e-Readers as a long term library solution?

[chazdraves]

I've been in-and-out of e-readers since the first Kindle, but there's a problem: I spend a lot of my time reading academic-type historical works such as The Republic, The Iliad, The Prince and other things such things. I've often found that navigating back-and-forth to find a specific quote or chapter is more difficult on a e-reader, but I have a bigger concern. I'm building my personal library of books I would like to have access to until I pass away many years from now. Betting on either Barnes and Noble or Amazon 60 years from now seems highly optimistic to me. It seems to me that for significant works that you want to maintain, the physical books remains the best choice. Anyone else thinking like this? Any other opinions?

Thanks for your thoughts!
- Chaz

 

[alent1234]

get an ipad and use a local copy in epub format

 

[Red Storm]

You can set bookmarks with e-readers, letting you quickly get to specific saved places.

I would make multiple backups of the various books you want in a format like epub or some such. You can always convert for Kindle reading (I'm not 100% sure what formats Kindle supports, but they do have a utility to convert to a Kindle friendly format).

 

[jpeyton]

get an ipad and use a local copy in epub format

Getting a $500 iPad specifically for reading when an $80 Kindle/Nook will do a better job seems like a waste.

If the OP is worried about having long-term access to a personal library of books, he simply needs to keep local copies of the books he wants on his hard drive. Using something like Calibre, he can build a DRM-free library and convert his books to any format his e-reader of choice supports.

 

[chazdraves]

That, I presume, is assuming you buy a DRM-free format in the first place? What about existing nook/Kindle books which come with DRM? What happens if Amazon/B&N revamp or close their respective service in the next 60 years?

Also, it's not really a matter of saving locations with bookmarks so much as it is for quickly recalling something you read in a previous chapter but don't know the specific location of - this is easy to do in a traditional book but not quite the same digitally.

I also agree that an iPad is probably going backwards in this situation, but I'm certainly debating the feasibility of any digital reader, so I guess it's a legitimate candidate for some.

- Chaz

 

[alent1234]

Getting a $500 iPad specifically for reading when an $80 Kindle/Nook will do a better job seems like a waste.

If the OP is worried about having long-term access to a personal library of books, he simply needs to keep local copies of the books he wants on his hard drive. Using something like Calibre, he can build a DRM-free library and convert his books to any format his e-reader of choice supports.

the ipad will allow you to add your epub files to itunes to sync over. i think the kindle will allow you to "email" them to your device but not sure

 

[Super56K]

the ipad will allow you to add your epub files to itunes to sync over. i think the kindle will allow you to "email" them to your device but not sure

Kindle has USB support from a PC.

 

[chazdraves]

My concern is not transferring files nor creating backups, my concern is the viability of the format long-term. It seems you're counting on Amazon or B&N to be just as successful and worthwhile 60 years from now as they are now - which certainly could happen but is nevertheless a leap of faith. With a traditional book, you have it regardless of what happens to the publisher/bookseller. You may have your files on your device after/if Amazon goes belly-up, but they're all DRM-locked and that little Kindle isn't going to be around forever if they stop making/supporting it. My question is whether or not it's really a good idea to take that gamble for books that you want to have for the rest of your life. Certainly there's no argument when you're discussing general fiction or casual reading - things that you may read once or twice and never miss.

Any thoughts more in that direction?
- Chaz

 

[the DRIZZLE]

My concern is not transferring files nor creating backups, my concern is the viability of the format long-term. It seems you're counting on Amazon or B&N to be just as successful and worthwhile 60 years from now as they are now - which certainly could happen but is nevertheless a leap of faith. With a traditional book, you have it regardless of what happens to the publisher/bookseller. You may have your files on your device after/if Amazon goes belly-up, but they're all DRM-locked and that little Kindle isn't going to be around forever if they stop making/supporting it. My question is whether or not it's really a good idea to take that gamble for books that you want to have for the rest of your life. Certainly there's no argument when you're discussing general fiction or casual reading - things that you may read once or twice and never miss.

Any thoughts more in that direction?
- Chaz

The formats aren't as proprietary as you think. My understanding is that it's basically a simplified form of HTML. The real issue is not the formats but the DRM, which has been cracked anyway.

 

[manly]

I prefer the odds of Amazon in 60 years vs. the durability of old tree books.

It may be a hassle, but you can still import 30 year old files from the early PC days. That is, if you still can access the floppies or had the foresight to preserve those files years ago. I can't fathom what devices will be like 60 years from now, but access to "legacy" digital formats doesn't seem like a problem now or later.

 

[chazdraves]

Certainly 60 years isn't that long for a book to hold up. I've no worries there if it's well cared for.

To the point, however, I take it I'm the only one who sees this as a concern? Perhaps I'm looking too far out; it merely seems prudent to consider when you're intending to start a collection that could someday become quite extensive. I'd hate to have to re-buy them all...
- Chaz

 

[manly]

Certainly 60 years isn't that long for a book to hold up. I've no worries there if it's well cared for.

To the point, however, I take it I'm the only one who sees this as a concern? Perhaps I'm looking too far out; it merely seems prudent to consider when you're intending to start a collection that could someday become quite extensive. I'd hate to have to re-buy them all...
- Chaz

books can take up a lot of space. I've stored many in the garage where they're dusty and getting filthy. Eventually I'll donate or just chuck some of them out. If you backup your digital media (or rely on the "cloud"), then I assert it's more durable than physical counterparts. E.g. old floppy disks do go bad but if you copied the files to a hard drive, there's always a way to access ancient files from defunct software.

Even well-cared books can sometimes have poor spines that fall apart.

But mainly for space reasons alone, I think digital media is vastly superior to physical (whether books or video, etc.).

As others have noted, if you get rid of the DRM, then you're not locked down to any device or company's survival.

As an aside, I actually wish there was a system where I could trade in a physical book for an e-book and pay a nominal fee. I think O'reilly & Associates does it for $5/ea, but I haven't heard of anybody else.

 

[Muse]

The formats aren't as proprietary as you think. My understanding is that it's basically a simplified form of HTML. The real issue is not the formats but the DRM, which has been cracked anyway.

I believe the freeware calibre utility referred to earlier in this thread will strip out the DRM protection and you can create Kindle or Nook friendly files that you can store on your media for safe keeping, assuming you are backed up. I don't have my ereader yet, ordered my first last night (Kindle Keyboard K3 3G), but have been doing a lot of reading about ereaders online.

 

[Muse]

books can take up a lot of space. I've stored many in the garage where they're dusty and getting filthy. Eventually I'll donate or just chuck some of them out. If you backup your digital media (or rely on the "cloud"), then I assert it's more durable than physical counterparts. E.g. old floppy disks do go bad but if you copied the files to a hard drive, there's always a way to access ancient files from defunct software.

Even well-cared books can sometimes have poor spines that fall apart.

But mainly for space reasons alone, I think digital media is vastly superior to physical (whether books or video, etc.).

As others have noted, if you get rid of the DRM, then you're not locked down to any device or company's survival.

As an aside, I actually wish there was a system where I could trade in a physical book for an e-book and pay a nominal fee. I think O'reilly & Associates does it for $5/ea, but I haven't heard of anybody else.

Good post

 

[3chordcharlie]

I've been in-and-out of e-readers since the first Kindle, but there's a problem: I spend a lot of my time reading academic-type historical works such as The Republic, The Iliad, The Prince and other things such things. I've often found that navigating back-and-forth to find a specific quote or chapter is more difficult on a e-reader, but I have a bigger concern. I'm building my personal library of books I would like to have access to until I pass away many years from now. Betting on either Barnes and Noble or Amazon 60 years from now seems highly optimistic to me. It seems to me that for significant works that you want to maintain, the physical books remains the best choice. Anyone else thinking like this? Any other opinions?

Thanks for your thoughts!
- Chaz

I've read all of these books, some because my parents owned them, others because my grandparents own them. I see the utility of e-books for 'pulp', but not for real classics.

If you want it in your library forever, get a nice copy and have it forever.

One wrinkle is some of these, at least in older translations, may be public domain, so you should be able to acquire them cheaply/free in digital form, both now, and in the future. And some may have new, better translations done in the future.

 

[MagickMan]

I always buy physical copies of those types of books and keep them on my iPad. As an academic, you should have analog and digital versions of important texts.

 

[shortylickens]

Yeah technology is improving to the point where we can rely on it for essential things and long term solutions.
Provided I was allowed to make a backup, or redownload it any time I want from a reliable service (Amazon) I could easily see myself going all digital with books and movies and music. Already made that jump with games and while it was weird at first, I have been mostly happy.

 

[JustMe21]

The Kindle uses the mobipocket e-book standard, which Amazon bought, and it's a proprietary format. The Nook uses the EPUB e-book standard, which is open source. However, both companies use DRM on their e-books, so they most likely will not work in the distant future unless both companies are still around to validate the DRM.

Of course, since the titles you mentioned are classics, they are already public domain, so you can get them in non DRM format from www.gutenberg.org where they are in different formats, although the formatting is pretty generic or possibly from www.mobileread.com where the forums users have generally improved the overall formatting and spell checked among other things.

Expect EPUB to stick around, although the specifications to it will improve over time, so it may introduce compatibility issues in the future. If you want to make sure you can always read the format, get the plain text version are maybe even the rich text version of the books. Or convert them to text from the other formats using Calibre from http://calibre-ebook.com/

 

[Chiropteran]

Drifting some from the original topic, I had the same idea- start buying all books in digital format rather than paper. What turned me off from the idea is the pricing.

I just find it ridiculous that many new popular books cost more in kindle format than they do in hardcover, even with shipping included. It kind of looks like the book publishers are trying to kill the ebook movement by pricing them so high.

 

[the DRIZZLE]

Drifting some from the original topic, I had the same idea- start buying all books in digital format rather than paper. What turned me off from the idea is the pricing.

I just find it ridiculous that many new popular books cost more in kindle format than they do in hardcover, even with shipping included. It kind of looks like the book publishers are trying to kill the ebook movement by pricing them so high.

I've never seen them priced more than hardcover. They are usually priced around the same as a soft cover.

 

[alent1234]

amazon takes a lot of the price. 30% to 40% or so.

printing was never that expensive. most of the cost of a book was always in the advance, retail markup, editing and proof reading it. as well as filtering what is publishable from what is not

 

[Dulanic]

amazon takes a lot of the price. 30% to 40% or so.

printing was never that expensive. most of the cost of a book was always in the advance, retail markup, editing and proof reading it. as well as filtering what is publishable from what is not

That is NOT Amazon's fault. Why do you even point out Amazon and not Apple too? Or B&N Ohhh that's right your a HUGE apple fanboy.

That was Apple and the publishers forcing Amazon's hand. Amazon was comfortable selling books cheaper but were FORCED to raise prices by the publishers and Apple.....

We have expressed our strong disagreement and the seriousness of our disagreement by temporarily ceasing the sale of all Macmillan titles. We want you to know that ultimately, however, we will have to capitulate and accept Macmillan's terms because Macmillan has a monopoly over their own titles, and we will want to offer them to you even at prices we believe are needlessly high for e-books. Amazon customers will at that point decide for themselves whether they believe it's reasonable to pay $14.99 for a bestselling e-book. We don't believe that all of the major publishers will take the same route as Macmillan. And we know for sure that many independent presses and self-published authors will see this as an opportunity to provide attractively priced e-books as an alternative.

http://articles.businessinsider.com/2010-01-31/tech/30029523_1_e-book-amazon-kindle-amazon-customers

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/...pple-and-five-publishers-for-price-fixing.ars

http://www.tomsguide.com/us/Amazon-Ebook-Prices-Rise,news-5746.html

http://www.mobilemarketer.com/cms/news/legal-privacy/10680.html

 

[alent1234]

amazon was selling them as a loss leader for less than what they paid for them. publishers told them to stop. and yes everyone was doing it. simply because in the glorious 21st century a book i locked to a specific brand of device and everyone was staking out their territory.

amazon lost a lot of business to apple in music and wasn't about to do it in books

 

[Chiropteran]

I've never seen them priced more than hardcover. They are usually priced around the same as a soft cover.

Maybe after a few months, but I like to buy new releases when they are still new, you know?

Looking right now, I can't find any good current examples, as it appears the model is to overprice the kindle edition for the first few weeks of release and then drop it a couple dollars to make it slightly cheaper than hardback price.

For example,

http://www.amazon.com/why-so-expensi...MxS60483PB74JD

"The Drop (Harry Bosch)
Michael Connelly (Author)

Kindle Edition -- $14.99 --
Hardcover $14.73 "


Here is a currently priced book that has kindle cost same as shipped hardcover-

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/037...d_i=3321372011


edit: Sorry, can't get the link to work.

Not all are more expensive than the hardcover, but even being close should be a crime. I don't care what the advances in book making technology have been, I know the manufacturers are paying at least a couple dollars to create the book in hardcover and a couple dollars to ship it. Even if the hardcover is more expensive by a dollar or two, that is still unacceptable to me, considering how much the publisher saves by sending only an electronic file instead of a physical book.


"amazon takes a lot of the price. 30% to 40% or so."

I doubt it very much. Amazon sells both hardcover and kindle editions, and has no reason to throw away all the profit on hardcover books while trying to charge more on kindle editions.

 

[Dulanic]

Basically right The publishers have all the pricing power now.