I think that books, sadly, are probably going to be phased out. Not entirely though.

Basically, the world is in a stage of 'data reconfiguration'. We're taking as much data as we can, from physical/analogue formats, and making them available digitally. I see no reason why this won't happen with books, just like it's happened to music (in a sense).

It's a logical progression, really. It's the content of the books that is meaningful, not the medium of delivery. The coup de grâce administered to physical books will simply be pricing. Buy the physical book for $15 (or more) or buy the digital version for $5. Those with an adequate reading tool (iPad, Kindle, whatever) will go the cheap route.

All of that said, there will almost always be a portion (no idea how large or small) of people that hold a romantic/traditional perspective, and so there will always be SOME kind of market for physical books. Just like people still buy vinyl, rather then CD/digital copies.

Personally, I put myself into the 'romantic/traditional' area. I love having books, and have tons of them. I suppose I have environmental qualms with the use of paper and all, but electronic readers have to use electricity to charge up, which is still a non-renewable resource, so it's a bit of a wank, really. I have to admit though: When I'm reading a book and find myslef not understanding a word or phrase, I often wish I had my laptop sitting right there, so I could consult Lord Google regarding some specifics. I could do this easily on an iPad or similar platform. But not in a book

___________________

Something that digital media, especially online lacks is the static quality of it.


When a book is printed and then people obtain it, its theres in that form, unable to be changed.


Also letting people have access to too much information is a bad thing... come on people didn't you play MGS2?

Until there's something of a global non-proprietary, long term data format enforced the book will still be very important

quote:

Originally posted by Danny Ocean would be cool to have a library of books on an iPad fot example, like an ipod for books, if it dosent exist already. Properly made though, not looking for books on the internet and reading them there.

My University will be finished a 'digital library' this fall. It will have a couple floors at the top full of books (just because they have them), but everything else will be taken off site and be put into digital form that will be accessible by hundreds of computers in the library. We wont be able to 'take books out' as there wont be any to take unless we specifically order them from a storage warehouse.

I watched something where someone suggested that book stores should, instead of having physical books, get machines that can print out books on demand. Have a digital library of a massive amount of books, select on the machine what you want and the machine prints it right there. This would result in less printing costs, less waste, and appeases those who really want physical copies. The rest of us can go with our digital copies.

quote:

Originally posted by Theresa I watched something where someone suggested that book stores should, instead of having physical books, get machines that can print out books on demand. Have a digital library of a massive amount of books, select on the machine what you want and the machine prints it right there.

Then...

quote:

Originally posted by Theresa This would result in less printing costs, less waste

You serious?

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by Sushipunk You serious?

Publishing companies lose a shit ton of money on books that they print and never sell. A lot of books sit in bookstores for years on end.

If books were only printed when the buyer specifically wanted it, then yes, it would save a lot more paper and there wouldn't be a loss for the publishers.

e-libraries don't work for hundreds of years, the format is in the hands of companies that change it every decade or so, then your data can't be read by modern equipment.
I mean, its in the hands of Microsoft, Adobe and Apple of all people!

quote:

Originally posted by Lilith e-libraries don't work for hundreds of years, the format is in the hands of companies that change it every decade or so, then your data can't be read by modern equipment. I mean, its in the hands of Microsoft, Adobe and Apple of all people!

Tell that to my University that just spent 151.5 million dollars on a digital library.



To be fair, it does look like it is going to be a wicked awesome building. I just wish they would get it over with because the fucking construction is a pain in everyone's ass.

EDIT:

Plus another 27 million that I didn't read about until after I posted.

quote:

Originally posted by Theresa Publishing companies lose a shit ton of money on books that they print and never sell. A lot of books sit in bookstores for years on end. If books were only printed when the buyer specifically wanted it, then yes, it would save a lot more paper and there wouldn't be a loss for the publishers.

I do see your point, sorry for the outrage But, there are huge movements all over the world trying to recycle books (unsold, used, etc.)

You also have to consider the retail aspect. You go into a book store wanting to buy a book, they have it in stock, you pay, and leave with said book. You can't really walk into a store, and have them print it out for you, right there. That loss of impulse store buying would likely effect the publishers' sales in a rather large way, despite offsetting the waste of over printing. Remember, it's waaaay cheaper to produce something in large numbers, via automation, than it is to print on demand.

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by Sushipunk Then... You serious?

This isn't what I had seen before, but this talks about printing on demand (POD) and how the publishers can make ten times the amount they normally make, per book.

http://www.fonerbooks.com/pod.htm

Seems far more efficient to me. No distribution, no storage, little to no returns, no wasted paper on books never sold, etc. etc.

Care to explain why you might think otherwise?

quote:

Originally posted by Sushipunk I do see your point, sorry for the outrage But, there are huge movements all over the world trying to recycle books (unsold, used, etc.) You also have to consider the retail aspect. You go into a book store wanting to buy a book, they have it in stock, you pay, and leave with said book. You can't really walk into a store, and have them print it out for you, right there. That loss of impulse store buying would likely effect the publishers' sales in a rather large way, despite offsetting the waste of over printing. Remember, it's waaaay cheaper to produce something in large numbers, via automation, than it is to print on demand.

Well the cost would obviously be transferred to the buyer by having to pay more for the book. However, the cost may not change much because there aren't storage and distribution costs.

They could also fix the "impulse buying" issue by having ads/promotions in the store, having commercials or ads pop up when you're browsing on the computer etc.

If they had enough printers, they could very well print it there for you. It may take some time to print, but chances are, if we progressed that far along to the point of eliminating physical books, there wouldn't be that many people wanting to buy physical copies anyway. You would have to pay a premium for a physical copy.

When presented with the option, like someone else already suggested, between a physical book costing you $60, and an e-copy for $15, MOST people will go for the e-copy.

At the end of the day, although I could foresee it really hurting bookstores, I think it would be overall a better way of doing it. Less waste, more profits for the publishers/authors, and more efficient.

quote:

Originally posted by Theresa Care to explain why you might think otherwise?

He owns a printing business.
Probably comes down to equipment cost