Will Digital readers replace books?

[mechana2015]

Scarecrow, back when illuminated manuscripts were around they were the ONLY books for the most part. The public was illiterate, precisely because book reproduction was so difficult and there was no reason to teach reading and writing if one would never encounter the written word and paper (vellum) was so expensive the general populace couldn't afford it. Illuminated books were created because it was the only reproduction method at the time, and was only affordable by the wealthy regardless of the level of illumination, but the illumination was done to 'show' the value of the books, and to provide some of the illiterate nobles something to look at if they couldn't read the books their family owned.

The printing press DID effectively replace hand copied reproductions of books and therefore Illumination, since the only books being reproduced at the time were books of prayer and the bible, since very few people could read, and a majority of the populace that could both read and reproduce books were the clergy, such as the monks (though some monks couldn't read and literally reproduced the letter shapes on the page). The gutenberg press allowed many people to see printed language for the first time because it made books avaliable to many who had never seen written language before, and it killed the Illumination because it made books cheaper and reduced the reproduction process from YEARS to (if I remember right) a month or so for a Bible.

It was AFTER the printing press where illuminated texts became an art form exclusively, rather than a form of art AND the main method for reproducing written text.

[Sae-chan]

As much as I love my e-reader, I have to say no! I have always loved the feeling of a book in my hands the best. Though the e-reader undeniably is more convenient than lugging around a bag of books to read, I don't think pressing buttons will ever replace turning pages and the smell of a new (or old) book.

[Sammy Boy]

I don't think so.

Books don't need electricity or any fuel source. Means you can read in sunshine, rain, or hail. You can even read in the dark, just need a torch (unless you have infravision, heheh).

You can flip to any page of a book at any time. Highlight words, underline sentences, or madly scribble notes on pages where the words inspire you or give you ideas.

Books and readers have this bond that is hard to describe. The feeling of sitting down with a good book in your hands, especially when it's thunderstorm-ing outside, is hard to beat.

So ancient, yet so flexible. Books rock.

[Icarus]

Means you can read in sunshine, rain, or hail.

If you actually read outside in the rain, you do not deserve to own books.

So ancient, yet so flexible. Books rock.

^This.

While I want an e-reader, I'm not going to do away with all the books I've collected when I get one. I mean, honestly, some books have too much import to be reduced to ones and zeros. Books like the Bible, LotR, The Way of Kings, dictionaries, would lose more than mass if packed into plastic and circuits.

That being said, I'm with Q in wondering how the next generation will view this debate.

[Furen]

If you actually read outside in the rain, you do not deserve to own books.
^This.

While I want an e-reader, I'm not going to do away with all the books I've collected when I get one. I mean, honestly, some books have too much import to be reduced to ones and zeros. Books like the Bible, LotR, The Way of Kings, dictionaries, would lose more than mass if packed into plastic and circuits.

That being said, I'm with Q in wondering how the next generation will view this debate.

Bibles could be fit on to an e-reader I'm sure. If they can be put onto an iPod I'm sure an E-reader is cake

[blkmage]

Personally, I've found reading books to be super unwieldy on a packed subway and I've found it much more enjoyable reading on my iPod touch (which is what I did for months when I had to commute to work in midtown Toronto).

[Nate]

Books like the Bible, LotR, The Way of Kings, dictionaries, would lose more than mass if packed into plastic and circuits.

How??

[Icarus]

I think it'd be harder to grasp how substantial said works are when all you see is a eight ounce, half inch thick piece of tech, as opposed to a four inch thick tome with gorgeous illustrations.

[Nate]

I thought you said they'd lose more than mass though.

[Icarus]

You're right, I did word that poorly. Rephrasing, the size/quality of some books inspires an almost reverential awe in me that would not translate well.

Also, you couldn't snap it shut to snap people awake. } : )

[airichan623]

Personally, I like reading paper books- mostly cuz i was always told to "not do something digital for a while" so to me that was 'read a book.' if its digital too, it doesnt seem right. what they SHOULD do is buy 1 electronic reader for each high school student, and download their textbooks onto it: the school saves money, and my back stops hurting.

[Edward]

Actually Nate, IMO CD's do have some advantages over digital music. For one thing, they sound better. I've turned up the bass on my Walkman's equalizer all the way and it still dosn't compare to a CD played in my car. The reason digital music takes up way less space is because audio quality suffers from compression of the file. Of course vinyl is (supposedly) the best because it's uncompressed, but I havn't had enough experience listening to vinyl to form an opinion as of yet. But I still think CD's offer superior audio quality when compared to digital music, and I will regret their certain demise. But maybe by then a CD quality audio file will take up as much space as the average mp3 does now.

On the other hand, phisical books will not be going away anytime soon. Digital memory can still be corrupted or wiped away. And digital readers still cost way too much for a lot of people. And digital books can cost as much as twice as much as a paperback. So, unlike CD's, books are here to stay, for now.

[ShiroiHikari]

Vinyl records are not superior to CDs, no matter what anybody says. Vinyl records have audible pops and static and it only gets worse over time. Some people are nostalgic for that sound, but it is not technically better than CD-quality sound.

Also FLACs are lossless and sound great but they're also effing huge files. Files won't get smaller, but storage space will get cheaper and cheaper so it kinda won't matter.

[blkmage]

I hope you are not seriously comparing the output from what is presumably your MP3 player's earbuds to your car's stereo system, not to mention not considering the difference in audio processing hardware.

I may or may not be back later with more on compression.

[Cognitive Gear]

Vinyl records are not superior to CDs, no matter what anybody says. Vinyl records have audible pops and static and it only gets worse over time. Some people are nostalgic for that sound, but it is not technically better than CD-quality sound.

While you are correct about very old vinyl records, new records, or ones that have been well cared for, don't have those audible pops and static.Basically, science tells us why digital will never be as complete as analogue.

But eh, it's all personal preference in the end anyways.

Also, I don't think that this was ever linked in this thread:
Barnes and Noble launch ebook publishing service.

Now, Barnes & Noble has launched Pubit!, which would allow you to self publish eBooks. It is a free direct to device self publishing service that has been launched for its Nook e-reader. All you would need to do is upload your file, and the service runs you through various steps like picking up a cover, a font and other such details, and you would get your final product. Barnes & Noble would pay you a 65% royalty and you could also get your eBook read on Kindle, and get a royalty of 70%.

This is electronic self publishing, and why I think that ebooks are a great idea. Now you can publish your own works and make money off of it for... as far as I can tell, no initial monetary investment.

[ShiroiHikari]

This is electronic self publishing, and why I think that ebooks are a great idea. Now you can publish your own works and make money off of it for... as far as I can tell, no initial monetary investment.

Sounds too good to be true!

[Nate]

blkmage has a point, an iPod is not going to have the same audio processing, much less output, as a car stereo system, so it's an unfair comparison. The only way to truly compare would be to play an MP3 and a CD on the same hardware...I think there are some car stereo systems that can do that, I don't think there's any combination CD/MP3 portable players though.

Second, Nette is right. The size of lossless quality sound files will become a moot point given enough time. To put this in perspective, when I was a kid, we had a computer that used 5 1/4 inch floppies for storage, and the ones we had could hold 720 kb. 3 1/2 inch floppies came out though, which could hold 1.44 megs...which was a large amount of storage for the time. A computer with a 256 meg hard drive was seen as incredibly huge, like to the point of "Man there's NO WAY you could fill a hard drive THAT big!"

And now we have iPods with gigs of storage space. Heck this 16 gig USB memory stick I have on my desk completely dwarfs the old Apple II computer I had as a kid in terms of storage space. But the QBASIC games and programs I had on my Apple II would fit easily on my memory stick. The file size didn't get smaller, the storage space just got bigger.

[Cognitive Gear]

Sounds too good to be true!

But it's here right now!

[Asuka Neko]

I certainly hope they don't! I can read a book much longer than I can stare at a screen, because staring at a screen hurts my eyes. I've also noticed (especially with manga) when I read stuff online, I totally miss things. Really, I didn't notice that one of the characters DIED while reading my favorite manga online. That is why I always have to get a real copy of a manga whether it be through a library or a bookstore.

[Blacklight]

Am I the only one who puts the open book on their face when they're lying down? It's not that I'm not interested in the book, but I do this sometimes. There's no way you can do that with a digital reader. (it's comforting in a way, and books smell good.)

And screens break, batteries die, etc.

But, books are also subject to damage. They aren't waterproof or tearproof. Then there's the convenience issue. I have a designated book bag for my library books, and it gets pretty bulky and heavy.

Then again, a good hardcover book would NOT break if you tossed it. Properly, I don't mean throwing it on the ground. I have a bunk bed, and will toss a book onto my dresser below, so that it lands level. Not in an abusive way. Really, I promise I've never damaged a book this way.
But, I would never try this with electronic anything. My iPod's clip got broken from using it too much. (Clip being the clip that shuffles have, so that it doesn't fall out of my pocket.)

And they did make waterproof cameras. I can see waterproof readers actually existing.
(For things like reading by the pool... or in the pool...)

I still prefer books.

[Sheenar]

Am I the only one who puts the open book on their face when they're lying down? It's not that I'm not interested in the book, but I do this sometimes. There's no way you can do that with a digital reader. (it's comforting in a way, and books smell good.)

I do that, too. It is really comforting --and also a great way to pause and process what you've just read.

There's just something about the sound and feel of the pages turning, the smell of the book, etc. that just can't be matched by an ebook.

Now, I do have NookStudy on my netbook (my Stats textbook is an ebook), but I vastly prefer reading a physical book. It's much easier on my eyes and the whole experience is more pleasant to me.

[Technomancer]

I don't think e-readers will ever replace books, although they may take a chunk of the fiction market (books that are less likely to be kept). Personally, I hate reading from computer screens, especially for anything demanding that requires any real concentration. I can see some use for it though to save one the trouble of actually grabbing and carrying around a physical newspaper or some dime-store novel for the morning commute. Since I get most of quick fiction reads from the library, I doubt I'll ever want one.

While you are correct about very old vinyl records, new records, or ones that have been well cared for, don't have those audible pops and static. Basically, science tells us why digital will never be as complete as analogue.

This article is actually wrong. Via Nyquist's theorem, perfect reconstruction of any band-limited signal can be achieved if the sampling rate is greater than or equal to the highest frequency present. So for a sufficiently high sampling rate (and CDs are certainly in this range), any reconstruction noise will be completely inaudible. At the same time, noise rejection is much easier in digital systems than in analog owing to the fact that the voltage levels should be well above any practical noise source, and can thus be corrected at each successive processing stage. This is impossible to do in analog systems.