Not signed in (Sign In)
    • CommentTimeNov 29th 2007
    Mark - The beauty of of my Sony is that there's no back-light or glare from the screen. It really is just like reading a book. Much like I hate sitting in a dark room with a computer screen because it burns out my eyes, I would also hate sitting in a room with low light reading a paper book. Who does that? The proper lighting works great with my screen. I even have specifications so I can turn texts that friends send me into pdf files formatted for my screen.

    I don't get eye fatigue from reading on my Sony like I can get from hours spent on my computer.

    I'll admit - my sister works for Sony and I got my Reader for free. It's stupid durable, because I've dropped it several times and it still works.

    Personally, I don't like the idea of having all of my electronics on one device. To me it's one device that when stolen or broken or simply borked is an entire life gone. I've watched my sister go through Blackberry withdrawals and it's not worth it to me. My Sony has a mp3 player and I never use it. It's headphones only and frankly I don't listen to music when I read, though it's nice to pretend I'm listening to something so people leave me alone.
    • CommentAuthormunin218
    • CommentTimeNov 29th 2007
    Personally, e-books just don't turn me on.

    I am a bibliophile, I like real, physical books.
    • CommentTimeNov 29th 2007
    I also agree that it doesn't have to be an either/or debate. I find it ridiculous that environmental issues are linked to the publishing industry, or at least to the extent they are - hardcover books are not killing all the trees. Businesses printing everything in triplicate, bleached toilet paper, and the non-stop barrage of unsolicated mail are.

    And I believe it was David Quammen who once said, yes, we may eat fish into extinction, but I will eat the last one. Basically - you can pry my books out of my hands with my dead fingers.
      CommentAuthormuse hick
    • CommentTimeNov 29th 2007
    all this talk on one medium destroying another seems pointless -- they change each other, they don't destroy each other. the internet mutated the radio and is in the process of mutating the tv. tv did the same to radio. radio did the same to print. print did the same to the oral tradition. it is just the creation of one more psychic space to fill up with a mixture of wonderful insight and heaps and heaps of boring worthless shit.
    the message that one medium is dead because something new has come along is sales pitch and only that
  1.  (23.45)
    So it's going to be that sort of day, looks like.

    Serendipity of a different sort, I suppose.

    (PS, I'm having so much fun today! I haven't had this much brain juice going since, well, last Friday, but still! It oozes out my nose! Or that's just me being sick)
    • CommentTimeNov 29th 2007
    agree with muse hick. electronic media will only complement books... in our lifetimes at least. Too much of the world remains offline. ebooks will probably evolve into a different medium from books altogether, rather than remain electronic equivalent. ebooks that remain merely as books reproduced on a screen will possibly be as quaint as someone who accesses the internet with a browser like Lynx.
    • CommentTimeNov 29th 2007
    I love bookcases full of books. I'm anal about how they are arranged but once I have them on there right...well, it's glorious. I also keep my favorite books of the moment out on the coffee table and encourage guests to flip through them. And they do.
    • CommentAuthortmofee
    • CommentTimeNov 29th 2007
    When you live in a small two bedroom house, it's hard to have a place for all the boooks, DVDs, CDs without it being a mess. Something like this is handy for me.. I've moved from Broken Hill to Melbourne to Wagga to Mildura. I'm pretty sure I lost a few books somewhere along the way.
    • CommentTimeNov 29th 2007
    the death of the library has been predicted ever since there were more than about 48 computers in the country.

    It's a fallacious argument because it rests on the presupposition that the library's main stock in trade is information. This isn't really true. I'm sitting at a reference desk in a library right now (in a department actually called Information Services) and information is not our major product. It's certainly not our killer app.

    Yes, we have a lot of information, and access to a lot more though journal archives and databases that aren't on the regular Internet, but that's not really what we supply.

    What we supply is knowledge.

    anyone can offer you access to information. There's more information on the Internet than a million people could read in their combined lifetimes (hyperbole, incidentally). The problem is that there's so much information that people don't know where to start looking, and so they resort to Google, which is fantastic as long as you are trying to find what Google thinks you should want. Where the library comes into its own is that librarians can tell reliable information from crap. They can find stuff that is citable, they know what a scholarly journal is and how that differs from other journals. And they've got mad skills when it comes to searching for things.

    The fundamental misconception is that the library provides a product (in other words books or information). We don't. We provide a service, namely helping you find stuff out. The exact method we use and the exact form of the stuff may change, but the job is just as vital as it ever was.
    • CommentTimeNov 30th 2007
    And we really should be careful what what we term a "real book". Something printed on paper with a cardstock cover shouldn't make it anymore "real" (tangible/acceptable/normal) than a digital version.

    I have many of my books in both formats and they are quite real to me.

    I may not have discovered many of my now favorite authors had it not been for digital versions available for my various readers. I embrace both formats because I understand that there will be people on both sides who will refuse to read the other, but I can't excluded one group or readership over another just because of personal preference or bias.
  2.  (23.51)
    And we really should be careful what what we term a "real book". Something printed on paper with a cardstock cover shouldn't make it anymore "real" (tangible/acceptable/normal) than a digital version.

    I have many of my books in both formats and they are quite real to me.

    I may not have discovered many of my now favorite authors had it not been for digital versions available for my various readers. I embrace both formats because I understand that there will be people on both sides who will refuse to read the other, but I can't excluded one group or readership over another just because of personal preference or bias.

    This is a given. My definition of "real" simply meant tactile. I can turn the pages.
    • CommentAuthortmofee
    • CommentTimeDec 12th 2007
    Here's a question, would you save up the cash and buy one of these e readers or buy something a little cheaper/smaller and more useful like a PDA??
  3.  (23.53)
    I carry about a gig of books on my 4-year-old Palm OS machine (Sony Clie UX50, for the gadget nerds who want to know). Perfect for those odd moments where you need either a massive occult tome or just some light reading. Screen's about the size of the iPhone one. It'll read any ebook format except Amazon's propriatory one. Got the machine for less than a ton on eBay.

    And at home I have a library of about 5000 dead-tree books.
    • CommentAuthortmofee
    • CommentTimeDec 12th 2007
    Im thinking the same.. Well, the TX anyways... It just seems a very stupid move to buy something thats dearer than a palm and does nothing else. Most of the time Ill probably be reading on the lappy, but when Im in a plane, or whatever...

    Whats it like to read with? too hard on the eyes??
  4.  (23.55)
    I find my division between electronic and physical book is very use dependent.

    For purely information reading - including lexis professionally - I rather use a computer. I want search commands and large amounts of information sorted easily. Hoverer, and despite what I may have said in other threads about digital comics (where I was making an argument), I vastly rather have a physical book when the reading is for pleasure.

    The question becomes if my tactile need for a book is a generational thing and if the technical advantages of digital readers in keeping books in print will outweigh aesthetics.
    • CommentAuthortmofee
    • CommentTimeDec 17th 2007
    Dymocks Australia just released the Iliad for 900 Australian dollars. That's about 770 US. Insane. I'm glad I got myself a PDA. Half the price, and it can do a hell of a lot more...
    • CommentTimeDec 17th 2007
    I'm having a time out until I can learn some manners.
    Within a year you will be able to use a full colour 130$ Nintendo handheld as a E Reader and lot of other things. You will even be able to make margin notes.

    It is a wild guess but is to good and easily workable idea not to happen. It would also be the perfect excuse for the kid wanting his parents to buy one.

    I do read some comics on CDisplay. It lets me try stuff I can't get and fill holes in my collection. I also download whole collections so I can read them without digging through a bunch of sealed boxes and bags. One thing about TPB's is they are much easier to reread. Just today I downloaded the complete(not really but close)Neil Gaiman collection from Pirate bay. I also got the full run of Transmet ,the walking dead and preacher. Other than most of the Neil gaiman and the first few issues of the Walking dead I already own the comics. I will probably buy the trades of the Walking dead I don't have out of completism.
    The CDisplay works rather well and is quite intuitive. I think it will be a great way to get people into new titles and maybe even comics themselves. It is sure better than trusting the bastards with my precious.

    I do love printed books though.

    My local public library stocks first rate graphic novels. They have Hellblazer ,Watchmen ,and even Warren's Ocean. I did not think I liked Neil Gaimen until I started the sandman series from the library. They have the entire thing. I just finished Neverwhere and have yet to return it. They also have fables and Y the last man.
    Hardly anyone takes them out but me though. People don't seem to read for fun much anymore although the anime thing is encouraging(sort of).
  5.  (23.58)
    I think I'm not so obsessed on format as much as Sociality and Setting:
    I had a Palm Treo full of books which I read at work (On the tarmac at an airline) which was hugely helpful and I found very helpful. I re-read a whole plethora of Vonneguts books after his recent death all the while walking around A300s, 747s, and 737s taking off.
    Now I do take with me the occasional paperback also, when I can't find a PDF of a book I love and thats not bad either.
    I think what I like is being around books readily available with info. No formats, no DRMs, no nothing, open them and boom your there.
    My problem is that Libraries, a place full of ideas, most have no new ideas! Little stupid things like putting a acafe, or putting WIfi and using the place to socially gather folks in a place to trade ideas.
    I live in Miami, and we woefully crappy libraries here, but I came to osme of them with ideas about using the space to show films by locals or to show artwork, or to host gatherings and to make things more dynamic.
    I looked like a mad man to them.
    So I keep prodding till now.
    But this is what I think a library should be: not just a depository of ideas but an Exhange of Ideas, a social real thing in Meatspace for people to come and look at things and exchange.
    I need to work harder on this now.
  6.  (23.59)
    I just got a Palm TX w/wireless keyboard, and paid for the $29.99 upgrade from Documents to Go 7.0 to 10.0 Premium Edition (Usually $49.99). One of the great things about it is Docs to Go 10.0 Premium has built in PDF reading, which is far better than Adobe's ancient-not-upgraded-in-years Palm acrobat reader.

    Cost about $290 - cheaper than an e-reader, and does so much more. With the SD card slot, you can put the newest 8GB SD cards in (about $55), and hold tons of stuff.

    The built-in wi-fi and bluetooth are great. Browsing the web is slow, but decent. Can check email, SMS, IMS as well. With Missing Sync, it works perfectly with OSX, though you can still use the Palm Desktop software for OSX.

    Does video, mp3s, and more as well.

    For reading, you can read either portrait, or landscape, and adjust the size of text.

    Beats e-readers, iPhone, iPod touch hands down.
  7.  (23.60)
    Yes, obviously one of the biggest problems with the internet is that it can only hold so much per page or else no one would sit long enough to read it. There may be 10,000 sites on the Civil War, but are many going to say much more than "An internal war within the USA over slavery and various other issues"? And this, in my mind, is going to be the ultimate extent of the average person's knowledge. The only way to really gain any solid knowledge on a subject is via a physical book, but does that mean that we won't get rid of them soon anyway? How many people would even mourn the loss of complexity and contrary facts that force one to think and debate?

    What's worse is that these children who are so plugged into the internet will grow up and they will have their own children and what could they possibly tell them about patience, books, and taking time to learn a subject?

    Far worse, in my mind, is that we have all these fancy electronic gadgets that are supposed to save us so much time. But instead of being free to go down the street to the local library, now we have no free time to do anything but huddle around our flashy LCD screens and absorb half-assed crap 24/7.