearly as quickly as I'd like.

Finally, there's the issue of buying ebooks. I can buy as many ebooks as I want at 3 AM, as long as I have money in my account. This is both a benefit AND a drawback. I can also sit down and browse with almost no physical effort. This is definitely a drawback, because I get some exercise by wandering around various stores. Even at a slow amble, I'll usually spend a couple of hours in a bookstore, and that does add up to a bit of exercise. I should probably try to rig up a Nook holder for my CardioCruiser.

I do find the cover to be poorly designed. It's attractive enough, but the front cover won't fold back neatly, so that I can hold it in one hand. And the closing strap also doesn't fold neatly out of the way. I might have to make my own cover.

I find that at least some books seem to not be proofread at all. In the Windrose books, for instance, "th" is substituted in many cases for "m", resulting in "me" being rendered as "the". The spacing is also rather erratic. If I hadn't previously read the books, I might have been stumped by some passages. As it was, I had to stop and stare at the words for a couple of seconds before realizing that the scanning wasn't perfect.

I still enjoy dead tree books, and will probably buy at least part of my library in dead trees. I never thought that I'd like an ereader, but I received this as a gift.

[Dangerosa]

I think the point was that a physical book is still the best tool for some uses while a e-book is the best tool for different uses -- and that it is not the case that a e-book reader can do everything a book can do. They have overlapping, but not identical, utility, and a big area where physical books win is in durability. As long as the utility remains different, physical books will not be eliminated.

Like, can you still read an ebook after you dropped the reader in the bathtub? Can you leave a Kindle in the backseat of your car, in the blazing sun without damaging it? (or inviting theft). Is it a good idea to put a Kindle face down in the sand if you're at the beach?

Physical books also have the property of being highly exchangable. Can you give e-books to a charitable cause when you're done with them? Does an e-book have any resale value? Can you make friends with someone on the train, and swap ebooks with them?

I can't read a book after I drop it in the bathtub either.....On the other hand, when I drop my Kindle, when I get my new Kindle, all my books automatically sync up with it. My Kindle has been carried for two years in my purse or briefcase, read in the tub, gotten wet, been spilled on and read with greasy fingers, and spent an entire week getting set in the sand on Maui (I don't value it much because I can get a new one for what I consider a small amount of money and the one I'm using was free). Its taken that beating for two years - with one little chip in the screen (from before I had a case for it and use to let it just knock around in my purse) and one system reset. Its a surprisingly durable piece of hardware

[Exapno Mapcase]

All this makes me wonder if you've actually tried a Kindle. Not iPads and those sorts of things, not mini-computers with backlit screens, something with a proper e-ink screen. Have you actually tried reading something on a Kindle, or are you basing your opinion on what you imagine them to be like?

Yes, I own a Kindle. Have for years.

I read your posts exactly the way mlees did:
I read your arguments as "If you prefer paper books, you're stoopid." and "you can't have tried it, because if you did, you would be luvin it like I do".

Calling print readers luddites destroys your credibility instantly. There are advantages at times for either format, but for my personal needs and desires print books are normally far superior. That makes me an intelligent consumer, not a luddite.

And I read all kinds of books. Go to a bookstore - I know, the horror! - and take a look around. Novels work pretty well on a Kindle. Nonfiction books with graphs or charts or lots of footnotes or with both footnotes and endnotes work less well. Illustrated books don't really work at all. Those range from illustrations in, say, a book about science to coffee table photography books. In fact, all oversize books don't work well in Kindle. Size in and of itself is a factor in design and readability and the impact on a reader. That also applies to the many books where the clever design and layout of typography is part of the experience. Even many novels rely on typographic tricks that don't translate well. Children's books don't really work on Kindles. I'm not sure how well cookbooks do - I like having the pictures. All those computer books that use screen grabs and fit the text around them would need to be completely rethought. Lots of humor books require the interplay of words and text, like the Sexy Book of Sexy Sex by Kristen Schaal and Rich Blomquist (http://www.amazon.com/Sexy-Book-Sex-Kristen-Schaal/dp/0811871266/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1311360073&sr=8-1). Not surprisingly, there is no Kindle edition at all. Some poetry is designed about the layout of the words on the page. It could be done, but scaling would destroy the intent.

"It works for me, therefore it should work for everybody" is a hopeless argument. That's the only one you've made so far. You're standing in a corner staring at a wall and insisting that's the only view of the room. That's objectively wrong, not just subjectively wrong.

[Onomatopoeia]

They should cost considerably less than the printed version, given the savings in publication and distribution costs.Most books that I've bought for my Kindle have been priced lower, some significantly lower, than the printed version. I've also purchased books from Amazon (and other sources) for free. All I'm saying is cost is not my motivation for owning and loving my Kindle.

And for those playing the bleeding heart "dead tree" card, why not let your heart bleed for the jobs lost because of these readers? Pine trees grow back. (Pretty quickly, actually.) Jobs do not.Sorry. I'm just not one of those people who feel a job should be maintained when innovation makes it obsolete. I'm not thrilled that unemployment is as high as it currently is either, but propping up an industry when more efficient alternatives present themselves is not the solution.

Or if you want to think more selfishly about it, corporations are eliminating thousands of jobs and loads of costs...and are keeping the savings all to their greedy selves. Hell, at least Wal-Mart passes the savings along when it destroys jobs.They do?

[Spoke]

They do?

Yes they do. Which is exactly why they run Mom-and-Pops out of business. Wal-Mart sells stuff cheaply.

[PunditLisa]

I think both have their place.

Kindle's advantages
*Less clutter
*Less bulk, especially if you want to take multiple books with you
*Centralized location so no losing books
*Easier to read with font size selection
*Games!
*Booklights work better because there's just one screen to illuminate
*Convenience of downloading new books
*New books are usually a few bucks cheaper
*They remain in pristine condition
*Recommendations page

Book's advantages
*Their batteries don't run out
*They take more abuse (I broke the screen on my first Kindle)
*Old books are usually cheaper, esp at Half Price bookstores
*You don't have to worry about them getting stolen at the pool, etc.
*When you're done, you can give the book to a friends
*The flight attendant doesn't make you stop reading during take-off and landing
*You don't have to fork over $100 just to start reading
*You can sell used books
*You can see any photographs included
*Not all books are available as e-books
*Less impulse buying
*e-books are driving bookstores out of business

[mlees]

*The flight attendant doesn't make you stop reading during take-off and landing

Do they really? Wow. The RF from a Kindle can't be much...

[Shakester]

I read your arguments as "If you prefer paper books, you're stoopid." and "you can't have tried it, because if you did, you would be luvin it like I do".

I think this approach is counter productive, if your goal is to actually win someone over to the kindle.

My goal is to encourage people to please not lecture me about how wrong it is for me to prefer my Kindle to print books. I don't actually care what anyone else prefers, I'd just like to not be browbeaten about what I prefer.

Kindles seem to bring that out in some people. I don't know why.

[Bosstone]

Do they really? Wow. The RF from a Kindle can't be much...Regardless of whether it can interfere with the operation of the plane or not, the attendants have always been very clear about turning off ALL electronic devices. On the last flight I was on, they wouldn't even accept Airplane Mode for phones, the phones had to be powered off completely.

[gaffa]

Amazon ONCE deleted a book off people's readers when it was discovered that it was sold in violation of the copyright. They also refunded their money. Not a bad deal, if you ask me.
Yes, but the book was 1984.

That single act consumed more than half of the entire world supply of irony in one fell swoop.

[mlees]

Regardless of whether it can interfere with the operation of the plane or not, the attendants have always been very clear about turning off ALL electronic devices. On the last flight I was on, they wouldn't even accept Airplane Mode for phones, the phones had to be powered off completely.

Would they make me shut off my flashlight? :D

[mlees]

My goal is to encourage people to please not lecture me about how wrong it is for me to prefer my Kindle to print books. I don't actually care what anyone else prefers, I'd just like to not be browbeaten about what I prefer.

Kindles seem to bring that out in some people. I don't know why.

Could you quote where someone said that you were wrong for holding your opinions as your own? I apologise in advance if I missed them. I don't think you're stoopid for luvin' your Kindle.

The first "negative" comment that I noticed seemed to be yours, in post #32 (the "Luddite" comment).

For me, the argument that the Kindle can hold dozens of books in memory is a little tempting, but not at the price that is currently displayed on the Amazon front page ($114-$140).

I don't have a lot of disposable income, and I am not sure how much it would cost to replace most of the books I already own in paper format. I don't see myself buying dozens of new titles soon. (I average 4 or 5 a year.)

The money value doesn't seem to be there.

[Onomatopoeia]

Regardless of whether it can interfere with the operation of the plane or not, the attendants have always been very clear about turning off ALL electronic devices. On the last flight I was on, they wouldn't even accept Airplane Mode for phones, the phones had to be powered off completely.Yep. I fly a lot for work, and the attendants now say: "Please turn off your cell phones and all other electronic devices, including e-readers."

[Shakester]

"It works for me, therefore it should work for everybody" is a hopeless argument. That's the only one you've made so far. You're standing in a corner staring at a wall and insisting that's the only view of the room. That's objectively wrong, not just subjectively wrong.

If you could quote one place where I said that, you would have.

I don't have the energy to argue with someone who makes up things and attributes them to me.

[Onomatopoeia]

*Less impulse buying
You said a mouthful there, sister. I've bought more books in the last three years that I've owned my Kindle than the entire previous 10. It's just too convenient to want a book and {poof} have it. :)

[mlees]

If you could quote one place where I said that, you would have.

I don't have the energy to argue with someone who makes up things and attributes them to me.

Post #45, the last paragraph, reads (paraphrased) as such.

All this makes me wonder if you've actually tried a Kindle. Not iPads and those sorts of things, not mini-computers with backlit screens, something with a proper e-ink screen. Have you actually tried reading something on a Kindle, or are you basing your opinion on what you imagine them to be like?

[Shakester]

Could you quote where someone said that you were wrong for holding your opinions as your own? I apologise in advance if I missed them. I don't think you're stoopid for luvin' your Kindle.

The first "negative" comment that I noticed seemed to be yours, in post #32 (the "Luddite" comment).


Sigh, I thought I was finished here...

The Luddite comment was hyperbole. It was an exaggeration. As should have been apparent from the rest of the sentence.

OK, my fault entirely for forgetting that the internet doesn't really do subtlety or banter. I was trying to parody the over-seriousness of others, I should really have been able to foresee that it would be taken Very Seriously. My fault, my mistake, and I apologise to anyone who felt that I called them a Luddite.

[Shakester]

Post #45, the last paragraph, reads (paraphrased) as such.

It was a genuine question. The fault, and again I accept full responsibility for it, was that it was meant not so much for the person who provoked it but for people who were ranting earlier in the thread.

If you're interpreting that as meaning "It works for me, therefore it should work for everybody", well, that's your mistake, not mine.

And too bad. I'm done here, thanks to the friendly people who PMed me, tough luck to anyone who's still offended, and good night to all.

[mlees]

It was a genuine question. The fault, and again I accept full responsibility for it, was that it was meant not so much for the person who provoked it but for people who were ranting earlier in the thread.

If you're interpreting that as meaning "It works for me, therefore it should work for everybody", well, that's your mistake, not mine.

And too bad. I'm done here, thanks to the friendly people who PMed me, tough luck to anyone who's still offended, and good night to all.

Take care.

[suranyi]

I like both traditional books, and the Kindle, for reasons that have been mentioned.

But the bookshelves in my home, and there are many, are almost completely full. So I'm getting a lot of pressure from my wife not to buy any more books that are available for the Kindle, and are "Kindle-friendly". (No color, few illustrations, etc.) She doesn't like all the clutter. She wants me to get them on the Kindle so I can still read them but they don't take up any more space in our house.

She has a point: There must be 500 books or more in our house and 90% of them are mine.

[Dangerosa]

I like both traditional books, and the Kindle, for reasons that have been mentioned.

But the bookshelves in my home, and there are many, are almost completely full. So I'm getting a lot of pressure from my wife not to buy any more books that are available for the Kindle, and are "Kindle-friendly". (No color, few illustrations, etc.) She doesn't like all the clutter. She wants me to get them on the Kindle so I can still read them but they don't take up any more space in our house.

She has a point: There must be 500 books or more in our house and 90% of them are mine.

That's our house (add kids). Four people in the house, I should get 25% of the bookshelves. My son really doesn't read much - at best he'd use 10% of the bookshelves - so I should really be getting 30%! But my husband and daughter - particularly my husband - take up more than their share of the space. To make things neat, we have to get rid of books. If I'm doing the getting rid of, its my books that I get rid of. The moment I free up some space, it goes to HIS books.

Well, it seems that way anyway - it isn't really true - but its true enough that the Kindle keeps me from having hard feelings.

Another thing about the Kindle is that my way of getting rid of books is to "loan" them out and then never see them again. I tend to do this with books I really like because those are the books I want to share. I've bought at least five copies of To Kill a Mockingbird, at least six of Pride and Prejudice, four A Handmaids Tale, etc. With the Kindle, I'm not loaning out my books to free up space, so I have them a year or two later when I want to reread them.

[Der Trihs]

Amazon ONCE deleted a book off people's readers when it was discovered that it was sold in violation of the copyright. They also refunded their money. Not a bad deal, if you ask me.Yes, but the book was 1984.

That single act consumed more than half of the entire world supply of irony in one fell swoop.
And they've done it more than once (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/12/17/confusion_over_amazon_censorship_policy/). Or rather, been caught at it; who knows if they've done it more often and not been caught. Or censored books and left you the censored version so you still see the title and think you have the original. I don't trust them.

[Thudlow Boink]

And they've done it more than once (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/12/17/confusion_over_amazon_censorship_policy/). Or rather, been caught at it; who knows if they've done it more often and not been caught. Or censored books and left you the censored version so you still see the title and think you have the original. I don't trust them.I don't think that link says what you think it does. If I'm interpreting it correctly, it doesn't have anything to do with Amazon deleting already-purchased material from anyone's devices. Rather, it's about them removing e-books for sale from their site, so that they're no longer available for purchase.

As I've said before when you've brought this up, I find it really, really hard to believe that they could delete or alter books on people's devices without anyone noticing.

[Ludy]

E-books have allowed my 89 year old Grandmother to start reading again. For years she was reading less and less because she just couldn't hold a thick book for that long. This past Christmas my Mom got her a Kobo and she has read more books in the past 7 months than in the 3 years previous.

They are light, easy to use and understand (at least the Kobo is, I have never used a Kindle), and she can make the print size as big as she needs. They opened up a world that she thought she had lost.

[aruvqan]

I like both traditional books, and the Kindle, for reasons that have been mentioned.

But the bookshelves in my home, and there are many, are almost completely full. So I'm getting a lot of pressure from my wife not to buy any more books that are available for the Kindle, and are "Kindle-friendly". (No color, few illustrations, etc.) She doesn't like all the clutter. She wants me to get them on the Kindle so I can still read them but they don't take up any more space in our house.

She has a point: There must be 500 books or more in our house and 90% of them are mine.

Pah, lightweight. I own somewhere on the close order of 4500 books. I live in a microscopically tiny house, 800 sq feet so 95% of my books are boxed and in the barn. We have the space for a bankers box worth of books, so periodically hubby packs up the ones we have, takes them out into the barn and randomly grabs another box for us to read until we get tired of them. Some paperbacks are falling apart, so I scan it in and toss the dead soldier.

[jabiru]

I've been thinking for some time about buying a Kindle. My bookshelves, like those of other posters above, are jam packed with books. I'd probably still buy a lot of non-fiction books in 'proper' format but I also read a lot of crime (fiction and non-fiction) which I'd have no interest in re-reading, so a Kindle version would be ideal. However, many of the authors I like don't seem to have books out in Kindle. Do the Kindle versions come out later or are they generally released at the same time as a paperback?

I haven't scoured Amazon yet for the titles I'm interested in but I have browsed a few and none seem to be available on Kindle. So, at this point, I'll probably continue to buy from Book Depository, while free shipping still exists.

[LurkMeister]

I like both traditional books, and the Kindle, for reasons that have been mentioned.

But the bookshelves in my home, and there are many, are almost completely full. So I'm getting a lot of pressure from my wife not to buy any more books that are available for the Kindle, and are "Kindle-friendly". (No color, few illustrations, etc.) She doesn't like all the clutter. She wants me to get them on the Kindle so I can still read them but they don't take up any more space in our house.

She has a point: There must be 500 books or more in our house and 90% of them are mine.

Last time I counted, I had upwards of 500 books on various shelves in my bedroom which I haven't read yet. And those are just the ones I've either unpacked or bought since I moved here three years ago. I know there are several boxes of unread books mixed in with the boxes of books I have read which are currently taking up space in my spare bedroom.

[Exapno Mapcase]

People might want to check out the How many books do you own? (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=556415) thread.

Dopers are readers. And they love books.

[Peremensoe]

Is this the moment to tout my designs for built-in bookcases, and the benefits of vast quantities of shelved books as home insulation?

[Spoke]

I have nothing particular against Kindle. It sounds like a great space-saver. My only beef is that it seems like a ripoff to pay full price, or anywhere close to full price, for ebooks. And my inner cheapskate will not allow me to be ripped off like that. Particularly when I can't lend my electronic book to a friend, or swap it, or sell it when I am through.

If the prices come down significantly on ebooks, then I would be all over that. But until then, I'll stick with old-fashioned paper.

[NAF1138]

I have nothing particular against Kindle. It sounds like a great space-saver. My only beef is that it seems like a ripoff to pay full price, or anywhere close to full price, for ebooks. And my inner cheapskate will not allow me to be ripped off like that. Particularly when I can't lend my electronic book to a friend, or swap it, or sell it when I am through.

If the prices come down significantly on ebooks, then I would be all over that. But until then, I'll stick with old-fashioned paper.

I totally agree with you. Completely. That said I currently have 171 books on my kindle and exactly 6 of them were purchases on Amazon, of those six only 3 were full price, the others cost less than the paperback. The rest are all free, or very cheap, and legal and all books that I really want to read.

I'm not saying give up paper books. I have entire walls lined floor to ceiling with book shelves and boxes full of the overflow, and thats just the stuff I was unwilling to part with when I moved across the country six months ago and gave 2/3 of my books away. I like real physical books too. But if price is the only stumbling block for you, look around a bit. It isn't that hard to find ebooks that aren't a total rip off.

[obfusciatrist]

I have no problem at all with paying the same price for an electronic version of a book as I do for a paper version of the book.

First, my willingness to pay $18 for a trade paperback for a book had absolutely nothing to do with how much it cost to print the book and ship it to a bookstore and everything to do with how much I wanted to read the words inside the book. My favorite book in the world I wouldn't be willing to pay for if it cost $500 and that was because the cost of paper had skyrocketed and it cost $499 to print. On the other hand, most books are overpriced at Free.

So if I'm willing to pay $18 how much it cost to produce the specific copy I'll be reading is irrelevant to me. Similarly, I don't stand in the grocery store saying "this pint of ice cream costs $5 but it probably only cost them $0.25 to make it so I refuse." I just say "am I willing to pay $5 for the pleasure I'll get from the ice cream."

Sure, there are some features I lose when not buying a paper book, but there are other features I gain by buying an electronic book and I'm satisfied with what I get in return for my money regardless of whether the $7.99 I paid is $0.05 profit or $7.92 profit.

[suranyi]

Last time I counted, I had upwards of 500 books on various shelves in my bedroom which I haven't read yet. And those are just the ones I've either unpacked or bought since I moved here three years ago. I know there are several boxes of unread books mixed in with the boxes of books I have read which are currently taking up space in my spare bedroom.

Yes, but the thing is we're trying to eliminate clutter in our house nowadays, not add to it.

Especially since we now have a toddler.

[Broomstick]

All this makes me wonder if you've actually tried a Kindle. Not iPads and those sorts of things, not mini-computers with backlit screens, something with a proper e-ink screen. Have you actually tried reading something on a Kindle, or are you basing your opinion on what you imagine them to be like?
My sister loaned me her Kindle so I could see what one was like. Yes, there are some very nice things about them.

However, I simply can not afford one. At all. All this talk of them being "inexpensive"? Those people don't live on my budget. That's one enormous downside from my viewpoint - if you're poor you can get quite a few books for the price of a Kindle device. What good are e-books to me if I can't afford the device required to read them?

(Yes, I know - you don't specifically need a Kindle to read e-books, but the same applies to any electronic device for e-reading. I happen to own a PC, so I read on the PC, and if I owned a Kindle I'd use it but the fact is I don't own one right now and there's no money in the foreseeable future to purchase one)

[Spoke]

I have no problem at all with paying the same price for an electronic version of a book as I do for a paper version of the book.

First, my willingness to pay $18 for a trade paperback for a book had absolutely nothing to do with how much it cost to print the book and ship it to a bookstore and everything to do with how much I wanted to read the words inside the book...

Well thanks for taking a courageous stand for...uh...high prices, I guess.

[obfusciatrist]

I'm not taking any kind of stand. I'm just saying that "cost of production" has very little to do with how much I am willing to pay for something. Neither does how much profit the other side of the deal is making.

If it is different for you, that's fine. But I'm curious if you get upset at a movie theater because they charge the same price to see the latest $8 million dollar indie movie as they do the $300 million summer tent pole? If eating at a restaurant would you complain about paying $12 for the dinner salad because you learned that the chef makes it from wild ingredients he picked for free while walking to work that day but happy to pay it because instead he has the ingredient shipped in by gold plated mule, costing him $11.75?

I'm not for high prices per se, but I for everything I buy I have a willingness to pay up to a certain amount. What that amount is, is minimally impacted by how much profit the other side will make at that price.

"I"m not willing to pay $8 for an electronic book because what I get in return for my $8" is an argument that makes perfect sense to me. "I'm not willing to pay $8 for an electronic book because it only costs them $1 to make it" is a weird argument to me. But me finding it weird isn't reason for anybody to abandon it.

[Novelty Bobble]

perhaps one option that scores the kindle highly is the iternet access.
I have the 3g version and for someone that travels a lot it gives me access to the internet pretty much everywhere without any crippling data costs.
yes the browser is clunky but it gives me access to my favourite sites and lets me post messages such as this.
i`ve had it for a few months now and it spurred me to read more and more varied works. when the uk libraries sort out kindle lending it will be perfect.

[Lynn Bodoni]

I'm not taking any kind of stand. I'm just saying that "cost of production" has very little to do with how much I am willing to pay for something. Neither does how much profit the other side of the deal is making. In my case, the cost of the item DOES affect how much I'm willing to pay for it. I'm willing to pay a reasonable markup, but what I consider to be reasonable and what the seller considers to be reasonable are probably two different things.

There's a particular department store that I won't shop at. They are constantly running huge sales on many items...and that tells me that they've marked those items wayyyy up, in order to mark them down again at intervals. There's a crafts store that sells furniture, but every single week the furniture is advertised as being 30% off.

It's quite possible that I'm weird this way. I'm weird in a lot of ways. But if I think that the seller has priced the product unreasonably high, in comparison to the cost of making that product and getting it to me, then I won't buy the product. And I think that I should see a discount on ebooks, compared to the paperback price. The sellers are incurring fewer costs (to my mind) because they aren't physically printing, shipping, storing, and remaindering the ecopies.

I do buy books for my Nook, but I don't pay more than paperback prices for those books.

[Spoke]

"I'm not willing to pay $8 for an electronic book because it only costs them $1 to make it" is a weird argument to me.

How about if I add "...and if enough people take the same position, the price will come down."

[NAF1138]

For price, I compare it to music. Books and CD's used to cost about the same (paperback). Books even a little less than your average CD. CDs were a rip off and everyone knew it, then digital music became available and, well you know the rest. If an album of music can be sold for $9.99 for damn near everything (and that's still a rip off, but whatever I can live with it) a digital book that retails for $6.99 in paperback can sell for less than $9.99.

If every eBook was priced at the same cost as the paperback or a buck or two less everyone would still make money and few people would complain. Like I said, I think Baen's model of giving an e book copy to everyone who buys a hardcover is ideal.

[Dangerosa]

How about if I add "...and if enough people take the same position, the price will come down."

Hasn't worked so far with other forms of digital distribution - ITunes songs are still around $1. On the other hand, those self same publishers may find that they are a no longer necessary middleman like the record companies are beginning to discover. But that will mean that there will be books only available digitally as authors leave their publishers behind. I suspect that is what is behind their grab for money now.....their functionality after hundreds of years of owning an expensive means of production is disappearing. Now, an author can write a book, hire a freelance editor, publish it on the internet for $2, market it via social networking and make more money than they made with a publisher in the mix. And starting authors can take the hassle of getting your first book published right out.

Value is one of those subjective things - as Broomstick said, she can't afford a Kindle. In her circumstances, the library and used books are going to factor heavily - she isn't about to casually pick up a $24 hardcover bestseller because it just came out or spend $80 on a specialty item with a small print run that has to do with managing IT as a business (a few of those are on my Kindle). But my household finances are pretty different than Broomsticks - both my husband and I do both (and my daughter does the first). Lynn considers the way a retailer markets regarding price when making purchase decisions, I avoid WalMart because they are passing on savings to you - but they get their savings by pressing their suppliers to lower costs, having their suppliers deliver a lower quality product, and paying their people (both at the WalMart level and usually at the supplier level once WalMart has done its cost press) poorly.

[Sarahfeena]

I've had a nook for a while now, and I would say the advantages are purely convenience. You can carry as many books around with you as you want (great for travelling!) and you can buy books instantly from where ever you are. Personally, I like it because I have ADD, and I have trouble focusing on what I'm reading, I'll get bored and start something else, then leave the first book somewhere and forget about it. I put whatever book I'm reading on the nook on it's own "shelf" at the top of the list, and then I can't misplace it somewhere. And I have a rule that I can't have more than 3 on that shelf, so I'm actually finishing books more than I used to, which is cool.

No, it's not as nice as having an actual book on the shelf, but then again, I don't necessarily want to keep every book I read for the rest of my life. Some are good for a couple day's entertainment and that's it. I still buy books, and I still get books from the library, but my nook has it's place, too.

[Athena]

And they've done it more than once (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/12/17/confusion_over_amazon_censorship_policy/). Or rather, been caught at it; who knows if they've done it more often and not been caught. Or censored books and left you the censored version so you still see the title and think you have the original. I don't trust them.

I don't think that link says what you think it does. If I'm interpreting it correctly, it doesn't have anything to do with Amazon deleting already-purchased material from anyone's devices. Rather, it's about them removing e-books for sale from their site, so that they're no longer available for purchase.

As I've said before when you've brought this up, I find it really, really hard to believe that they could delete or alter books on people's devices without anyone noticing.

I'm with Thudlow - that link just talks about books being removed from the Amazon Kindle store, not people's Kindles. Very different thing.

And regardless, as others have pointed out - if you're really worried about Big Evil Amazon randomly deleting your books, just turn off the wi-fi on the Kindle and/or make backups on your computer. Voila. Problem solved.

[even sven]

I'm posting this for free from a remote South African village, where I have a library of books and a 24/7 bookstore in my hands despite not even having a food market for miles around. I think I've read around 30 books since coming here a month ago. Previously, travel meant I was limited to one or two books that I could hand carry and whatever random crap I could swap them for at hostels. Mostly, it meant I had to give up reading. Now, I can read whatever I want whenever I feel like it, even stuff that is banned where I am (a big plus in China)- plus, I can get internet access the current copy of the Economist pretty much wherever I am. Freaking lifesaver.

[obfusciatrist]

How about if I add "...and if enough people take the same position, the price will come down."

You could say that about anything. I assume you're just sitting in your cardboard box waiting for everybody to refuse to pay current prices for anything so that prices will come down? And that you're in the grocery store demanding to know the manufacturing cost of any product you consider buying so that you can determine if the price is warranted?

If I view the book I bought as worth the X amount I spend on it, why should I deprive myself of that benefit in the hope that they will someday reduce the price to what you think it is worth paying? I'm not unhappy with the transaction.

And conversely, if they reduce the price of the next Dan Brown novel to whatever you think it is worth (hopefully, somewhere south of a quarter), if that is more than what I think it is worth (anything less than them paying me to read it would be) should I buy it anyway to reward them for meeting your price preference?

[bmasters1]

I find it interesting that eBooks and eReaders have so many haters. They really seem to bring out the Luddite in some folks. You realise you're using computers to write your anti-new-technology rants, and that you're posting them on the internet, right?

That's exactly why I dislike a lot of televangelists, not the least of which is the infamous Jimmy Swaggart. I mean, he has a television ministry, but he uses that ministry to go on air and complain about how the medium is corrupting us. Hello?! Why does he use the medium to complain about how it's corrupting us? That, I will never know.:smack:

[Spoke]

You could say that about anything. I assume you're just sitting in your cardboard box waiting for everybody to refuse to pay current prices for anything so that prices will come down?

Well I'm not stupid enough to rush right out and throw my money away paying premium prices the second a new technology hits the shelves (http://i2.cdn.turner.com/money/2010/09/23/technology/lcd_tv_prices/chart_lcd_tv2.top.gif), like some technophiles I know.

[obfusciatrist]

Yes, the smart thing would have been for everybody to wait until next year when a 32" LCD TV will be $150 before anybody buys the first one. That chart isn't exactly evidence for the proposition that if everybody agrees to wait for a lower price that prices will fall.

But then, knowing I paid the absolute minimum for something is not what gives me joy in my purchases (but I assume that is what motivates the people who will stand in a 30 minute line to get a free $3 ice cream cone), enjoying my purchases does.

If a ebook isn't worth it to you at X price, I don't care. Don't buy it. But why does it need to be a protest against the evil profit motive? And why am I stupid for having a higher price point for the product than you?

[Spoke]

And why am I stupid for having a higher price point for the product than you?

Why do I live in a cardboard box? You're the one who got defensive and started making it personal, hoss.

But I would be happy to say we simply disagree about whether spending that much on kindle books is a good idea.

[Peremensoe]

I find it interesting that eBooks and eReaders have so many haters. They really seem to bring out the Luddite in some folks. You realise you're using computers to write your anti-new-technology rants, and that you're posting them on the internet, right?That's exactly why I dislike a lot of televangelists, not the least of which is the infamous Jimmy Swaggart. I mean, he has a television ministry, but he uses that ministry to go on air and complain about how the medium is corrupting us. Hello?! Why does he use the medium to complain about how it's corrupting us? That, I will never know.:smack:

Shakester made a very poor argument there. Frankly, most responses to technology critiques that involve the word "luddite" aren't very examined. (The term, as an insult, itself represents something of a misunderstanding of the original Luddites, but that's another discussion.)

Absurd and mendacious as televangelists may be, there's nothing inherently contradictory about using a technology one way to make a critique of the same or similar technology used another way. Nobody is confounded by the notion that books can be used to attack the ideas or effects of other books, right?

Nobody here, even Der Trihs I think, is categorically rejecting the technology of a portable electronic device for storing and reading written material. Obviously everyone here has embraced certain forms of computer technology.

Neil Postman, often derided as a luddite by people who didn't understand what he was saying, suggested that new technologies be evaluated in light of questions like, "what is the problem to which this technology is the solution?" As noted in the thread, there are some problems to which an e-reader can be a solution. Great! But we might then consider questions such as "whose problem is it?" and "what new problems might be created because we have solved this problem?" All technologies vary considerably in their utility to different people, or to the same people in different contexts. Most technologies are not unalloyed goods.

[obfusciatrist]

Why do I live in a cardboard box? You're the one who got defensive and started making it personal, hoss.

I don't really view what I said as personal, or defensive. The argument you presented for why people should not spend that much is, it seems to me, one that would pretty much apply to anything you might purchase. If everybody refused to purchase Campbell's soup, presumably they'd lower the price as well.

The living in a cardboard box is the reduction to absurdity of it. Since obviously you don't live naked in a cardboard box eating overripe fruit you find fallen on the ground, the implicit question is why does your analysis apply to electronic books when it doesn't to other things (or, what am I missing in it that makes electronic books inherently different).

[Spoke]

[T]he implicit question is why does your analysis apply to electronic books when it doesn't to other things...

Who says it doesn't? I don't mind someone making a reasonable profit off of me, but if the margin starts getting too big, I look for other options.

You don't mind people profiteering at your expense? Hey that's your lookout. More power to you. Best of luck to you and yours.

[Quasimodem]

Yikes! I had to check uptop to make sure we weren't in GD all of a sudden! ;)

Q

[locamochagirl]

I got a Kindle for Christmas and my reaction was slow. I felt like I paused and then was like "OH WOW, THANKS" in an almost fake way. I am a giant nerd who loves reading books. I love having them, buying them, displaying them. I thought the Kindle would take that away. I LOVE my Kindle the the point of obsession. I love that you can look on Amazon for a book and within 30 seconds have it downloaded. They're cheaper, and I don't have stacks and stacks of books everywhere. I already have like 50 and it takes up NO space! LOVE the Kindle.

[Mister Rik]

I love my new Kindle for one big reason: I like to read when I go out to eat, and it's always been a royal pain in the ass trying to keep a thick paperback open while I'm reading, because my hands are otherwise occupied. I was always trying to use the edge of my plate or tray to hold the book open, and shuffling the plate/tray on and off the book every time I wanted to turn the page. And some books are just too thick (hey, I love fantasy novels, where it is almost a requirement that books be 500+ pages) to make that at all practical, especially if I'm near the beginning or end of the book.

I also foresee the Kindle being helpful for those times when I want to tell somebody about a neat passage I read in a book. When I'm finished reading a paperback it goes on my shelf and I'm unlikely to have it at hand when I want to tell somebody about a passage. With the Kindle, I can just call up the book and the relevant passage.

I have run into one minor annoyance, though. I downloaded a free copy of The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes, and whoever transcribed/scanned it didn't use a character set that the Kindle understands. So every time money is mentioned in a story I see weird codes where the British "pound" symbol should be, and the same problem when Holmes or Watson says something in French and the words include diacriticals and French-specific letters.

[Peremensoe]

I find that at least some books seem to not be proofread at all. In the Windrose books, for instance, "th" is substituted in many cases for "m", resulting in "me" being rendered as "the". The spacing is also rather erratic. If I hadn't previously read the books, I might have been stumped by some passages. As it was, I had to stop and stare at the words for a couple of seconds before realizing that the scanning wasn't perfect.

I have run into one minor annoyance, though. I downloaded a free copy of The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes, and whoever transcribed/scanned it didn't use a character set that the Kindle understands. So every time money is mentioned in a story I see weird codes where the British "pound" symbol should be, and the same problem when Holmes or Watson says something in French and the words include diacriticals and French-specific letters.

That kind of thing would drive me absolutely batty.

Is there any mechanism or accepted basis for returning (deleting and refunding, I suppose) imperfect e-books? I know the one mentioned was a freebie, I'm asking generally.

(I have read on a Kindle, but don't own one.)

[Helena]

Sook Nyul Choi's Year of Impossible Goodbyes was apparently the victim of bad OCR scanning--"It made me happy to see my little brother smile through his tears" was rendered as "through his teats." In another spot it said "I went to a comet and sat down." It took me a while to figure out this was supposed to be "corner."

[jabiru]

I love my new Kindle for one big reason: I like to read when I go out to eat, and it's always been a royal pain in the ass trying to keep a thick paperback open while I'm reading, because my hands are otherwise occupied. I was always trying to use the edge of my plate or tray to hold the book open, and shuffling the plate/tray on and off the book every time I wanted to turn the page. And some books are just too thick....

This alone has sold me on the idea of a Kindle, even if a lot of the books on my Wish List aren't available in that format. Where I work, meal breaks are taken as and when we are able. Sometimes I have a companion, most times I eat alone and I always like to have something to read while I'm eating. The Kindle sounds ideal for the reasons you outline.

Thank you for helping me to come to a decision. I'm the most indecisive person I know and it's a real relief to finally make up my mind.

[antonio107]

I have run into one minor annoyance, though. I downloaded a free copy of The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes, and whoever transcribed/scanned it didn't use a character set that the Kindle understands. So every time money is mentioned in a story I see weird codes where the British "pound" symbol should be, and the same problem when Holmes or Watson says something in French and the words include diacriticals and French-specific letters.

I was fortunate that most of the Sherlock Holmes mysteries were pre-loaded on my Kobo, but it screws up diacritics bad. German is bad, Hungarian is unreadable.

The Holmes mysteries I had to buy were shoddy, for the reasons described by other posters. Scanned into a machine, doesn't always groove with the font...the irony is that the free Project Gutenberg versions were of better quality, since they seem to be vetted by real people.

I'm reading some Star Trek extended universe fiction, and i'm astounded by the sloppy spelling and missing punctuation in my ebook...:(

[Mister Rik]

That kind of thing would drive me absolutely batty.

Is there any mechanism or accepted basis for returning (deleting and refunding, I suppose) imperfect e-books? I know the one mentioned was a freebie, I'm asking generally.
That I don't know.

[Leaper]

I personally like being able to buy and sell used books, and not having to worry about the publisher taking away or censoring what I've already bought on a whim.

Oh, and the format is readable in perpetuity, no matter what happens to technology. (Language, of course, is another matter entirely.)

[even sven]

Nobody outside of the clinically insane "worries" that the biggest publisher in the world is going to use the format they have invested heavily in to suddenly screw everyone. This is not a rational thing to worry about. And you and I both know you are far more likely to leave your book on the bus than to lose a Kindle book to shadiness.

Anyway, the two are not mutually exclusive. If I want to read a cheap detective novel on the beach, I still can...and for cheap quick reads I do just that. But I find the Kindle a much better deal for the meaty pricy non fiction I tend to buy.

I am addicted to the instant gratification, too. If I read an interesting book review or get a good rec from a friend, I can be reading it instantly...no planning a trip to the bookstore, forgetting about stuff you really want to read, etc. It is costing me fortunes, though!

[OpalCat]

Is there any mechanism or accepted basis for returning (deleting and refunding, I suppose) imperfect e-books? I know the one mentioned was a freebie, I'm asking generally.

Yes, Amazon has a return policy for Kindle books. I've returned two because of the bad OCR making them unbearable to read. They refunded my money without question.