Your are viewing a read-only archive of the old DiS boards. Please hit the Community button above to engage with the DiS !
- Read this in the Metro
...to a similar extent that the iPod has stopped people buying vinyl/CDs.
..."Way Of The Dragon". Mickey Rourke right?
people who bought one book a year will stop doing so, whereas avid readers will continue to buy physical books regardless?
it's probably not a fair comparison because when iPOds and other mp3 players came out, there were already plenty of mp3s being used/distributed/shared/listened to, so it made sense to have portable mp3 players; whereas who reads e-books now?
Well, maybe people will *now*, what with kindles and iPads and notebooks, I suppose...
for Harry Potter and Maeve Binchy novels.
the batteries on my copy of Ulysses have run out, what am I gonna read on the tube now?
though not in Sweden actually
though in truth most of it probably comes under animal cruelty laws
It allows information to be shared and carried far more easily. These devices will prosper and flourish.
They're not replacements for paper and pencil, they're more complimentary.
...this discussion was moving waaay too fast for me to keep up anyway.
Who cares about what you read it on, the most important thing about a book is its content, it is a collection of words not a collection of pages, ill always prefer books because I like objects but think the kindle is a great invention great for students, anyone that has to read alot for work, people travelling etc it is just really practical, dont think any of the arguments youve made about ipods is true, theyve enhanced my enjoyment of music immeasurably, and the pretentiousness you seem to be attatching to kindles seems like it would be better attached to your pro book argument
I like reading books and have no plans to buy a Kindle, but I can obviously see the appeal of saving a shitload of space.
...but you are reading?
But "no one can sit and look at a little screen for a couple of hours and focus properly".
Your indulging in a spot of trolly action or you've never seen an eInk screen.
...generated by the idea of The Kindle. Surely anything that increases access to literature can only be a good thing. I don't remember there being anything like this kind of resistance to MP3s rather than 'real' physical forms of msuic, altho maybe it's more similar to the late 80s/early 90s vinyl vs CD debate.
That said, is it primaril because reading is put on far more of a pedestal than listening to music?
Everyone knows the book's been shit ever since the invention of the printing press. A machine to print multiple copies of something someone's worked hard at by hand just devalues the work.
From now on I'm only reading books that monks have slavishly reproduced by hand.
that shit is cheating
only carved stone tablets for me
I was dead impressed how clear and readable it looked.
Ultimately if you're travelling about or live somewhere without much storage, it's a brilliant thing - books are bulky and heavy and I can definitely see why it'd be useful to have this as an alternative.
I find the weird luddite snobbery of some people in this thread rather amusing. It's a piece of technology. It doesn't change the words on the page or the quality of the actual book so to dismiss it with a smug superiority complex is ridiculous.
Stop asking me questions I've answered already.
I don't think there's any need to phase out books but I think this is a fucking useful invention for certain circumstances.
First off it's holiday readers and loose women types.
Then it's Stephen Fry and Hipsters. If you're going to talk prejudiced stereotying nonsense, at least talk consistent stereotyping nonsense.
Second off, that's certainly not most of the people who own iphones (I own neither an iphone or a kindle btw so I'm not just being defensive) so you appear to have confused what you think goes on in the real world with what actually goes on in the real world, which is a rookie error.
Thirdly, so fucking what? At what point did you decide you had the authority to determine who should and should not be judged as a valid book reader?
The spite-fuelled superiority complex you're displaying in this read says far more about you than it does anyone who owns a kindle.
I've read plenty of irrational vitriol in my time, but your contributions are among the best.
Why are you on the Internet anyway? Isn't that just some toy for some geeks and people posting videos of their cats walking on piano keys.
everyone knows they're a bit 'busy' for him.
I think what you meant to say is "It does nothing an entire library full of books, hard-to-find titles, rare or out-of-print volumes and academic journals doesn't do."
but I can still see a role for the Kindle. People who rage against it seem very reactionary to me.
nobody can see you're reading Chomsky or Kierkegaard*, or an early edition of a modern classic novel and NOT the fucking movie tie-in edition for that shit americanised film you love to hate.
*I fully except someone to say Kierkegaard is a bit too mainstream. the real action with angsty Danish philosophers moved on from him ages ago.
for one thing you can't scribble all over what you're reading or stick markers in so it'd be bloody useless for study.
I also really enjoy the cheapness of reading. You can pick a book up for £1 in a charity shop. I don't want to pay hundreds of pounds for a device that will inevitably break or get stolen - I worry enough about my iPod.
I also see it as being less useful than a portable music player, because books were portable in the first place.
Still, each to their own.
Oh, but you can
the rest of your points are grand though
Ultimately, the reason I don't want one is because I don't want another device to worry about getting mugged for - same reason I don't want a ipad or an expensive phone.
but typing is more fiddly than writing - until you get the hang of it
I'm a book man until they come up with shrinkable devices that you can stowaway in your credit card pocket
and then only type it up at a later stage. For some reason I find I can only do certain things with a pen and paper, and I know I'm not the only one.
I'm a book woman until the alternative becomes cheaper - which it won't.
contemplative, critical or creative writing is definitely easier with pen and paper - well, not easier per se just more ... natural?
STOP THE PRESSES!!! HOLD THE FRONT PAGE!!!!
I do have poor fine motor skills though.
The delete-cut-copy-paste-shuffle-around-ability is much more condusive to the way I draft most stuff.
I can barely hand write a greeting card properly these days without treating it like a calligraphy project.
I'm not sure how I'd feel about a Kindle textbook. Size factor and searchability are abviously mega, but there's no ability to put fingers in between pages and flick back and forth etc.
You don't really do this with a novel, so I can see the appeal of using a kindle for that type of reading.
although if you have an aversion to writing things by hand then no doubt its going to be a bit off putting. Obviously people who have poor fine motor skills are going to prefer a computer.
Maybe I am very fixed in my ways, but at least I have a method of getting things done.
If I've not made it clear enough already, I have no problem with other people wanting a kindle - I was just explaining why I don't want one.
...followed by "Books, on the fire".
the print was in white and the background was black.
...at any invention? It's also not true.
Save you lugging around loads of heavy text books and journal articles, allow you to take several books with you to last however long you are going. If you loved reading as much as you think you do rather than trying so hard to have an angle youd have no problem with kindles
What matters is the words you bellend. Is a paperback less authentic than a hardback? Is a printout less authentic than a paperback? Book worship is a nonsense, it's what's inside them that counts.
You're using a computer for fuck's sake. Does that make you a phoney? This is ludicrous, barely-thought-out proto-hippy twaddle.
and it's fucking hilarious.
My dad has hardly put it down since getting it, having not read for ages due to shitty eyesight.
Unfortunately I'll have to tell him that he's not actually reading and he's only pretending to be 'literate' and 'cultutral' as 'no one can sit and look at a little screen for a couple of hours and focus properly'
And similtanously a Loose Women obsessed holiday reader.
:-\ - shakey ground.
I'm sorry. You seem to have misquoted yourself.
"It's for holiday readers"
"The iPhone is a great piece of kit. It really could have had genuine usefulness and use. However, it seems to be that mostly gay men deluded by Stephen Fry, and 'hipster' types, own them. I think a similar thing will happen with the kindle."
"I think it will be for Loose Women types".
For Christ's sake man, don't deny saying things people can prove you said on the exact same page of the internet within the last half hour.
Then we come to
"my point is yes, there are advantages"
So that would be where you said "if the Kindle hadn't been invented, there would have been no call for it whatsoever".
I think what's embarrassing and shameless about this thread isn't the fact you're talking absolute nonsense but the fact you're too spineless to defend, or even admit to, the nonsense when challenged.
Is the shittest superpower ever.
"My point is, yes, there are advantages."
Good one. Think you should calm down a bit, you're talking absolute nonsense again. Go and have a cup of tea maybe?
It's pretty simple really, if enough people find it is more useful than a book then it'll do alright. If not then it won't.
If I'm sitting here having just finished my last book but I fancy reading something else then why wait a couple of days to find a new one? Whereas I could get something downloaded to my Kindle right now. Happy days.
if these things were around when I was at uni. Having multiple textbooks on one device would have been amazing.
PDF copies of journal articles too.
The only barrier being it would've been prohibitively expensive.
which is usually paid for by the university.
Not even he embarrassed himself this badly.
than their hardback equivalents. Like it or not, Kindles and their ilk are here to stay.
You guys need to hang loose sometimes, seriously
Take them outside and shoot the cunts
So I'm not sure what you're crowing about.
Any sensible person knows the recorded medium of any kind just cheapens music to a point of it being degrading to listen to.
Hence I only ever listen to music live. If there's a song I want to hear at home I'll purchase the sheet music and invite some friends round to play it with me.
I've watched all those bands live. Then I own sheet music by all of them (bar Hefner where I've had to learn the songs myself) and meet with friends to play their songs.
But I obviously do NOT listen to any of them recorded. I genuinely don't understand why anyone would do something that so clearly cheapens the live experience.
But I'll admit at least the advantage people who listen to MP3s (and an extent CDs) have over people who listen to records is that least they admit their listening to a cheapened version of the real thing. People who listen to vinyl and kid themselves they're being 'authentic' rather than, by listening to recordings, they're just displaying their contempt for music by listening to it in such a bastardised and artificial form are easily the most shameless sellouts of all.
You appear to have taken 6 (admittedly fucking good) band I rated three years ago, extrapolated my entire music taste from that and made a petty insult based on ageism. Well done. Have a celebratory biscuit.
And then stop insulting people 'cos you don't have a coherent argument to come back with. It just makes you look like someoene who can't argue very well.
Excellent. When all else fails it's time the personalised band slagging-off.
I'll be honest with you - I've completely forgotten what songs are on our Myspace and I can't view it at work. We're pretty chameleon-y though so it might be slightly older sounding stuff - certainly a lot of it's influenced by 80s post-punk so it's very possible.
I'm still confused as to what your point is though. On the one hand you seem to hate things that are too modern on the other hand things that are old-fashioned. Are you actually Goldilocks?
PS Slagging off people into books may be the most improbable thing I've ever been accused of in DiS. Or anywhere else. I hate to go back to the "do you ever read what anyone says?" but "do you?". Is it just a comprehesion issue?
They're taking the word "gullible" out of the dictionary!
in refusal to listen to anything older than a year and in a hatred of new technology?
and then next sentence claiming they reprented the "music taste of an old man". He seemed quite confused. To be fair the latter's truer than the former. I found the description of Leonard Cohen and REM as "modern" to be rather quaint.
Seriously though, you're saying that people with disposable income, who are into reading but have got homes cluttered up with a load of old books are buying these things? Jeez, that's just so tragically unhip.
- How much does it tend to cost to buy ebooks?
- Does your kindle have internet so you can buy books when you are out? How much does that cost?
- How easy is it to get things that are rare/out of print?
But you can get a 3g version that connects to the internet, costs 40 more than the normal wifi version but thats it no additional connection charges ever
No one else want to answer my sensible questions?
- don't know
- don't know
- very difficult, at least when i searched for some in waterstones (which would have been the main reason for me buying one).
They cost 109 or 149 depending on if you want 3G. Quite reasonable really.
it seems like Kindle prices are about 50% of paperback RRP for fiction titles. Don't know how the prices compare when you get into the more specialised/less widely-available stuff.
The pricing seems a bit stupid at the moment, basically the same as just buying the actual book. So if it's only available in hard-back, that's what you've got to pay.
Yeah, there's a version with wi-fi or one with both 3g and wi-fi.
Probably not so easy. But, if someone scans a really rare book in pdf form, then you can read it that way maybe? (so, for some things, i suppose it could become easier to get hold of them?)
I really like the idea that ebooks could make books that have previously been difficult to obtain available to a lot more people. Kind of like how you used to have to travel for miles and pay lots of money to buy obscure records, but now you can get almost everything over the net super cheap, (or free if you have no morals).
Doesn't look like anyone's interested in doing that now though. Maybe in the future.
Unless you knew in advance that TBO had been on the undiluted Kia-Ora for breakfast.
nowt better than people getting hysterical over meaningless stuff.
as long as you have a system that manufactures cheap batteries, as long as you have a system that can maintain regulated cheap electricity, then your method works, however it looks like a very dependant form of reading, one that requires the support of a large industrial infrastructure.
Reading a book requires much less support and resource.
A Book is 'standalone'
Content wise if these can display pdf scans then anyone can produce it, not convinced books are stand alone they take a lot of resorces and is pretty dominated by established industry surrounding it
more the ephemeral nature of electronic media, and the changing nature of a reader's relationship with the material they're reading, and of who has control over what.
it's not the full picture, but it's an interesting 'long-term effects' aside that often gets overlooked in the rush to achieve 'progress'*.
*little bit of CG 'progress' for progresses sake sceptisism there.
and that's not quite as simple as it sounds.
it's not just a case of 'make a backup of it'. far from it.
1) the production of them
2) the use of them
I was referring to 2), because these devices are not necessarily for the writing of the content, but are for 'consuming' the content. And because i imagine that a lot of books that might be read on these, were originally written in physical form pen or pencil on paper, most likely.
So just referring to 2)
I think that you will find that there are many many many copies of the classics and really good books that are in charity chops or even being sent to landfill (theres a 'shop' that is in my town that gives 'free books' and takes ones you dont want....its just an exchange to keep books that might be wanted out of landfill.
I am worried that there might become a tendancy, in the future, for people to almost regard physical books as clutter.
We dont really even need to print many more copies of say, the classics, there are loads of them around from the looks of things, I could easily collect a decent small library of top notch essential books by visiting book exchanges and visiting charity shops, and library sell offs, for a very small sum (If I had the space......in fact any school or university could do this (admitedly technical multiple volumes for some subjects are not going to be easily collectable by these means)
Books also feel nicer, it is easier to pick one up, read a bit and put it down again.
I love poetry, when I was working abroad I had lots of poetry and lots of books on my laptop, but its not the same as having books......what I like about my collection of books is that they are not all uniform size and condition and age, thus they all have character, I can even (vaguely) work out which books i might have read before others. Books are also referred to by some people in the past who might also be talking about their own love of books and scripts, it can remove you more from such things.
Here is an example of literary referencing.
'Homer' wrote the Odessy.
Chapman did a particular translation of the Odessy
Shelley writes a poem about how moved he is on many levels by this book and by the interpretation and tries to get across the feeling.
I then read Shelley's poem about it....If I read it from a book i am more in 'the same room as shelley' than if I read it from something that feels completely different.
Mind you then again Im an old fogey who actually likes writing with a fountain pen.
but I don't think Kindles are evil.
Sitting on the fence...:)
I think they're the only thing keeping this thread going.
You massive willy
my eyes are shit and i don't have a lot of storage space/money... it's encouraged me to read more books.
definitely see the value of the Kindle, and I kind of want one. But I would rather have an actual book collection than a digital collection, I like being able to see them on a bookshelf and just the general feel and smell of the paper, sound of turning the pages. These things aren't really important in the context of reading a book, but holding a book feels really natural and stuff... I cant see it being the same with looking at a digital screen. Also having books that you've owned for a long time is pretty good, memories attached to them from taking them to places for example.
I don't feel the same way about Cd's against mp3s, I don't really care about CD packaging and artwork (its usually pretty shit). Vinyl is nice, but still not something I would really miss. But with books somehow I think it makes the act of reading more enjoyable (maybe the wrong word), for me anyway. But the Kindle is very useful.
Not What I wanted
but we absolutely had to put a stop to it. I wasn't willing to play second fiddle to the postman.
this conversation is some of the funniest trolling i've ever seen.
*stands up and applaudes theguywithnousername*
"If there's a song I want to hear at home I'll purchase the sheet music and invite some friends round to play it with me."
"(bar Hefner where I've had to learn the songs myself)"