Page 1 of 1

Books versus e-Readers

PostPosted: 06 Oct 2014, 20:02
by Ice.Maiden

Re: Books versus e-Readers

PostPosted: 07 Oct 2014, 10:36
by pilvikki

for me, the only advantage of an e book is being able to delete it if I don't like it. I've become rather snooty about my books and right now I have at least a dozen books I will donate to the pub as I certainly did not enjoy them, but maybe someone else will...

and some of them are tremendously popular, like Pillars of the Earth that I found a poor imitation of Rutherfurd's Sarum.

Re: Books versus e-Readers

PostPosted: 07 Oct 2014, 11:55
by Kellemora
Debi prefers both.

She likes the convenience of having 3000 books in her hand to read where ever she is. She also like sitting down in a chair with a paper book also. If she is reading an e-book she would prefer to read as paper, she will buy the paper version.
She only keeps one bookcase of paper books now, and takes the older ones to McKay's Used Bookstore for credits toward other books. At least she loves to read!

There are advantages to both paper and e-books.
It's sorta like cars, those who really love to drive, feel the road, and have greater control over their car, traditionally bought stick shift transmissions. Those who only saw a vehicle as transportation fell for the new automatic transmissions.
As time marched on, automatic transmissions improved steadily, so now those who love to drive are selecting more vehicles with automatics, especially if they give control back to the driver.

The way technology is advancing, it won't be long before we buy paper magazines with video advertisements running in them when you turn to that page.
I can see e-readers becoming more like the feel of a book, with pages you turn and read like a book. The pages themselves each being a display with text that look and feel like the page of a book. Plus we will still have the slimline single screen units as well, only more advanced than what we have today.

Whether the text you read is displayed on a projection screen on the wall, on a computer monitor, in an e-book, or printed on paper, really should have nothing to do with retention, as the paper publishers claim. I would say it has more to do with what the person reading is wanting to get out of it. Not the method in which they receive the information.
Although the printed book publishers say retention is lower on e-books. The newspaper industry has found quite the opposite. Folks gleaning information from a newspaper see far less, than when they see those same articles on their computer screens. Plus the added benefit of places like Farcebook or YouTube, where a hot article spreads like wildfire, so more people learn about it faster than it would ever be spread in paper newspapers alone.

I prefer a paper book for research purposes, because I can stick a post-it marker in the book to refer back to it quickly. I use my computer books with Bookmarks in much the same way. If you only have one computer, you have to stop what you are doing to load the document, find the bookmark and move to it. At least you can copy and paste from one on your computer.
But perhaps you need to reference several books, and in this case paper books are the fastest. If you can remember where you left the book the last time you used it that is.

I publish my novels in both softcover and all e-book versions. So far, Apple i-books is outselling Amazon on my novels. The sale of the print version is lagging far behind e-book sales. I find this true regarding most authors I've spoken with who offer both e-book and print.

As far as the prices shown in the article as a means of measuring. It is VERY MISLEADING, and does not indicate the NUMBER of books sold per type of book.
To come up with the same dollar value, 25 e-books would equal the same amount in dollar sales as one print book.
So, your store sold $1,000.00 worth of paper books today, but only $100.00 worth of e-Books.
How many books is that? Oh, we sold 40 print books and 101 e-Books.
See what happened here?

Now if you were a bookstore, you would need to deduct from your profits, floor space for the paper books, shipping costs for the paper books, packaging costs for the paper books. Before long it looks like all of your profits were from the 101 e-Books and next to nothing on the 40 paper books.

I take published figures about things with a grain of salt, because they usually have absolutely no meaning. It's like percentages are always totally meaningless without comparative basis figures to go on.

TTUL
Gary

Re: Books versus e-Readers

PostPosted: 07 Oct 2014, 17:28
by pilvikki

for me, I retain papered print much better than anything on screen. I don't knbow why, but I cannot visualize something I saw on the screen the same way as do on a printed page. and if I don't see it, it's usually lost to me.

also, I can write a letter and read it 15 X, print it, and at once see all the mistakes i'd made. why did I not see them on the screen?

I was explaining to squeaki today about my memory: if I don't see it, I don't know where it is. if someone says "have you seen my shoes?" and I can't see them in my mind, I don't know where they are. otherwise i'll picture them sitting on the hallway floor downstairs.

same with print.

Re: Books versus e-Readers

PostPosted: 08 Oct 2014, 18:04
by Ice.Maiden
The article suggests the same thing - that people retain what they've read by turning paper pages, far more frequently than reading from an eReader. Maybe the reason for this's that with electronic gadgets, you have a wealth of different books at your immediate disposal, so go from one to another, and much of the text's lost from previous ones.

With a paperback, it's not often that folk go from one to another to another on a continuous basis. They like to savour the story, and then maybe tell their friends about it before investing in another, and having a bookcase lined up with nicely-printed covers that you can actually feel, seems by far the best way of keeping and reading your favourites.

Having said that, it's what people become used to, but I love the smell of paper books, and the older ones're even better. A glorious fusty smell can invoke memories of a first read, or make you want to read it again, whereas eReaders're too impersonal and "cold".

I have complete works of leather-bound books, and prefer to use one of the many bookmarks which people've given me over the years. I find it satisfying to get comfortable and then sit back with a good read. The turn of the pages's part of the attraction, and, as the article says, you get a nice feeling of watching the right-hand side get thinner as you read along.

One day, real books may be worth a fortune - any book - and I don't think they'll go totally out of fashion.

Re: Books versus e-Readers

PostPosted: 08 Oct 2014, 18:10
by pilvikki

turning the page is the only thing I dislike... blasted things seem to always get stuck!

Re: Books versus e-Readers

PostPosted: 08 Oct 2014, 18:20
by Ice.Maiden
LOl - evening Vikki. I'm still here for a bit - got engrossed.

Doesn't bother me about pages sticking. If you get a new book and give a quick rip through them, like with a pack of playing cards, the pages don't seem to stick then.

Re: Books versus e-Readers

PostPosted: 08 Oct 2014, 18:22
by pilvikki

well, it's usually just the 2 for the next page... I blow on them, which works, unless you're having a snack atm...

Re: Books versus e-Readers

PostPosted: 08 Oct 2014, 18:32
by Ice.Maiden
:lmao1: LOOOL!!!!! Is it a case of: "Look what I've done! Oh crumbs!"

Could be worse, if you've just eaten something sloppy. :shock:

Re: Books versus e-Readers

PostPosted: 09 Oct 2014, 18:32
by pilvikki

don't read and snack! :snoot:

Re: Books versus e-Readers

PostPosted: 09 Oct 2014, 18:54
by Ice.Maiden
Best not to. You wouldn't want to cover your Fifty Shades of Grey in 50 other shades, would you?? : )

Re: Books versus e-Readers

PostPosted: 09 Oct 2014, 19:05
by pilvikki

I hear 50 shades is pretty gray...

Re: Books versus e-Readers

PostPosted: 09 Oct 2014, 19:16
by Ice.Maiden
I read a few pages of it. Not for me.

Re: Books versus e-Readers

PostPosted: 10 Oct 2014, 15:39
by pilvikki

wouldn't even attempt it... :shrug:

Re: Books versus e-Readers

PostPosted: 10 Oct 2014, 18:54
by Ice.Maiden
It didn't even seem to spur the slightest interest in reading on, for me. Someone'd marked pages out for me to read, and it just seemed to be full of dominance - S & M - and with dark undertones.

Re: Books versus e-Readers

PostPosted: 11 Oct 2014, 19:37
by pilvikki

:woop:

Re: Books versus e-Readers

PostPosted: 11 Oct 2014, 20:16
by Ice.Maiden
"Mommy porn" seems to be the latest craze to attract readers' attention. Bit sad really.