Seriously, paper books are so wasteful. Once a decent e-reader is invented paper will die as quickly as cassettes did when the CD came out. Look at newspapers, The death rattle of paper based news is growing louder and louder.
Paper books will soon be an anachronism. Get over it. It’s going to happen and it’s going to happen as soon as the “ipod” of e-readers is invented. All your dead tree books will be as outdated as your LP collection.
Yeah, and I’m gonna have one installed in my flying car.
Moving thread from IMHO to MPSIMS.
It’s coming tree killer! Believe it!
No, it won’t. They said essentially the same thing about paper documents when personal computers became common in business offices. But, we now have even more paper documents than ever before. Like it or not, paper documents–and I include books here–are far more durable than digital media, without the problems of future accessibility. If you don’t understand what I mean by that, try reading Hollerith cards, 12" discpacks or even 5 1/4" floppies with your current PC.
I wouldn’t read a book on a screen–too much eye strain. On the other hand, I’ve planted a lot of trees.
Once the reader base is established and a common format settled on (pdf or similar) the standards issue will be a non-issue. Paper is an insanely wasteful way to produce and store text information unless it’s for documentary purposes.
I think e-books are in the realm of video phones as complicated technology that most people feel isn’t as useful as cheaper, simpler methods
They haven’t really come up with a cheap enough display that’s as easy-on-the-eyes as ink-on-paper. I remember some buzz about a new type of LCD that was supposed to be glare-free and use reflected light, black-on-white. Great! Bring it on!
Now they’ve got one of the advantages of paper that is totally required for any amount of reading for pleasure. It’s just too prohibitively expensive, so far… and if you can afford it, you’ve still got an ungainly product that doesn’t sit in your hand as well as a book.
Eventually they’ll get it – but don’t hold your breath. Who’s funding R&D for the “as good as pulp products, but much, much more expensive” project? When the technology arrives, it’ll be an incidental afterthought.
And very few people will use them.
What part of the cost of a typical book is the printing, binding etc. and physical distribution?
I haven’t read a hardcopy book in months, but go through an e-book a week. Reference/technical books I’d rather have in paper (rather have plastic, honestly - paper leaves a lot to be desired).
One hand, turn pages with simply pushing a button with my thumb, can eat lunch or pretend I’m listening to the meeting. There’s no way I could carry 50 or so books with me any other way.
If more publishers would release in e-format the same time as hardcover, I’d read even fewer paper.
Just a few minutes ago I was grumbling about having to get a new monitor, as my current one is trying to die on me. Can’t play my games, it’s hard to do anything on my computer. When the power goes out, the computers, tvs, etc. are just so many expensive paperweights. But I can light a candle or oil lamp and read.
I find computer screens harder to read than paper. Books are just plain easier to use, and far more portable, at least right now. I’m not philosophically opposed to using an ereader, but I’d want one that was EASIER to use than a book, not harder, for me to make the switch.
What part of the value of a typical book is the printing, binding, and physical palpability?
It seems unlikely that we’ll even see things get as far as Philip K. Dick’s “homeopapes.” If you just want the news, a more versatile appliance will do that for you – and enough people will probably prefer an actual paper to justify their continued distibution. Hell, even advertising inserts will justify (economically) the distribution of papers.
I know how you feel, though. I feel the the same way about stereoscopic television. Nobody understands. 
PocketPC and Microsloth Reader, btw. Not as “good” as the printed page, but 668 books on one 256MB SD card.
The Sony Reader (warning: the page uses a lot of Flash animation) uses “electronic ink” technology that may be what you’re thinking of. It costs $350, but it seemed quite easy on the eyes and lightweight.
If they can come up with an “Ipod” like format for paperless books then maybe they will catch on. (So long as the screen on the reader is easier on the eyes.) It would be weird though, to have one “decoder” device, and several “book cartridges” to play on the device for reading. I’d bet though, that they could make them compact enough to be very practical. This, coming from a self confessed “book dragon”. Just so long as they can find a way to render images on the reader like “cover art” and “illustrations” for art books, children’s books and etc. That might pose a problem, unless they make the reader’s viewscreen settings adjustable? Heck, why stop with just having text on the “reader”, why not also allow music to play, or perhaps a reading of the book? Maybe even make an “all in one” device, in which you can put in a music cartridge, and a book cartridge and settle in to read? It could be powered like cellphones too.
One of the huge advantages of a book is the cost. I lose at least one or two books a year. Perhaps I’d be more careful if it cost $350, but between losing backpacks, dropping shit in the water, dropping stuff onto a concrete floor, and leaving stuff on a plane, the stress of losing an ebook would be substantial.
Nevertheless, I like the idea, and when on an extended trip, a combo ebook/web browser/world phone/music player/DVD player-burner is quite appealing. especially if you can keep the weight to below a pound. I assume such devices will be available in the near future. Hopefully, it’ll be more robust than that piece of shit $400 PDA I bought 6 years ago.
Yes, that’s another thing: cost. Remember when they said CD’s weren’t going to continue to cost more than vinyl? If they can make book cartridges affordable, then they will make a killing. (Affordable in this case is somewhere in between the cost of a paperback and hardcover edition now, but closer to the cost of a paperback with exceptions for “deluxe edition art books” etc.)
The only way it could be better would be if it didn’t need a battery.
Also, strip mining. You have to get the metals necessary to manufacture consumer electonics somwhere. How would you feel about your backyard?
Except for the display quality, my PocketPC is exactly that - games, digital camera, music and video, books, MS Office, and with removable memory cards.
Unfortunately it appears that very few people actually want this.
A little technophobia, a little bull-headedness, there’re some people who will come up with near endless excuses to avoid an ebook (but these same SOB’s will chatter away at me in the company break room because they don’t have a book to read and so we all must suffer. They won’t interrupt someone with the holy paperbook, but electronic publishing isn’t real so I can’t possibly be wandering off topic, can I?)
It’ll be a long time before ebooks are the norm I believe, but the technology is here now - providing you’re more interested in reading the book than you are in communing with the spirit of dead trees or something. It’s simple to download a book from Amazon or BN, toss a copy on CD in case you lose your SD card, and off you go.
Those cellphone jerks are wasting metals and filling up landfills faster than the book market would, methinks.
Granted, initial investment is high and short battery life can be a major buzzkill, which is never a problem with normal books.
Surely I can’t be the first person in the thread to raise the issue of DRM?..
I think that people generally prefer the tactile feel of real books. People tend to learn better when multiple senses are engaged – such as sight and touch. This is accomplished more thoroughly through paper than through electrons.