|
thedeadhaji
39489 Posts
Back in the day, when ebooks were just a marketing term for a self-published pdf file, ebooks were not particularly convenient. Not only was the purchase flow cumbersome, the content of such ebooks was suspect at best. But things have changed, and changed they have. There are a whole bevy of options where purchasing is almost frictionless, whose content is identical to print. Better reading devices, ebook management software, and the societal acceptance of the medium has made the continual proliferation of ebooks all but inevitable at this point. But does this make traditional dead-tree volumes defunct? I personally don't think so. Ebooks and regular books present a choice to be made by the consumer. Each medium offers a unique set of advantages that are not readily replicated by the other. Ebooks are portable, making them great while traveling. For someone who is renting their room and a move is inevitable, it will prevent the backbreaking labor of moving tomes in and out of rooms and up and down stairs. I shudder at the thought of moving the hundreds of volumes our family has at home. They are particularly well suited for casual reading, and we can immediately scratch the itch on our backs to read the next book that suddenly captures our attention. No more listlessly waiting for several days while the volume bumbles its way to your door. A hidden benefit is that non copyrighted material is now free for consumption at the utmost of convenience. The day I realized that I no longer had to shell out twenty dollars to read something by Shakespeare or Plato was groundbreaking[1]. But the traditional books still own a few niches. If ebooks are suited to casual reading, then physical copies seem to be more natural, all things being equal, for the more academic or highly formatted an illustrated instructional material. Physical copies are still the choice for longevity of the medium, as who can never be so sure when the electronic formats and digital devices of today will give way to the next generation of protocols and conventions. Paper has, ironically, stood the test of time for many centuries (though certainly wobbly legged); even the most steadfast electronic storage mediums cannot hold their bits for nearly this duration. But trumping all of this, at least for me and at least at the time of writing, is the ability to lend physical books to friends. The free flow of books amongst friends is something so important to me, that no matter how convenient or inexpensive ebooks become. In this way, and also in that ebooks have proven to be not any more cheaper than physical copies, I have failed to be convinced that moving to ebooks is the right decision for me, personally, as of now. Perhaps the roadblocks to my emigration will be removed in the future, and I will no longer have to contend with the mountainous formation of books that imposes itself in the corner of my room.
[1] Doesn't this mean that it no longer makes any sense for schools to force their students into buying physical copies of "the classics"?
Crossposted from my main blog
 
|
Well, what makes "the ebook revolution" so awesome also fixes your lending issue: ebooks can be pirated, and very very easily at that. No need to lend a copy to your friends, just copy it and send it over.
Now, I actually buy ebooks (because iphones suck at reading .pdfs while kindle formats own) and I'm disgusted by the prizes (the mass effect books are CHEAPER in hardcover than in kindle versions if you buy from amazon... wtf, wow) but you can always fix those problems by.... "borrowing" some books from some nices sites out there.
|
I recently have moved almost entirely to a digital ebook format. I love reading and often have several books on the go at any one time, so having my kindle with me makes it much much more convenient for my style of reading. Having said that, I do love to own a physical copy of a book that I really like, particularly if it's a special edition or binding. Even though most classics are free as ebooks now, reading them in a format like this is a rather special experience.
There are many books that simply aren't available as ebooks, however, and many types of books (illustrated manuals, encyclopedias etc.) that aren't really suited to the smaller e-ink display, so I'll continue purchasing physical copies of those for now.
I also very much resent paying VAT for ebooks. 
|
I much prefer to have physical copies of novels and alot of it probably is nostalgia. I like the feel of books, the way they age, smell and wear as you share them round or read them over and over. It becomes your copy, compared to some indistinct file on a hard drive. I like having a bookcase packed with novels I enjoy and the ability to lend friends physical copies. I also like being able to physically feel and see your page progress through a novel as more than just a number at the bottom of the screen. It's also cool to be able to see what other people are reading on the train or at a cafe, but with kindles there aren't easily visible book covers. Who knows someone might strike up a conversation with me based on seeing me reading a book they like? That sort of thing won't really happen with e-books.
My final argument against them is I already spend enough of my day looking at a screen.
|
My personal problem with ebooks is that I find it much more relaxing to read a paper book as the electronic variant. Even though the quality of the higher end e-readers that handle the e-pub format is very very good it's the mindset that counts in the end and when reading I just can't seem to relax as much with an ebook as with a paper book.
But somehow that is not the case when I'm reading non-fiction. History books or philosophy books for example, although I read them solely for my pleasure, I'm happy to read on an e-reader. Perhaps this will change in the future but for now for light reading (like SF etc.) nothing beats sliding into a hot bath with a good old fashioned paper book.
ps. I recently moved and I can tell you packing, moving and unpacking all my books was indeed a real pain in the backside. I really hope not having to do it again in the foreseeable future.
|
Physical copies will always feel better. That aside ebooks are great and come in handy.
On another note, I will never buy ebooks(I always pirate them), not until the publishers stop being greedy money grubbers and actually sell them at fair prices.
I can pay, and did many times, big sums for hard covers, but the situation with ebooks is getting out of hand and it's a matter of principle for me now.
|
I never had the pleasure of lending and borrowing books from friends as most of my friends up to this point have never been avid readers. And receiving copies of your books all worn down and in an abused condition kind of scarred me.
Nothing will replace the experience of reading a physical copy of a book. There isn't just the nolstagia factor into it, but also just the experience of holding the pages in your hand, feeling the weight of the pages shift to from one hand to the other as you progress through the story, and the smell of paper. E-readers will never replace the physical experience of reading a book.
Also, the fact that books don't require batteries is a huge plus for me. Reading on an eletronic device (as I do sometimes on my phone or tablet) comes with the always nagging thought of, "do I have enough battery?" There is nothing more inconvienient than being in an area with no outlets available when the e-reader just dies when you are getting to the good part. Sure, battery lives are getting longer and longer but I still get bugged by the ever persistant voice in my head that goes, "do you have enough batteries?"
And one thing that doesn't seem to be mentioned often when it comes to the ebook vs book discussion, is the speed of either device. Books require almost no boot up time. I just go to my mark page and instanteously, the words are there (duh, it exists physically XD). And quickly jumping from page to page takes no effort. I've tried Kindles and other e-readers before, both for academic and personal purposes, and the one thing that always bugged me was the fact that I couldn't go from page 394 to page 42 without significant delay or the hassle of having to interact with the user interface. Not to mention the fact that I can't quickly jump back and forth between the two or read both at the same time.
Of course, it might change when I have to lug around 800 books. But when will I ever have to that?
|
The permanence of real books is an integral part of why I enjoy them. I enjoy reading books that demand a high level of time and processing in order to truly grasp their meaning, and the ability to hold it, take notes, and flip around are important aspects that allow me to connect to the words held within. Ebooks are flashy but they're also easy to come by and tend to be 'disposable;' your commitment to owning a physical object helps persuade you to exert the effort to make the most of it, even if it's difficult.
I imagine that a large number of people will enjoy the quick and dirty potential of ebooks for quick entertainment, but there will always be a market for real books for 'true' readers.
|
thedeadhaji
39489 Posts
On March 22 2012 03:05 Steveling wrote:
Physical copies will always feel better. That aside ebooks are great and come in handy.
On another note, I will never buy ebooks(I always pirate them), not until the publishers stop being greedy money grubbers and actually sell them at fair prices.
I can pay, and did many times, big sums for hard covers, but the situation with ebooks is getting out of hand and it's a matter of principle for me now.
Particularly when we can buy used books on Amazon for as cheap as one cent + $3.99 for shipping ~_~
|
Hong Kong9152 Posts
I believe physical books are easier to commit to reading compared to their electronic cousins. Maybe it is different if you have an e-reader like a Nook or Kindle, but reading a PDF on a computer just doesn't feel the same and the fact that you are on a computer presents any number of alternative things you could be doing in order to distract you.
E-books are also not as conducive to my particular style of reading, especially if they are reference and non-fiction works. They are harder to annotate as well.
Edit: E-books present one important advantage though: they lower the cost of production for books. It is easier for people to self-publish works in the digital age. Likewise, it should also mean that e-books should be cheaper than their physical counterparts, but that is sadly not the case more often than not.
|
On March 23 2012 03:20 itsjustatank wrote:
I believe physical books are easier to commit to reading compared to their electronic cousins. Maybe it is different if you have an e-reader like a Nook or Kindle, but reading a PDF on a computer just doesn't feel the same and the fact that you are on a computer presents any number of alternative things you could be doing in order to distract you.
E-books are also not as conducive to my particular style of reading, especially if they are reference and non-fiction works. They are harder to annotate as well.
Edit: E-books present one important advantage though: they lower the cost of production for books. It is easier for people to self-publish works in the digital age. Likewise, it should also mean that e-books should be cheaper than their physical counterparts, but that is sadly not the case more often than not.
The price issue may be changing soon. The US Department of Justice is currently investigating Apple and the five largest publishers in the US for collusion and price fixing to artificially inflate the cost of ebooks.
|
thedeadhaji
39489 Posts
>itsjustatank
Definitely agree on the ease of commitment to reading a physical book. I think it's analogous to being internet-free when studying, or getting out of your own room to study/work.
An environment that makes it easier for your mind to focus on the task at hand should be taken advantage of fully. Even MightyAtom has written about this regarding his work.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
