Do publishers misunderstand their readers so much that they think a print-on-demand feature would actually be desirable? Part of what makes the book such a great technology is its form: a well bound (and acid free) book can last for centuries and handle multiple users. I can't imagine reading Moby Dick on a stack of 8.5x11 print outs. Yes, it costs more money to print bound books but the shape, the size, and the format are comfortable for more reasons than just "we're used to doing it that way." (or am I wrong to assume that printing on demand would produce a less-than-desired bound format?)
As to the paragraph about libraries: "All that stuff that makes running a library awful" doesn't happen all that much (relative to successful transactions) and even in a "juice bar" format, these errors would still occur, only in different forms: the file was accidentally deleted or corrupted or the student worker printed the wrong book so you have to wait another 30 minutes to print the right one because the line is out the door by this point. Books are more than just informational nodes: they are objects of history, comfort, and experience. Going to a library is more than just finding what you need. How many times have you found something wonderful by browsing the shelves? I went to the stacks at my local university library recently looking for a specific book on Prague and came away with three that I found nearby. Can digital formats provide this experience? (yes they can but I am suspicious of the efficacy)
Libraries are not simply defined by their contents. A personable and intelligent Reference Librarian is more valuable and more useful than any Google search. Granted, it isn't as instantaneous, but the results are more insightful.
I do however like the idea of creating a mix tape style book. As the cost of production decreases, I hope this is an option publishers will consider.
The emerging, digitally-based reader culture is not about on-demand, it's about access. Reader-consumers want to have access to any and all books and the information contained therein. Technologies that facilitate and speed up easy access will be the most desirable. This additionally includes the searchability that digital copies can provide. But when it comes to using those books, when it comes to reading cover to cover, the game changes.
I'm excited about the advantages that new technologies offer. But I think we often forget that practicality should always be kept in the forefront of our mind.
my cart |
Additional thoughts to consider
Do publishers misunderstand their readers so much that they think a print-on-demand feature would actually be desirable? Part of what makes the book such a great technology is its form: a well bound (and acid free) book can last for centuries and handle multiple users. I can't imagine reading Moby Dick on a stack of 8.5x11 print outs. Yes, it costs more money to print bound books but the shape, the size, and the format are comfortable for more reasons than just "we're used to doing it that way." (or am I wrong to assume that printing on demand would produce a less-than-desired bound format?)
As to the paragraph about libraries: "All that stuff that makes running a library awful" doesn't happen all that much (relative to successful transactions) and even in a "juice bar" format, these errors would still occur, only in different forms: the file was accidentally deleted or corrupted or the student worker printed the wrong book so you have to wait another 30 minutes to print the right one because the line is out the door by this point. Books are more than just informational nodes: they are objects of history, comfort, and experience. Going to a library is more than just finding what you need. How many times have you found something wonderful by browsing the shelves? I went to the stacks at my local university library recently looking for a specific book on Prague and came away with three that I found nearby. Can digital formats provide this experience? (yes they can but I am suspicious of the efficacy)
Libraries are not simply defined by their contents. A personable and intelligent Reference Librarian is more valuable and more useful than any Google search. Granted, it isn't as instantaneous, but the results are more insightful.
I do however like the idea of creating a mix tape style book. As the cost of production decreases, I hope this is an option publishers will consider.
The emerging, digitally-based reader culture is not about on-demand, it's about access. Reader-consumers want to have access to any and all books and the information contained therein. Technologies that facilitate and speed up easy access will be the most desirable. This additionally includes the searchability that digital copies can provide. But when it comes to using those books, when it comes to reading cover to cover, the game changes.
I'm excited about the advantages that new technologies offer. But I think we often forget that practicality should always be kept in the forefront of our mind.