Amazon Kindle

[Rosalind]

Christopher said:
There are lots of people who refuse to loan out their physical books to friends. At least an e-book can't have its pages dog-eared or smudged or its spine broken. Every format has pluses and minuses.

:: raise hand :: I don't easily lend books out, it has to be to someone who I know will treat the book right.

And didn't the mod already ask us to avoid rehashing the same old e-book vs. paper book argument yet again? It's all been said a thousand times by now.

yep, and thank you to everyone who tried to stay on topic.

on topic, I agree with a lot of the people here that (1) this thing is too expensive, and (2) it needs to be able to support other formats since I've already got a small library of ereader books. some people might find the price ok and/or don't mind the format problem, it's just not for me atm. now if it can support other ebook formats I'll be seriously considering it since I spend this much money on a night out in the opera.

 

[Julio Angel Ortiz]

EBooks are as much a legitimate form of literature as physical books. They're just "different."

The kindle just looks ugly to me. I wish all devices ran Palm Reader and could loan books to others through WiFi (similar to song sharing on the Microsoft Zune).

 

[Sxottlan]

Smiley said:
While I agree that "ink-and-paper" would be a more accurate term, I took "real" in EMH's post to mean a description of the format, not a value judgment of stories in eBook form.

Exactly. I think some have a problem discerning between the two.

 

[KRAD]

^ Yes, except the opposite of "real" is "fake." There is no way, none, to view the designation of codex books as "real" without the implication that eBooks are "fake," and there is no way to view that as anything but an insult to everyone who's written eBook-original fiction. That is comes from one of the board moderators is even more disheartening.

 

[Baerbel Haddrell]

I think people also have to look at intention. How do you best describe the difference between e-books and non-ebooks without stepping on someone`s toes unintentionally? My suggestion is, use "paper book" and "non paper book". I can`t see how that might be offensive to someone.

In the past I have also talked about "real books" before in connection with the e-book discussion but simply meant the physical side of it, which is holding a book made of paper in your hands. OK, there are also electronic readers nowadays but that didn`t enter my mind at that time.

I like good stories. I just don`t like the e-book format. But I would never say that because I don`t like the format, I think the stories are inferior.

I like comic books. I don`t like audio books. Of course there are people who think differently.

I wish some people here would not react so overly sensitive because people prefer one format to another one, especially when it is obvious that no insult was intended.

Anyway, I will try to remember and stick with "paper books" and "non paper books" in future.

 

[Geoff]

Since "eBook" is an abbreviation for "Electronic Book," why not use "pBook" as an abbreviation for "Paper" and/or "Printed Book?"

 

[Jim Gamma]

KRAD, gotta say I think that, for once, you're wrong there - there IS a way to see it as not meaning "fake". A "BOOK" just means the medium in which a story is written. So saying "Real book vs EBook" to me just implies that the dead tree format is considered "real", whereas the EBook format is "fake" - or more accurately, non-"real" in that you can't hold it in your hands and turn the pages.

I guess it all depends on whether a "book" is the actual physical medium by which the story is conveyed, or the story itself. For me it's the medium. Saying "novel" or "story" or whatever refers to the story itself. You read "a book", but that's just shorthand for "the content of a book", just like "using the computer" is shorthand for "using applications, documents and files on the computer's hard drive". It's all shorthand and all definition-y.

But anyway, I have nothing against e-book stories or e-books themselves (apart from finding it easier to read paper than screen for a long time), and loved the few e-books I've actually read. *cough*Malefictorum*cough*

Back to the original topic, the Kindle looks interesting. As I said in my LJ, me want, but not available here yet.

 

[sttngfan1701d]

I will say this. Consider how you'd feel if you finally got the chance to write a Trek story and get paid for it. You've got the publishing contract. You've been paid for the story. You've seen the copy edit. You've seen the page proofs. You've got your first professional sale. You know your story is going to kick seven levels of ass. You're ready to go online and tell everyone about it, because you're sure they'll be as thrilled for you as you are for yourself.

But you've had the misfortune of it being an eBook.

So only a handful of people are actually going to read it.

Then you're told by the talking heads online that your work isn't "real" purely because it's an eBook and not printed on paper.

How would you feel?

Question wasn't directed at me, but honestly I'd feel bad for the consumers that the publisher would be so rigid and only offer it as an ebook.

First, even if I wrote the book I would disagree with that tactic...I wouldn't want to force the reader to get a certain format just to read my book, and to be blunt, that is NOT the attitude publishers should take if they really want the ebook format to grow. Why haven't I personally read the SCE books? Because they're ebooks and the print editions come out way after the fact. Basically, if you want to trumpet the electronic format as being just as good or "real" as print, then release books in both formats concurrently and give consumers a CHOICE. I don't want to be force-fed a certain format just because the publisher thinks that if something is only offered as an abook, people will have to buy it, thereby raising the ebook profile alongside print. But then, that's what it's all about isn't it? The fear that most people will just continue to buy print over ebooks unless you take print out of the equation sometimes.

Second, attitudes such as the one displayed above will do nothing to sway me to the ebook format. WHY does it offend authors when someone doesn't rate ebook as a format? Some people will like it and some people won't (for many of the reasons already enumerated a thousand times in this and other threads). People are dismissive partly because the ebook is a very restrictive format as opposed to print. And if I were an author whose first book is published ONLY as an ebook, I would be very disappointed because that would mean that some of my family would not be able to read my first published work because they are quite illiterate when it comes to computers and electronics. My mom, for example, can hardly work her phone and digital camera, much less a PC or pocket-PC, despite numerous attempts to teach her. So yeah....I'd be pissed at the publisher, not at the consumers who dislike the format.

 

[TerriO]

Jim Gamma said:
KRAD, gotta say I think that, for once, you're wrong there - there IS a way to see it as not meaning "fake". A "BOOK" just means the medium in which a story is written.

By that definition, a book published on paper isn't a book, because the medium most writers work in these days is electronic.

I'm hoping you realize that's what you're saying.

So saying "Real book vs EBook" to me just implies that the dead tree format is considered "real", whereas the EBook format is "fake" - or more accurately, non-"real" in that you can't hold it in your hands and turn the pages.

Which is exactly the opposite of what you just said.

So, is a book the format in which a story is written, or the format in which it's published?

Therein lies the rub.

And the point of contention over the last several hundred iterations of this "discussion" (I use quotes because the use of that term's debatable) has been the format in which the thing's published.

I guess it all depends on whether a "book" is the actual physical medium by which the story is conveyed, or the story itself. For me it's the medium. Saying "novel" or "story" or whatever refers to the story itself. You read "a book", but that's just shorthand for "the content of a book", just like "using the computer" is shorthand for "using applications, documents and files on the computer's hard drive". It's all shorthand and all definition-y.

We obviously need to redefine what a "book" is, or (IMO, of course) phase the term out, because the electronic format obviously isn't going away if Amazon is throwing their hat in.

But anyway, I have nothing against e-book stories or e-books themselves (apart from finding it easier to read paper than screen for a long time), and loved the few e-books I've actually read. *cough*Malefictorum*cough*

Jim, I should think you've known me long enough to know that sucking up isn't going to change the amount of grief I give you if I'm convinced you're wrong, especially when I can prove it.

Back to the original topic, the Kindle looks interesting. As I said in my LJ, me want, but not available here yet.

If I had the money I'd try it. But it's kind of out of my range right now.

 

[Jim Gamma]

By written, I meant published, not constructed - thanks for the correction, Terri, I should've been clearer about what I meant. So it's not "the opposite", I just mixed up my terminology. Easy enough to do in this sort of conversation, no?

And I wasn't sucking up, I was just mentioning that I do actually like stories that are published in that format, I just dislike the format itself. I don't think it does justice to the story, as I like to turn the pages and physically feel it in my hands, and not have to carry around yet another cold, electric device.

And yeah, redefinition would be great - hang on, I'll just call up the writers of the OED.

 

[Christopher]

Hey, everyone knows it's not a real book unless it's carved in cuneiform on clay tablets! None of this newfangled "paper" stuff!

 

[TerriO]

sttngfan1701d said:
Question wasn't directed at me, but honestly I'd feel bad for the consumers that the publisher would be so rigid and only offer it as an ebook.

The question was actually addressed to the entire forum, so you're fine.

Ah, but you've been hired to write for a line that's published in eBook format first. You don't have any say in how it's published. The publisher wants to do an eBook line, and they've hired you to work in it. So, are you saying you'd decline the opportunity?

First, even if I wrote the book I would disagree with that tactic...I wouldn't want to force the reader to get a certain format just to read my book, and to be blunt, that is NOT the attitude publishers should take if they really want the ebook format to grow. Why haven't I personally read the SCE books? Because they're ebooks and the print editions come out way after the fact. Basically, if you want to trumpet the electronic format as being just as good or "real" as print, then release books in both formats concurrently and give consumers a CHOICE.

Impossible.

The eBook format gives you a shorter word count to work in than a 100K novel or even a 50K short novel (although there are ways to work around that).

That's not long enough for publication in multiple formats. That's why the eBooks are collected into one whapping huge volume for reprint.

I don't want to be force-fed a certain format just because the publisher thinks that if something is only offered as an abook, people will have to buy it, thereby raising the ebook profile alongside print.

See, now, what intrigues me is the notion of science fiction fans running away from the eBook format. Of all of the people I'd expect to embrace the format, it would be science fiction fans. I mean, think about being able to do things like carry around the entire Wheel of Time series on one device instead of the backbreaking tomes.

But then, that's what it's all about isn't it? The fear that most people will just continue to buy print over ebooks unless you take print out of the equation sometimes.

Launching a product is never an easy thing. Sometimes, the only way to give it a fair shake is to take the other options out of the equation and see how it fares. That's just simple business sense.

Second, attitudes such as the one displayed above will do nothing to sway me to the ebook format. WHY does it offend authors when someone doesn't rate ebook as a format?

Because you're telling me that my books and the books of so many other authors who've put their hearts and souls into their work aren't real.

And that couldn't be further from the truth if it tried.

And it's offensive because it's discrimination. I'm tired of being discriminated against, and I'm tired of apologizing for the fact that I took jobs when they were offered to me.

If being fed up with the situation is an attitude problem for you, then can we discriminate against you for years on end just for taking whatever employment you may have and see how you feel about it?

Some people will like it and some people won't (for many of the reasons already enumerated a thousand times in this and other threads). People are dismissive partly because the ebook is a very restrictive format as opposed to print. And if I were an author whose first book is published ONLY as an ebook, I would be very disappointed because that would mean that some of my family would not be able to read my first published work because they are quite illiterate when it comes to computers and electronics. My mom, for example, can hardly work her phone and digital camera, much less a PC or pocket-PC, despite numerous attempts to teach her. So yeah....I'd be pissed at the publisher, not at the consumers who dislike the format.

So you rail against the publisher in an area filled with the very authors whose work you're discriminating against because you're railing against the publisher?

And you're not expecting them to get a bit miffed because you're discriminating against them to their virtual faces for taking jobs they were offered?

And one of the authors getting angry about this is a surprise how, exactly? Are we just supposed to sit here any take it? Because we've been doing that for years. And there's only so much abuse some people can take.

 

[Deleted 2]

sttngfan1701d said:
I don't want to be force-fed a certain format just because the publisher thinks that if something is only offered as an abook, people will have to buy it, thereby raising the ebook profile alongside print. But then, that's what it's all about isn't it? The fear that most people will just continue to buy print over ebooks unless you take print out of the equation sometimes.

Not necessarily. For publishers, eBooks represent a way to reduce the cost of bringing a book to market. If not immediately, then eventually.

So, if you were given the choice to publish a book, or a series of books aimed at a small but tech-savvy audience, and you weren't sure whether they would catch on or not, what format would you choose? Leatherbound hardcover? Or digital eBooks?

 

[TerriO]

Jim Gamma said:
And I wasn't sucking up, I was just mentioning that I do actually like stories that are published in that format, I just dislike the format itself. I don't think it does justice to the story, as I like to turn the pages and physically feel it in my hands, and not have to carry around yet another cold, electric device.

For the record, Malefictorum was only ever designed to be published as an eBook. Publishing it in print first? Gods, that would not have even remotely done that story justice, as there were underlying themes that ONLY worked in eBook format. There's an entire psychological aspect to that one that's going to be lost completely when it goes into reprint.

So, you'd better believe I'm going to argue that there ARE benefits to the eBook format, because there are some stories you can do there that just won't work as well elsewhere. Not that far removed from some movies not working nearly as well on TV as in the theatres, actually.

 

[Christopher]

sttngfan1701d said:
Question wasn't directed at me, but honestly I'd feel bad for the consumers that the publisher would be so rigid and only offer it as an ebook.

First, even if I wrote the book I would disagree with that tactic...I wouldn't want to force the reader to get a certain format just to read my book...

Umm... that happens all the time. If I sell a story to a magazine, it only gets published in the magazine, at least unless I manage to sell it to a reprint anthology sometime down the road. Short-story magazines aren't nearly as easy to find as paperback books these days, even though they've been around longer. You generally have to subscribe directly or search for a bookstore that carries them or order them online.

News flash: we write stories to get paid for them. If you were a writer, you wouldn't refuse payment for a story just because of the market it was in. You'd sell it to whoever would buy it, because you need the money, the experience, and the name recognition. Sure, only a small number of people would read a story published as an e-book, but it wouldn't be too much smaller than the subscriber base of a semi-pro short-story magazine like Interzone. Writers have been selling their work in limited-distribution formats for generations. You take what you can get. And if not a lot of people read it, you hope that eventually you can get it reprinted in an anthology or collection. This is just how the business works.

and to be blunt, that is NOT the attitude publishers should take if they really want the ebook format to grow.

It worked fine for print magazines for generations.

Basically, if you want to trumpet the electronic format as being just as good or "real" as print, then release books in both formats concurrently and give consumers a CHOICE.

Short stories generally don't come out in magazines and anthologies simultaneously -- they get published in magazines first, then maybe get anthologized years later. Does that mean that magazines are less "real" than squarebound books?

I don't want to be force-fed a certain format just because the publisher thinks that if something is only offered as an abook, people will have to buy it, thereby raising the ebook profile alongside print. But then, that's what it's all about isn't it? The fear that most people will just continue to buy print over ebooks unless you take print out of the equation sometimes.

No, it isn't. Any more than that's the reason why stories get published in magazines before they're reprinted in anthologies, or why comic books get published in single issues before they're re-released in squarebound collections. It's always been the nature of publishing that fiction is presented in multiple formats, and sometimes gets reprinted in a different format than the one it originated in.

And if I were an author whose first book is published ONLY as an ebook, I would be very disappointed because that would mean that some of my family would not be able to read my first published work because they are quite illiterate when it comes to computers and electronics.

Uhh... if you wrote the story, couldn't you just print off a copy of the manuscript from your own computer and give that to your family? Or you could wait until the editor sent you the galley pages in the mail (because the writing and editing process is exactly the same in both formats). Those pages let you see the book in the format in which it would appear in the final eBook, except printed out on unbound 8 1/2 x 11" paper. Just flip a rubber band around them or put a binder clip on them and hand the sheaf to your family members (once you've checked the pages and sent corrections to your editor). Just don't charge them for it.

So yeah....I'd be pissed at the publisher, not at the consumers who dislike the format.

Well, I'm an author whose first "book" (novella, actually) was published as an eBook, and I wasn't angry at the publisher. What mattered was that I got my foot in the door. I got paid, I got my name established, and it was a stepping stone to a career. Plus it was a valuable and enjoyable experience. Everything you write, you learn from. And you move onto the next project and build on the experience you've gained. You don't dwell on how many or how few people read your first project, because if you're any kind of professional writer, you've long since moved on to the next project and the one after that. If not many people read the last thing, you hope to get more with the next thing.

 

[sttngfan1701d]

Ah, but you've been hired to write for a line that's published in eBook format first. You don't have any say in how it's published. The publisher wants to do an eBook line, and they've hired you to work in it. So, are you saying you'd decline the opportunity?

Well if you put it like that, I would do it but I wouldn't exactly be happy about it.

Impossible.

The eBook format gives you a shorter word count to work in than a 100K novel or even a 50K short novel (although there are ways to work around that).

That's not long enough for publication in multiple formats. That's why the eBooks are collected into one whapping huge volume for reprint.

So is this just for Trek Books/Pocket? Because there are a lot of other books of all different types for e-Readers aren't there? The Amazon Kindle thing claims to have a crapload of titles (including the book I most recently bought, The Godfather's Revenge, which in print edition is 600 pages).

Because you're telling me that my books and the books of so many other authors who've put their hearts and souls into their work aren't real.

And that couldn't be further from the truth if it tried.

And it's offensive because it's discrimination. I'm tired of being discriminated against, and I'm tired of apologizing for the fact that I took jobs when they were offered to me.

If being fed up with the situation is an attitude problem for you, then can we discriminate against you for years on end just for taking whatever employment you may have and see how you feel about it?

For the record, I never said that ebooks weren't real. I know they are; hell, I'm writing a screenplay right now that's not printed out, so I know that it's "real." What I addressed is your reaction. And as for your reaction...okay, so you're tired of being discriminated against for taking a job that was offered....but IS it discrimination in the classic sense if people don't want to buy/read ebooks? Some people will, some people won't. You might think it's for stupid reasons, much like a filmmaker might feel if a critic dismisses his or her film for "personal taste" reasons because of the medium they work with (i.e., Critic A: "I won't watch anything that uses rotoscoping or that's done entirely on digital because it undermines film").

It's the "personal" element here that's weird for me. You HAVE readers. Loyal readers. Readers who don't care that you write ebooks. You also have people who won't read your books because they don't like ebooks. It's a matter of personal taste, even if it may seem at times like it's stupid criticism. But couldn't you just let it roll off your back?

See, now, what intrigues me is the notion of science fiction fans running away from the eBook format. Of all of the people I'd expect to embrace the format, it would be science fiction fans. I mean, think about being able to do things like carry around the entire Wheel of Time series on one device instead of the backbreaking tomes.

Okay, here's the thing. Yes...as a science fiction fan the idea of reading something on a "padd" is intriguing to me and appeals to my nerdish side. But personally, reading things electronically reminds me of doing research. For novels or nonfiction pleasure reading, I'd rather lay on my bed. Or curl up in a recliner. Or sit on the couch....rather than stare at a computer. And I'd like to read something on a couch without investing in hardware to do it, be it the Amazon Kindle, the Sony Reader, a Pocket PC, whatever. I don't want to read while monitoring battery life. I like flipping pages better than scrolling. Even for textbooks...it's easier for me to hold my page while looking something else up in a glossary and flip back to it than entering a page number in the box on Adobe. That's one of the things that annoyed me most when I researched electronic articles at school. Electronic archives can be great...but for novels/short stories, I have a hard-enough time reading an online version of The Christmas Carol. It's just not the same.

So you rail against the publisher in an area filled with the very authors whose work you're discriminating against because you're railing against the publisher?

Everyone who posts here buys Trek books, either in "traditional print" or ebook form. Pocket is making money. The authors are making money. If some of us don't want to read the ebooks....so what? It's not a slight against the AUTHORS (at least in my point of view) it's a slight against the format and the attitude displayed against criticism. And even if you think it's discriminatory, like I said...you have plenty of readers and plenty of fans that love your work. So why not let their praise drown the rest of us out?

And as for railing against the publisher, why would I do that? I might be PISSED, but railing against them won't do anything. If I had a contract I'd write the ebook....but that doesn't mean I'd be happy about it if I never got to hold said book in my hands.

 

[TerriO]

Emh said:
Terri, my opinion is simply that: an opinion.

In light of everything said, care to revise that "opinion"?

Rosalind, I'm sorry. However, seeing one of the mods derail the thread into the usual crap is something altogether new for this "discussion" (and I use that term loosely).

I'm not going to apologize for speaking out when I feel I'm being discriminated against. If you want to warn me, fine. I've tried everything in my power not to cross the line to deserve it, but if you think I do, I'll take it.

I just am tired of being on the receiving end of discrimination and, in a way, verbal abuse because I took a job.

 

[sttngfan1701d]

Oh, come now. The issue here isn't the material you write, nor what you do, nor even, most importantly you. The issue is the medium in which your work is published and that's all. I don't think any of this is about you personally, Terri. It's not personal discrimination.

 

[David cgc]

TerriO said:
I just am tired of being on the receiving end of discrimination and, in a way, verbal abuse because I took a job.

It's not discrimination, any more than if you wrote a book in french and people declined to read it or waited for the translation.

 

[Vic Sixx]

I'm still not sold of them, but the Kindle is on the cover of the current Newsweek magazine. I just got it. With a pretty good story of the them. It's looks pretty good.