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