Publishing on the internet

[Alexa]

Internet brings us another challenge: publishing on the internet. I'm curious what people think about it, generally speaking. It seems bookstores had to close their bussiness after more than 40 years on the market.

Do you really think books should be available only on line ? What about the paper version ? Are they old fashion ?

[Karen Dales]

Are you talking about ebooks or advertising print books through online stores such as amazon.com?

[Scarfy]

I personally hate the thought of things like books going digital. I had a look at a few e-readers and they just... well, they felt wrong.

Anyway, read the disadvantages section of the wikipedia link below. I think all the points there, especially the one about cost, fragility, and theft will hold back e-books for quite some time,

E-book - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[Ian Whates]

Having had a dozen or so short stories published in different venues online, that's fine by me.

Have to confess, I don't particularly relish the thought of trying to read an entire novel in digital format, but there's every indication that's the way the market's going.

Who knows, perhaps in ten years from now we'll all be reading books that way without a second thought.

[ctg]

Well, I say this, blogosphere has eaten a lot of printed media space. So much so, that many media outlets has turned to publish blogs. In the other hand is the traditional book publishing versus the e-book scheme. E-books, even though they are very appealing to the wider audience, are still in baby shoes. This is because not that many can read whole book from the screen, as they need to hold it in their hand. There's a solution for that problem, the e-paper (reader), but thing is, you can only get them from the oriental countries. Therefore, in novel publishing terms, the e-book scheme is a good promotional material for the paper version. Then again, if you are into the murky interwebs world, you already know that many hackers prefer to have all their material in the electronic form. But that's so small part of the whole business, and those sort of people find a way to get their free copies.

[Perpetual Man]

The idea of reading it from the screen just drives me crazy - it's not portable, you have to sit at your computer to read it, you can't just pick it up and read it, and certainly reading in bed is a problem (Unless you use a laptop, but even that is problematic, changing position with a laptop is a lot harder than a book)

And then as ctg says there's now the e-paper reader (well sooner or later it'll be here) and it's easy to condemn or rave abut something that I have not had a chance to play with yet, but you still have to keep it charged, it'll take time to warm up - no matter how quick it is it will not be as fast to open as a book... and there is always the chance of headaches... or eyes strain from looking at the screen for too long...

Give me paper any day! It just FEELS right

[ctg]

Originally Posted by Perpetual Man

And then as ctg says there's now the e-paper reader (well sooner or later it'll be here) and it's easy to condemn or rave abut something that I have not had a chance to play with yet, but you still have to keep it charged, it'll take time to warm up - no matter how quick it is it will not be as fast to open as a book... and there is always the chance of headaches... or eyes strain from looking at the screen for too long...

You know those readers are very quick on opening whatever you want to read as it's their only function, plus they are not that heavy. So instead of you dragging a back bag full of sources, you got a small reader that can hold hundreds of sources. Also when you learn to use it, it can be quicker then sourcing it out from the paper version. In some cases, zooming into the pics is easier then you doing with the paper versions. But, as you say, many people prefer old ways and stick with the paper.

[Perpetual Man]

I've just been looking at the Sony version which is out in the UK in September. It does look kind of handy, still don't think I'll be that interested to start with - it's a bit expensive and not sure over all, but I can see the appeal (and the space saving - instead of bookshelves and boxes everywhere, the entire library in the palm of your hand!)

But on the old fashioned side it just won't have the feel or smell of a book!

[Troo]

I think once ebook readers fix the eye-strain issue they'll really take off. But I'll always prefer paper

[Sylvetra_Snake]

Books in PAPER format please! I have seen the digi-handheld-books and they look handy but seem like another novelty. There is just something different having a book in physical form.

[neilwilliamson]

Originally Posted by Troo

I think once ebook readers fix the eye-strain issue they'll really take off. But I'll always prefer paper

Troo - I've just got one, and I find it much, much less strainful on the eye than a pc or laptop screen. The e-paper is not backlit like a screen is, which means it has very similar reflective properties to paper and ink.

At the moment I'm using it less to read purchased e-books than I am to read all the other fiction oriented stuff I have to get through. And I find it a nice solution to vastly reducing the amount of material I print out without straining my eyes irrepairably by forcing me to read from a screen ALL blinking day.

Just my tuppence-worth.

[Barney]

When you look at how fast music downloads have become established, it is probably inevitable e-books and readers will overtake printed books. Although it is nice to have a tactile artefact like a record or CD collection, there are younger people now who are used to having all their music in digital form, on their ipod or PC.
Probably books will go the same way, but not for a while yet. A book is a design classic after all; how many hundreds (thousands?) of years has the book been around, and not changed significantly? It's the perfect handheld object.

[Alexa]

Several e-books are already available on line and not too expensive, in my opinion. Those interested can download from free public domain, books with no charge at all.(you can chaeck on Mobipocket site)

The problem is people cannot afford to buy books. First of all, they are expensive if you want them from the bookstore and not a second hand. Secondly, some of them are difficult to find in a bookstore or a library. 3th some of them are in bad shape because of the quality of binding. Well, at least not when you buy the book. You can see fast enough if you want to read it in the bus, train, or any other transport.

Are we condamed to read them in the future on line ?

[MarkCN]

Having worked in bookselling and behind the scenes, I can honestly say that I don't think ebooks will 'replace' fiction in physical form much. For two main reasons.

1) The average book buyer purchases just a few books a year. Why would he/she want to fork out a lot of money on a device when it wouldn't be used much?

2) Generally speaking, those who like lots of books like, uhm, books. The physical object. They would want to continue owning the physical object.

And there is not much of a market in between.

Ebooks will support fiction, by giving samples etc. Just look at what Tor US did. The ebooks they released for free resulted in a sales increase for the physical texts.

A few more important factors: music downloads worked because people could dowload quick individual songs, make playlists, and redistribute simply. The book equivalent is mixing chapters - not the sanest of routes. You simply cannot compare the two industries - they are not the same.

Music, also, has always been played on a device when sold. The book is the perfect device already for distributing literature. What's more, you wouldn't be afraid of dropping it in the bath...

What the ebook is trying to do is put a device on a device. Apple aren't going to do it - there's not a big enough market for readers apparently. There will be no iPod moment. The Kindle looks like it was made in 1983 by Amstrad.

[Ian Whates]

Hi, Mark,

Thanks for your thoughts on this, and...

Welcome to the Chrons!

What took you so long??