What about audio books? I've read more in the last few years than the decade before, since I switched almost entirely to audio books. In many cases they are much better than the printed version. Case in point, Ulysses by James Joyce. The audible.com spoken version is a masterpiece, and this is definitely a book that's meant to be listened to.
Did technology kill the book or give it new life?
11–20 of 40 posts
Re: Did technology kill the book or give it new life?
#12While I used to be the guy that would carry a book on my mass-transit commute, I found that the (admittedly minor) headaches of doing so were contributing to my reading less and less.
Having to carry a book around is fine if it's a small paperback, but for books I just couldn't wait for, I found that my laptop bag was cramped enough without trying to carry the hardback Game of Thrones, so I ended up prioritizing taking smaller books on the commute, which meant that I had books at home that I wasn't reading. Meanwhile, the Kindle is smaller than a paperback. Advantage: Kindle.
If I was nearing the end of a book, I would just stop taking it, because (for me at least), the idea that I might take a book into my commute, finish it, and not have a book to read on the way home was a hassle. Moreover, I had to carry the already-read book around for the rest of the day. With the Kindle, I could finish one book and start the next. Advantage: Kindle.
Bookmarking / placeholding doesn't need much discussion, but I definitely found that on the Metro, I lost my place a lot more often than reading on my porch. Advantage: Kindle.
Goodreads integration. I like sharing my thoughts on books, but more specifically, I like sharing my ratings of books... mostly for myself, so that when I'm looking for a new book and nothing is jumping out at me, I can check out my Goodreads review, find other books by authors I rated highly, and just grab the next book from an author I previously enjoyed. With paper books, I found that I would often forget to update my rankings, while my Kindle asks at the end of every book. Advantage: Kindle.
To those who suggest that paper is better on the eyes than e-ink, I can't assert scientifically either way, but as a programmer who spends too much time in front of a screen, I can only say that having begun with the Kindle software on an iPad, and eventually moved to the Kindle hardware, the Kindle is MUCH better on the eyes than the iPad. On the scale of paper to iPad, the Kindle feels like it comes closer to paper than iPad, if it's not exactly the same.
While I acknowledge that the above quibbles are in fact quibbles, and possibly unique only to me, on the whole, I've found that keeping my Kindle on me just means that I end up reading more, which is the far better alternative.
Re: Did technology kill the book or give it new life?
#13For adult fiction, I doubt any of us care how or where people read. It's an uncomplicated example. Instead, consider something like scientific research. The possibilities seem endless when it comes to putting research online: richer multimedia, raw data sets, crowdsourcing, timely publication, etc. But paper (and parchment) is still a more reliable archival format, which could be crucial on some unfortunate day in the (hopefully distant) future.
For content that matters, I wonder how long paper will be able to keep up with digital, and what the long-term effects will be either way.
Re: Did technology kill the book or give it new life?
#14For adult fiction, I doubt any of us care how or where people read. It's an uncomplicated example. Instead, consider something like scientific research. The possibilities seem endless when it comes to putting research online: richer multimedia , raw data sets, crowdsourcing, timely publication, etc. But paper (and parchment) is still a more reliable archival format, which could be crucial on some unfortunate day in t…
Do scientific journals count as books? Have they ever been novelized? I feel like they might fall outside the scope of the topic.
Re: Did technology kill the book or give it new life?
#15Earlier quoted context omitted.
Have you used a (non-backlit) Kindle or other e-ink display for any length of time? It's difficult for people who haven't tried it to believe, but it feels nothing like staring at a screen. I spend all day in front of a screen as well, but reading my Kindle at the end of the day is no harder on my eyes than looking at a dead-tree book.
It really is completely different. It's like looking at an Etch-A-Sketch, which in the end, is not much different than looking at paper with ink or graphite particles in it. E-Readers are one of those technologies that I'm completely unconflicted and wholly supportive of. E-books should be priced better though, to account for the inability to lend them out to people.
Between the limitations and the lack of a used market, ebooks do seem really expensive compared to dead-tree.
Re: Did technology kill the book or give it new life?
#16Other than the occasional technical book, I refuse to buy e-books when reading for pleasure. After spending all day in front of a screen, the last thing I want is another screen in my face when trying to relax with a good book at the end of the day.
I understand where you are coming from, really, I do. My eyes are strained too and I recently got a Kindle (purposely without the backlight) and it is amazing. I'd recommend to give it a try - but I can't really speak for the backlit versions.
It's worth making the distinction between frontlit and backlit ereaders too. I have a frontlit Nook and other than the lights being a bit bluer than I'd like, it's much more comfortable to read on than my tablet at the lowest brightness.
Re: Did technology kill the book or give it new life?
#17Other than the occasional technical book, I refuse to buy e-books when reading for pleasure. After spending all day in front of a screen, the last thing I want is another screen in my face when trying to relax with a good book at the end of the day.
I understand where you are coming from, really, I do. My eyes are strained too and I recently got a Kindle (purposely without the backlight) and it is amazing. I'd recommend to give it a try - but I can't really speak for the backlit versions.
No epaper Kindle has a backlight. The Paperwhite and Voyage are front-lit and are AMAZING!
Re: Did technology kill the book or give it new life?
#18Other than the occasional technical book, I refuse to buy e-books when reading for pleasure. After spending all day in front of a screen, the last thing I want is another screen in my face when trying to relax with a good book at the end of the day.
I understand where you are coming from, really, I do. My eyes are strained too and I recently got a Kindle (purposely without the backlight) and it is amazing. I'd recommend to give it a try - but I can't really speak for the backlit versions.
I have the paperwhite, and the backlight is really easy on the eyes, I actually prefer the backlight somewhere between 8-12 (the max setting is 20), as opposed to using the lowest setting, because it makes the page seem whiter, instead of like it is emitting light.
I did recently crack a small section of my kindle's screen when I dropped something heavy on it, and now the backlight bleeds through the small hole with the intensity of a thousand suns.... But before then, it was very comfortable, and I'll probably buy a replacement.
Re: Did technology kill the book or give it new life?
#19I love ebooks and I'm way too prone to impulse-buying them on my Kindle, but recent price movements are trying hard to kill the market.
I'm not going to pay £15 for a text file, sorry. I honestly don't care how good your editing is, chances are it's awful anyway: one I got recently, by a mainstream author from a mainstream publisher, has "renaissance" spelled "re nais san ce" (with spaces) throughout the entire book, clearly an hyphenation fail (and let's not go into "wrong" words you can clearly recognise as spellchecking fails).
So in the end, you publisher-and-author are just shuffling a text file from A to B and you want me to believe your profit is the same as when you were cutting trees, pressing ink and transporting heavy boxes around the land. I just feel insulted. I know cost and price are different and what the market will bear and yadda yadda, I just don't think a text file is worth more than a few quid.
Re: Did technology kill the book or give it new life?
#20I love ebooks and I'm way too prone to impulse-buying them on my Kindle, but recent price movements are trying hard to kill the market. I'm not going to pay £15 for a text file, sorry. I honestly don't care how good your editing is, chances are it's awful anyway: one I got recently, by a mainstream author from a mainstream publisher, has "renaissance" spelled "re nais san ce" (with spaces) throughout the entire book,…
Hear hear. If the Kindle version of a book is not 10-20% less than the new paperback price, I don't buy the book. It's a simple as that.
Thankfully, there are enough books for which this isn't the case.