"E-reading isn't reading"

Deleted member 42 · Nov 17, 2012

Meh.

All the books I purchased from Baen, Peanut Press/eReader/Fictionwise in 2000 still work today, even on devices and OSs that didn't exist then.

For me, one of the plusses for ebooks is that I can purchase a high quality ebook of The Book of Kells for my iPad for $12.99, with much better image quality than the $800.00 limited print edition I purchased twenty years ago.

Amadan · Nov 17, 2012

davidh219 said:
Gonna have to disagree with you there. Even removing the DRM, you have no guarantee. PDF may be ubiquitous now, but will it still be around in ten years? Who knows?

In ten years? Most assuredly. In fifty? Maybe not, but if some other format comes along to replace it, it's not like PDFs will instantaneously become obsolete, and there will still be software that can read it. ASCII text has been around for almost 50 years now.

Even if it is, will the e-readers of the future even allow it on their devices? Current trends suggest that they probably won't, as companies are moving more and more towards proprietary software and file formats.

Almost all devices allow text, PDFs, and epubs, even that most proprietary of devices, the Kindle. And the current trend is toward epub or other open source formats. Even Kindle and Nook books are just wrappers around an open source format. My prediction is that even Amazon will eventually give up on DRM.

All you're offering is speculation. You think that if you strip your books of DRM and store them on dropbox or something that they'll be safe, but there are so many things that could prove you wrong.

Like what, a global thermonuclear war that destroys the Internet? If you drop a file on Dropbox, leave it there, and come back twenty years later, having forgotten your password, yeah, you'll probably have trouble getting access. But I actually know how ebooks and computers work. It's not just random speculation.

The oldest book I have is a high school physics textbook from 1912. It's a hundred years old now, and it's in perfect condition. The kind of technology that's going to be around a hundred years from today will be so different that neither of us can even guess as to what it will look like. I realize I won't be alive then, but what if I want to pass my collection on to my kids and grand-kids?

Your book can be damaged or destroyed in many, many ways, while I have multiple backups of all my ebooks.

Digital media is so ephemeral and easy to forget about and misplace that I will bet anything you won't still have all your books in 40 years.

All of them? Probably not. The ones I feel it important to keep? Yes, I will. Digital media is no more "ephemeral" than your hundred-year-old textbook. It's not this faerie medium that Amazon can wave a wand at and make vanish at midnight.

Deleted member 42 · Nov 17, 2012

davidh219 said:
The oldest book I have is a high school physics textbook from 1912. It's a hundred years old now, and it's in perfect condition.

Yeah, this is a silly tack to take.

My oldest book is a cuneiform tablet from the Akkadian era, c. 14th c. B.C.E.

Were I to drop it on our kitchen floor, it would shatter.

A book is a container for data, usually text, but not exclusively so.

(Note that the English word book is Old English for beech, because thin sheets of beechwood were used for writing, often as reuseable writing surfaces filled with wax. )

There's a tendency to make the book into a talisman. I can sympathize.

The best way to make a text survive is to propagate it widely, that is, to make many copies and distribute them.

We have roughly 64 copies in ms. of Chaucer's Canterbury Tales.

We have a single badly damaged (by time, insects, use, and a fire) manuscript of Beowulf.

Chaucer's work has never stopped being "in print," in the sense of new copies freshly made being available for purchase.

Beowulf spent hundreds of years languishing, unknown, and unrecognized.

There are about 400 years between the time the Beowulf ms. was created, and the time the oldest Canterbury Tales ms. was created.

Having multiple copies of a text in the "liquid" form of digital text is far more likely to encourage long term survival and viability.

The same liquid text can be poured in multiple digital file formats, printed on paper, copied by hand, etched on stone or glass, or imparted via the speech and sound.

Tablet, scroll, manuscript, printed codex book, ePub—they're all containers.

What's important is their contents, not the vessel.

davidh219 · Nov 17, 2012

Amadan said:
All of them? Probably not. The ones I feel it important to keep? Yes, I will. Digital media is no more "ephemeral" than your hundred-year-old textbook. It's not this faerie medium that Amazon can wave a wand at and make vanish at midnight.

Amazon can do exactly that, providing you don't take the extra step of removing DRM and backing them up elsewhere, which shouldn't even be necessary, honestly. And it's not just a matter of being able to keep the books stored on a hard drive somewhere and them being safe that way, it's a matter of memory. Are your kids going to know your dropbox password? Will they remember it? Will you? Will they even remember it exists? Maybe you don't care about passing your books down to your kids, and that's fine, but I do, and that's all I'm saying. Passing digital books from generation to generation is a messy and uncertain business that nobody's really tried yet. You can't tell me that you know, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that dropbox will still be around in 20 years, because you don't. Passwords are easy to forget, websites get left by the wayside. At least nobody's going to forget about my giant wall of books, even if I die and never say anything about them. Not saying it's the right way, or that you're wrong, or anything like that, but that's one of my main reasons for preferring print books, and I don't see how I'm wrong for thinking that way. No need for hostilities people. To each their own.

Deleted member 42 · Nov 17, 2012

davidh219;7750971Maybe you don't care about passing your books down to your kids said:
Having people disagree with you does not make us "argumentative."

Unless you're buying archival quality books (and there aren't many publishers or printers creating them) the hardcover book you buy today and treat gently and keep on a shelf at home has an average life span of about twenty years even if you never take it off the shelf. It's already decaying before you even buy it.

If you live in a city in China, in Los Angeles, Florida, India, or Chicago, you'll be lucky to get it to last twenty years.

The ink will start etching holes in the paper at about 15 years. The glue will first become brittle and then crack, which means the binding will crack. Since modern books are rarely sewn, that means that the probability is quite high that you'll start losing pages.

You don't want to know what happens to mass market trades, or book club editions. A Penguin paperback, for instance, or a standard mass market paperback, will have brittle, yellow pages in about ten years, if you buy it today.

Look for publishers who state in the colophon that they're using low acid paper or recycled paper. You'll have a better chance of survivability.

davidh219 · Nov 17, 2012

Medievalist said:
Unless you're buying archival quality books (and there aren't many publishers or printers creating them) the hardcover book you buy today and treat gently and keep on a shelf at home has an average life span of about twenty years even if you never take it off the shelf. It's already decaying before you even buy it.

Look, I'm no expert on paper or anything, but my 40 year-old mass-market paperback copy of the exorcist disagrees with you. It's yellow as hell, but perfectly legible. Even cheap books can last a lot longer than you might think.

Deleted member 42 · Nov 17, 2012

davidh219 said:
Look, I'm no expert on paper or anything, but my 40 year-old mass-market paperback copy of the exorcist disagrees with you. It's yellow as hell, but perfectly legible. Even cheap books can last a lot longer than you might think.

What part of "today" do you not understand?

Today. That means Today. Not forty years ago.

Things have changed since then.

And I am an expert. I even know what "today" means.

Theo81 · Nov 18, 2012

davidh219 said:
Amazon can do exactly that, providing you don't take the extra step of removing DRM and backing them up elsewhere, which shouldn't even be necessary, honestly. And it's not just a matter of being able to keep the books stored on a hard drive somewhere and them being safe that way, it's a matter of memory. Are your kids going to know your dropbox password? Will they remember it? Will you? Will they even remember it exists? Maybe you don't care about passing your books down to your kids, and that's fine, but I do, and that's all I'm saying. Passing digital books from generation to generation is a messy and uncertain business that nobody's really tried yet. You can't tell me that you know, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that dropbox will still be around in 20 years, because you don't. Passwords are easy to forget, websites get left by the wayside. At least nobody's going to forget about my giant wall of books, even if I die and never say anything about them. Not saying it's the right way, or that you're wrong, or anything like that, but that's one of my main reasons for preferring print books, and I don't see how I'm wrong for thinking that way. No need for hostilities people. To each their own.

There are books and there are books. The only books I own which I'd hand down to the children I don't have are the Art books which cost me £75+ each, or the ones which have a personal meaning (and are objects rather than books).

I'm with Medi - *content* matters, not the method of delivery. If more people appreciated that, maybe there'd be less complaining about the "expense" of e-books.

(Also, I find a password list hidden in a place which will be found upon your death the best method for ensuring future generations can read all the casino based spam I receive.)

bearilou · Nov 18, 2012

davidh219 said:
Amazon can do exactly that, providing you don't take the extra step of removing DRM and backing them up elsewhere, which shouldn't even be necessary, honestly.

No they can't. Not if I store them in a folder that is not My Kindle and on my hard drive. Also, you don't need to strip DRM just to store them. I have a backup of all my kindle and nook books preDRMstrip.

And how is that different than putting books in boxes and putting them in storage?

I have a 10'x10' storage unit. It's got a lot of boxes in it. I counted and sorted and over half of those boxes are books. I have had to put them in storage because at the moment, I have no room to put them in my home.

By the same token, I have enough books in my Kindle and in my Nook and in my misc ebook folders to fill several boxes and I've just burned them to DVD. Just one of them.

I can only imagine having to pack those if they were physical books and move them again. :e2thud:

davidh219 said:
And it's not just a matter of being able to keep the books stored on a hard drive somewhere and them being safe that way, it's a matter of memory. Are your kids going to know your dropbox password? Will they remember it? Will you? Will they even remember it exists?

I don't need a dropbox to store my digital books. I have a DVD burner and it doesn't require a password.

davidh219 said:
Maybe you don't care about passing your books down to your kids, and that's fine, but I do, and that's all I'm saying.

Wow. Emotional gutpunch, anyone? 'I CARE about my legacy, clearly you don't care about YOURS'.

davidh219 said:
Passing digital books from generation to generation is a messy and uncertain business that nobody's really tried yet. You can't tell me that you know, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that dropbox will still be around in 20 years, because you don't.

No we don't. You don't know, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that your house won't catch fire and burn down to the ground either. Whether you have a wall of books or I have a box of DVDs, it's still going up with the rest of the house.

davidh219 said:
Not saying it's the right way, or that you're wrong, or anything like that, but that's one of my main reasons for preferring print books, and I don't see how I'm wrong for thinking that way. No need for hostilities people. To each their own.

No need for emotional manipulation, either, David and it's rife through your posts. It's fabulous that you cherish physical books. Really, as the vast majority of us here are writers, avid readers and married and partnered to writers and avid readers, we can fully appreciate the legacy of reading to pass down to our children. It's okay not to want digital books or to want to read them on any medium other than paper or even want to save them. Really, no one here is judging you. Books are books; reading is reading.

But if others of us think that leaving digital books to our children is just as much as leaving them a legacy to read, it's not much of a different argument than yours, just the 'physical' wrapping. The hazards of losing that in some catastrophe are present with any 'form' the book takes, even if the details are different.

Komnena · Nov 18, 2012

As an SF fan I like the fact that classics long out of print are back in digital form.

Becky Black · Nov 18, 2012

Pshaw, books! New fangled rubbish. It's not proper reading if it's not a scroll.

So obviously visually impaired people who use an ereader to get read at a font size they can read easily aren't really reading. Don't go claiming to have read a book, visually impaired people using ereaders! You've read nothing!

Personal Prose · Nov 18, 2012

Let's throw more kindle into the fire. What about audio books?

mccardey · Nov 18, 2012

davidh219 said:
Look, I'm no expert on paper or anything, but my 40 year-old mass-market paperback copy of the exorcist disagrees with you. It's yellow as hell, but perfectly legible...

Well yeah because THE DEVIL. :mob

That why books get banned. It's for your own good. (Sister Anne Mary told me that- also forty years ago... )

Amadan · Nov 18, 2012

davidh219 said:
Amazon can do exactly that, providing you don't take the extra step of removing DRM and backing them up elsewhere, which shouldn't even be necessary, honestly.

My ereader isn't a Kindle. Problem solved.

Seriously, Amazon is not the problem. With physical books, you don't even have the option of backing them up.

Maybe you don't care about passing your books down to your kids, and that's fine, but I do, and that's all I'm saying.

At least nobody's going to forget about my giant wall of books, even if I die and never say anything about them. Not saying it's the right way, or that you're wrong, or anything like that, but that's one of my main reasons for preferring print books, and I don't see how I'm wrong for thinking that way. No need for hostilities people. To each their own.

You're not wrong for preferring print books. You're wrong for passive-aggressively telling people who prefer digital books that they're fools who don't care about the written word or passing a legacy down to their kids.

mccardey · Nov 18, 2012

Amadan said:
You're not wrong for preferring print books. You're wrong for passive-aggressively telling people who prefer digital books that they're fools who don't care about the written word or passing a legacy down to their kids.

And for reading The Exorcist. :mob

Obviously.

Ahem.

(That there ^ it's just an Aussie/Catholic joke... The Exorcist was quite a Thing at the time...)

Katie Elle · Nov 18, 2012

And it's not just a matter of being able to keep the books stored on a hard drive somewhere and them being safe that way, it's a matter of memory. Are your kids going to know your dropbox password? Will they remember it? Will you? Will they even remember it exists? Maybe you don't care about passing your books down to your kids, and that's fine, but I do, and that's all I'm saying

What if your kids toss your paper books into a trash bag and bring them to the dump?

Overall, the article wasn't just pretentious, it was creepy and and reminded me of the fetish porn I write. Just substituting paper books for leather or boots or whatever.

French Maiden · Nov 18, 2012

I love a good read as much as the next person, really thats what it's about. It doesnt matter how we get it, what we read it on, all that matters is that we enjoy it.

I love holding a book in my hands, the smell of the pages, the sound of paper rubbing against paper as it turns, the look of a beautifully organised book shelf. But there is only so much space in a small house and all 6 of my book cases are full.
Reading off an E-reader is no different than reading off a paperback in terms of recieving the content. If anything it makes it eaasier for the reader, being able to adjust font size, audio options, easy storage and no need for book marks. Plus the environmental factors, how many trees would have been cut down to stock all of my bookcases? I dont even want to think about it.

I was on the train the other day, an elderly lady was sitting next to me talking to her husband she looked around and said to hubby 'Look at all these peopl on their phones and their computers.' I was on my e-reader, if I had of been reading a paper back she probably wouldnt have thought anything of it. Naturally there are going to be people adverse to technology, this is because they are from a different era.

The world is changing and we can either jump on for the ride or sit back and watch it pass us by.

Toothpaste · Nov 18, 2012

Look, there are advantages and disadvantages to both forms of media. Depending on who you are and your personality, chances are the advantages of one will outweigh the advantages of the other. Or maybe you'll appreciate both equally. The thing I'm seeing right now is a debate between people who have different taste, and thus it seems to me to be pointless. There truly isn't one pragmatically better medium, there is simply the one we prefer.

Me I prefer physical books. I like them as a physical work of art, I have yet to be able to spend money on something I don't get to keep as an object. I like decorating my home with books. I like glancing at a shelf while doing something else and instantly being reminded of a story and where i was when i read it. I also like reading books better because of the particular way I read. That being said i like my ereader for traveling, and for reading my friends' mss. I can also take out books from the library on it. But all this is simply my taste, it isn't the right way to read, it's just my way.

I guess my point is, can we stop judging each other? And stop trying to prove one is objectively superior? It ain't gonna happen.

calieber · Nov 18, 2012

Amadan said:
Seriously, Amazon is not the problem. With physical books, you don't even have the option of backing them up.

Actually, I think the problem is Amazon. It's not an issue with the idea of e-books, it's with Amazon's practices specifically.

(I only use my Kindle for stuff that's free and stuff I wouldn't miss if Amazon decided to disappear it or I otherwise lost access)

bearilou · Nov 18, 2012

calieber said:
Actually, I think the problem is Amazon. It's not an issue with the idea of e-books, it's with Amazon's practices specifically.

Is this in reference to the 1984 incident of removing the book from ereaders? Yes, it was a boneheaded move.

But it's not a problem if you make a copy of your My Kindle Content folder and store it somewhere else. They can 'remove' all the books they like from my cloud and device, I still have it and can still read it.

CrastersBabies · Nov 18, 2012

Insert eyeroll at the original article there.

That's really it. If I had an account at "Slate" I'd probably post, but honestly... I have better things to do than up that article's page hit.

RedWombat · Nov 18, 2012

At the risk of demonstrating myself Not A True Bibliophile, if a thermonuclear war destroys the Internet, I expect I'll have other stuff on my mind than getting access to my library. But in preparation, my copy of Chicken Soup For The Radioactive Mutant's Soul is hard copy only.

Mr Flibble · Nov 18, 2012

davidh219 said:
And it's not just a matter of being able to keep the books stored on a hard drive somewhere and them being safe that way, it's a matter of memory. Are your kids going to know your dropbox password? Will they remember it? Will you? Will they even remember it exists?

Not heard of digital wills then? (Gist: a digital executor will take care of internet/online stuff after you die, because you log your info - logins/passwords - with them. Also handy for getting rid of the embarrassing porno subscription on your credit card before the Other Half finds out

)

ETA: I love my print books, but wouldn't be without my Kobo either.

Deleted member 42 · Nov 18, 2012

Toothpaste said:
I guess my point is, can we stop judging each other? And stop trying to prove one is objectively superior? It ain't gonna happen.

I'd like to see books in all forms flourish. Wide dispersal is a good way of encouraging survival against the ravages of time.

It's not like anyone's stopped creating Torah scrolls, or hand-illuminating books.

Students who study Sumerian or Akkadian at the graduate level, or Egyptian, will almost certainly have an opportunity to try your hand and river-reed at making a tablet, or your brush and papyrus at making a scroll.

Medievalists generally take classes in paleography and learn to prepare vellum and then write on it.

Of the making of books there is no end.

But if we're buying modern printed books for longterm use, it's smart to start learning about what will last and what won't.

Look for colophons that mention low-acid paper, or better still, archive quality paper. Look for hardcovers that have stitching as well as glue for binding.

muravyets · Nov 18, 2012

Medievalist said:
...
What's important is their contents, not the vessel.

From this may I take it you disagree with the points about books as objects and about artists/authors exploiting a medium's capabilities for message delivery which were made by me and Filigree?

Also that you disagree with Marshall McLuhan's ideas on media and communications (not hard to do, since his ideas are nearly unintelligible anyway, I guess)?

ETA: I'm asking because, as both a writer and an artist, I think those points are kind of heavy and speak to a possible future development in the wordy arts thanks to both new and old technologies. I think a lot of this kerfuffle over "proper" ways of reading (a nonsensical notion, I'm sure we agree) is due to people not yet wrapping their minds around the idea of these media as tools of creative expression, nor for some folks, thinking simply pragmatically about their practical, logistical and functional needs.

ETA2: Also, in reference to the question of the durability of a book collection, a digital book can be secured after purchase by stripping the DRM and saving as a text file, formatting it, printing it, and having a craftsman or artist bind it for you in a nice, customized style.

I would always prefer to be able to do that legally -- well, actually not to have to do it at all, but in the event I must -- and so I am very cautious about the status of digital publishing and DRM controls and where those may be heading. I would even be willing to pay extra for the license to do that if I had to, just so long as I could do it reliably and without headaches. I admit that, being too poor for an e-reader and not yet ready to publish in any format, I'm not 100% up to date on current DRM situations, but I keep it on my horizon.

"E-reading isn't reading"

Deleted member 42

Amadan

Deleted member 42

davidh219

Walking Anachronism

Deleted member 42

davidh219

Walking Anachronism

Deleted member 42

Theo81

bearilou

DenturePunk writer

Komnena

In Honor of Peter Tomich,USS Utah

Becky Black

Writing my way off the B Ark

Personal Prose

mccardey

Amadan

mccardey

Katie Elle

French Maiden

Toothpaste

THE RECKLESS RESCUE is out now!

calieber

Couth barbarian

bearilou

DenturePunk writer

CrastersBabies

Burninator!

RedWombat

Runs With Scissors

Mr Flibble

They've been very bad, Mr Flibble

Deleted member 42

muravyets

Old revolutionary