Re: 14.8 million ipads sold (in 9 months) during 2010

bob said:
and spent a little time looking at them on my Sony Reader:
fantastic! thank you for a very close and observant analysis... these are the kind of reviews that we need more of! *** jim, where are you? don't flake on me now, buddy; i will roam the wide countryside to hunt you down... so, that .pdf you pointed us to is pretty good, really. i might have a few qualms, like, for instance, i would suggest that you not put the chapter-headings at the very top of a page, they need some breathing-room, but for the most part, the .pdf is pretty good, and you can trust me when i say that, because i wouldn't say it if it wasn't true (right?), and also because i know how to analyze the functionality of a .pdf closely, including minutia about which i do not yet care to educate you... but the .pdf still leaves a few things to be desired... for instance, you don't give people a way to skip to the hotlinked table of contents from any place in the book, which i would suggest, since its location on page 5 is not exactly all that convenient. page 2, right behind the title-page, would be better. (which reminds me, can you get rid of the p.g. legalese? we don't need it.) this exacerbates the rather serious problem that this .pdf lacks the normal table-of-contents that you will traditionally find in the sidebar, a very useful feature. (and no, those little page-icons are not a substitute.) while i'm on this topic of the linked table of contents, i'm sorry to say that i must report that the links do not work correctly, beginning with the one for chapter two. they consistently jump to a page which is one page shy. you will want to fix that bug. finally, we should all acknowledge that this .pdf reports it was produced by microsoft office 2007, which is _not_ something that will work in the p.g. production pipeline. so, jim, can you give us something that will support your contention that p.g. should use .html as its master format? -bowerbird

so, jim, can you give us something that will support your contention that p.g. should use .html as its master format?
I already did this BB, but like always you are not listening. What I gave as support for my contention that PG should use HTML as its master format is the fact of life that overwhelming what PG customers are telling you they want, from their simple act of downloading, that statistically what overwhelming they really want is files in HTML file format, and/or its two closely derived file formats, EPUB and MOBI. Further, I showed that it is trivial for customers to generate the PDF that they want, in the page size and format they want from the HTML if they want to do so. I'm not against PG also providing on-the-fly rendering of HTML to PDF in a page size the customer specifies, with a margin size they also specify, and whether they want 1-up portrait, or 2-up landscape, and/or two sided, and/or center-bound, etc, if PG actually wants to support paper-printer issues -- I just don't believe anyone at PG *actually* wants to really support such printer-related issues - I am happy if PG also support PDF as long as PG doesn't take the feedbooks approach of dumbing-down the books we submit back to 1970s txt-only format! In practice PDF IS ALWAYS a generated output rendering format in any case, since NOBODY actually authors in PDF. In practice, the farther off you start from giving customers what they want, then the farther off you are going to end up from giving customers what they want.
participants (2)
-
Bowerbird@aol.com
-
James Adcock