 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Thu, 26 Aug 2010 19:35:08 -0700, Neeum Zawan wrote:
> Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospam com> writes:
>
>> Yeah, but if they'd done that with a paper book, they'd not have come
>> into my home, taken it and left me the money. That's vaguely what they
>> did, though, with the eBook. They needed (IMHO) to make it right in a
>> similar fashion rather than taking advantage of the fact that they
>> *could* just "unsell" it electronically. Just because you can do
>> something, doesn't mean you should. It created a lot of uncertainty
>> about eBooks.
>
> To be honest, I find the analogy with physical books somewhat flawed.
> Electronic media /is/ different, and the notion of rights differs as
> well. In the long run, I'm sure people's views will change about such
> things, and it won't be perceived as a violation of rights.
Possibly, but from my point of view, I'm paying for the content, not the
delivery mechanism. If it was about the delivery mechanism, eBooks would
be priced significantly less than print counterparts - with B&N, it's
maybe a 10% difference in price.
But my usage is more for free eBooks anyways, so the pricing of the books
doesn't matter - Gutenberg has 25K books available for free in epub
format, and that's enough to keep me going for a while. :-)
> I don't like it either, which is why I still prefer a physical copy
> (mine or the library's). However, I can see a middle ground where for
> certain category of items an ebook reader may be preferred.
Yes, that's true.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Thu, 26 Aug 2010 13:23:15 -0700, Darren New wrote:
> Jim Henderson wrote:
>> They needed (IMHO) to make it right in a similar fashion rather than
>> taking advantage of the fact that they *could* just "unsell" it
>> electronically.
>
> Which they did, yes. I mean, after the mistake, they gave the books
> back, gave you money, and wrote into their contracts they wouldn't do it
> again. That seems pretty upstanding compared to a lot of places.
Sure. My point is that people didn't think *first* and then act, and
that's a troubling trend overall to me in business these days.
When I make a business decision for the business I operate, I try to look
at it from as many perspectives as possible first and then decide what to
do - and one of those angles that I look at is the negative PR effects.
It amazes me how much resistance I sometimes run into with that. I've
got something I'm working on now (that I can't go into a lot of detail
about) where I suggested contacting a competitor about something, and now
find myself in the position of having a much less defensible position
because everyone said it didn't matter if we did or not. But I think it
does, and I'm waiting to see how it plays out once we make the
announcement - hoping I will be right about how it plays out so maybe
next time my concerns will be taken more seriously.
>>> True, and he acknowledged that *and* gave people back the book as
>>> well. Not sure what more you could ask for.
>>
>> Not doing it in the first place. Yes, he can't undo what's been done,
>> the best he can do is correct it, and the best we can do is hope that
>> he has learned from it. But it troubles me that businesses make
>> decisions that really on the surface should be clearly the wrong way to
>> approach things and then deal with it as a PR issue, when clearly it's
>> not a PR issue, but a decision-making process issue.
>
> It sounds like the lawyers got into it first, actually. I wouldn't be
> surprised if there was no policy in place to handle such an event, or if
> the policy hadn't been reviewed by anyone other than the lawyers.
Quite possibly, though I think if the lawyers were involved, they'd have
done a more thorough risk analysis. But that's from the outside looking
in, and the picture from the inside may well be very different from what
the public sees.
>> Honestly, I think it would be in the best interests of eReader
>> manufacturers not to lock consumers in. You see this with gaming
>> consoles as well - someone wants a particular game, they've got to
>> purchase a particular game console if there's an exclusivity clause in
>> their contracts.
>
> Kindle is, amusingly, doing just the opposite. You can get like 30% of
> the sales of your book, or you can get 70% the sales of your book if you
> don't rip off Kindle users or lock them into a specific format.
I'm not sure I follow what you're saying here.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Thu, 26 Aug 2010 19:29:25 -0700, Neeum Zawan wrote:
> Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> writes:
>
>> Neeum Zawan wrote:
>>> My concern is about the DRM, as well. Having the file around 30 years
>>> from now is no use if I can't read it.
>>
>> That was what stopped me from getting a kindle or whatever when they
>> first came out, yes. But if I want the book again 10 years from now,
>> I'll just buy it again.
>
> If it's available.
>
> When I last moved, I was planning to get rid of a number of fiction
> books by well known authors. On a whim, I did a search, and found that
> quite a few of those were now out of print. Lots and lots of used
> copies, but it made me uneasy.
One of the books I want to read in eBook format is an anthology of sci fi
short stories that was edited by Greenberg and Asimov (and a couple
others) back in 1978. It's not available anywhere that I've found, and
in fact the print versions are apparently considered collector's items -
and I used to have a print copy that's now lost somewhere, maybe in a box
in the basement, probably got tossed/sold when my mother moved out of her
house a couple years ago.
Print copies run about $95 now. Ouch.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Thu, 26 Aug 2010 13:29:34 -0700, Darren New wrote:
> Jim Henderson wrote:
>> That took me about a day of normal usage to get past - I had kept
>> trying to turn pages using the eInk screen. When something doesn't
>> work, you learn fast. ;-)
>
> Yeah. And the delays in the UI are at least consistent, so they're easy
> to get used to.
Yep.
>> I tried the iPad - found it too awkward to use for reading books - it's
>> physically too heavy for me to use in that way.
>
> I just played with it for 10 minutes in an Apple store, noticing how
> nice the display was and all.
I had about 4 hours. The screen is too glossy (makes a great mirror, but
if you've got an overhead light, you have to position yourself so the
light doesn't reflect directly off the screen). It also attracts
fingerprints like a magnet and I'm sure after some time dust can become
an issue. I'd be constantly wiping the screen off.
But the thing that I found most unusable was the weight. My tendency
when reading books was to try to hold it in one hand, but it's just too
heavy to do that, so then I found myself adjusting how I was sitting in
my chair to rest it on my stomach. Or lay it flat on the desk, which
didn't work really well because for me it's not a natural position to
read in.
>> The thing I'm wondering is if the 3G option is just a special MicroSD
>> card, it might be possible to upgrade at some point.
>
> I guess if you want to crack the case open or something... :-)
Well, the MicroSD slot for expansion is easily accessible - the back can
be removed to replace the battery and to install the card (which is
necessary for the 'easy' way to jailbreak the device). The front bezel
comes off (that's how the first ones were jailbroken - remove the system
SD card and replace the code on it).
>> bother me, if I were going overseas, the 3G option is only supported in
>> the US anyways AFAIK (it's tied to AT&T)
>
> The Kindle worked fine for me in Germany. Amazon charged a nominal fee
> for using it for magazines, but no additional for books or web browsing.
That's cool, what kind of fee and was it per magazine? The one magazine
I read anymore is Linux Format, and as a subscriber I can get the issues/
articles as PDF for free.
>> The Nook uses a micro USB adapter, but I found the extension works
>> well. 5' isn't a short cable, it's just not quite long enough for
>> charging while reading in bed.
>
> Yeah. I don't know offhand how long the kindle one is, but the power
> adaptor has the female host connector onit, so you could put as long a
> cable on it as you wanted.
Well, until cable attenuation breaks it, but for power that's not a huge
deal. :-)
>> I generally don't either - I've been working out the battery usage, and
>> find that if I leave it in "Airplane mode", the battery usage is much
>> more predictable. When turned off, it's actually just sleeping, so
>> there's some battery usage when it's not fully powered down, and they
>> don't recommend powering it down.
>
> Yeah. I'm leaving mine on now just to see. The wireless definitely
> drains the battery faster. The kindle has "sleep" mode and "off" mode,
> and it still runs the wireless (and probably other background tasks,
> like the search index builder and such) in sleep mode, but not in off
> mode.
That may be what happened the first couple of nights - I'd go to sleep
and it'd be at 70% power, and wake up and the battery was drained. That
seemed odd to me, but last night it was fine - but I was in Airplane mode.
So now I just turn that on when I don't actually need the wireless. I
may look for a way to script it to disable when, for example, the web
browser isn't actively running.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Jim Henderson wrote:
> Sure. My point is that people didn't think *first* and then act, and
> that's a troubling trend overall to me in business these days.
They did. They just didn't think of all of it. It's not even clear to me
that Bidzos was involved in the decision.
Note that I'm not saying they didn't screw up. I just don't think it's
enough of a big deal that it's going to affect my purchasing habits. Unlike,
for example, how the stories of the app store affect my desire to write code
for iphones.
> Quite possibly, though I think if the lawyers were involved, they'd have
> done a more thorough risk analysis.
Lawyers don't do PR risk analysis. :-)
> But that's from the outside looking
> in, and the picture from the inside may well be very different from what
> the public sees.
Yes. That's kind of my point.
>>> Honestly, I think it would be in the best interests of eReader
>>> manufacturers not to lock consumers in. You see this with gaming
>>> consoles as well - someone wants a particular game, they've got to
>>> purchase a particular game console if there's an exclusivity clause in
>>> their contracts.
>> Kindle is, amusingly, doing just the opposite. You can get like 30% of
>> the sales of your book, or you can get 70% the sales of your book if you
>> don't rip off Kindle users or lock them into a specific format.
>
> I'm not sure I follow what you're saying here.
I'm saying that Amazon has two contracts for you publishing books on the
Kindle. The usual one, where you get some small percentage of the fact value
of the book, and one where you get a surprisingly large percentage of the
face value if you're not a dick about it. I.e., if you charge less than
physical delivery, don't lock the book to a specific platform, don't defer
the electronic publishing until people who really want it have gone out and
bought the hardback, etc etc etc, then you get a much higher royalty rate.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
Quoth the raven:
Need S'Mores!
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Jim Henderson wrote:
> One of the books I want to read in eBook format is an anthology of sci fi
> short stories that was edited by Greenberg and Asimov (and a couple
> others) back in 1978.
I'm rather surprised how often I run across old out-of-print books that
someone has scanned. You might try looking around. What's it called?
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
Quoth the raven:
Need S'Mores!
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Jim Henderson wrote:
> I had about 4 hours. The screen is too glossy (makes a great mirror, but
> if you've got an overhead light, you have to position yourself so the
> light doesn't reflect directly off the screen). It also attracts
> fingerprints like a magnet and I'm sure after some time dust can become
> an issue. I'd be constantly wiping the screen off.
Yeah. I just noted it was nice and crisp and bright. I would be surprised if
Apple wasn't smart enough to not put overhead lights over the tables with
the iPads on them. :-)
> Well, the MicroSD slot for expansion is easily accessible - the back can
> be removed to replace the battery and to install the card (which is
> necessary for the 'easy' way to jailbreak the device). The front bezel
> comes off (that's how the first ones were jailbroken - remove the system
> SD card and replace the code on it).
Yeah, I'd forgotten the nook opens up like that, but now that you mention
it...
> That's cool, what kind of fee and was it per magazine? The one magazine
> I read anymore is Linux Format, and as a subscriber I can get the issues/
> articles as PDF for free.
$5/week for everything.
Interestingly, when I turned on the radio in Germany, it spontaneously
downloded a document called "Important notice on fees for travelers" or some
such, detailing what was and was not different.
> Well, until cable attenuation breaks it, but for power that's not a huge
> deal. :-)
I would think that few would sell commercial USB cables too long to even run
a USB drive over. I wonder if a sufficiently long cable makes USB drop back
from 2.0 to 1.1 speed?
> That may be what happened the first couple of nights - I'd go to sleep
> and it'd be at 70% power, and wake up and the battery was drained. That
> seemed odd to me, but last night it was fine - but I was in Airplane mode.
I'm up to the third or fourth day of reading pretty steadily and basically
keeping it awake as much as possible, and I'm about 1/2 to 1/3 battery now,
with the radio on. Kindle keeps it on in case you buy something online that
gets pushed down to your device, or if you have subscriptions updating.
Once the experiment is over, I'll turn the radio back off. :-)
Also, lots of these kinds of batteries take a few charge/discharge cycles to
reach their full potential.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
Quoth the raven:
Need S'Mores!
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
http://www.treelobsters.com/2009/12/112-e-reader.html
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
Quoth the raven:
Need S'Mores!
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Fri, 27 Aug 2010 08:31:08 -0700, Darren New wrote:
> Jim Henderson wrote:
>> Sure. My point is that people didn't think *first* and then act, and
>> that's a troubling trend overall to me in business these days.
>
> They did. They just didn't think of all of it. It's not even clear to
> me that Bidzos was involved in the decision.
The reaction to me looked like an "oh, crap, undo, undo, undo!" reaction.
> Note that I'm not saying they didn't screw up. I just don't think it's
> enough of a big deal that it's going to affect my purchasing habits.
> Unlike, for example, how the stories of the app store affect my desire
> to write code for iphones.
A fair point.
>> Quite possibly, though I think if the lawyers were involved, they'd
>> have done a more thorough risk analysis.
>
> Lawyers don't do PR risk analysis. :-)
My experience is different - well, not PR risk, but a cost analysis is
part of the process, and the cost of additional PR to control a situation
is an important part. Though in my experience as well, the lawyers (the
good ones) will tell you what they'll be able to defend, and leave the
decision to the business to make.
> > But that's from the outside looking
>> in, and the picture from the inside may well be very different from
>> what the public sees.
>
> Yes. That's kind of my point.
:-)
>>>> Honestly, I think it would be in the best interests of eReader
>>>> manufacturers not to lock consumers in. You see this with gaming
>>>> consoles as well - someone wants a particular game, they've got to
>>>> purchase a particular game console if there's an exclusivity clause
>>>> in their contracts.
>>> Kindle is, amusingly, doing just the opposite. You can get like 30% of
>>> the sales of your book, or you can get 70% the sales of your book if
>>> you don't rip off Kindle users or lock them into a specific format.
>>
>> I'm not sure I follow what you're saying here.
>
> I'm saying that Amazon has two contracts for you publishing books on the
> Kindle. The usual one, where you get some small percentage of the fact
> value of the book, and one where you get a surprisingly large percentage
> of the face value if you're not a dick about it. I.e., if you charge
> less than physical delivery, don't lock the book to a specific platform,
> don't defer the electronic publishing until people who really want it
> have gone out and bought the hardback, etc etc etc, then you get a much
> higher royalty rate.
Oh, I see - that's an interesting approach.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Fri, 27 Aug 2010 08:33:00 -0700, Darren New wrote:
> Jim Henderson wrote:
>> One of the books I want to read in eBook format is an anthology of sci
>> fi short stories that was edited by Greenberg and Asimov (and a couple
>> others) back in 1978.
>
>
> I'm rather surprised how often I run across old out-of-print books that
> someone has scanned. You might try looking around. What's it called?
I looked around for it, but didn't have any luck. It's called "100 Great
Science Fiction Short Stories".
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
