Some Things I Like the Best and the Least About eBooks
Some Things I Like the Best and the Least About eBooks by Michael S. Hart Founder Project Gutenberg, Inventor of eBooks One of those things I like best about eBooks is giving them away. Not just giving them away, but how easy it is to give them away-- and how many you can give away with such little effort. Another wonderful thing about eBooks is that you can correct what you find in error, or just make changes in how YOU think an eBook should look for you and then whenever you give them away everyone you give them to will have the same improved copies. Of course, you can also send in Project Gutenberg error reports-- and we will gladly check these against various edition, and these will be fixed for the rest of the history of that eBook. One of my personal favorite things about eBooks is how easy it is to find your way around in them; even a three word phrase such as "not to be" only appears twice in Hamlet, so telling everyone how to find a certain place in an eBook is much easier than on paper, as giving the page number in a paper book only takes you within a thousand or two thousand characters of where you want to go. The idea of giving someone just a three word phrase to find the exact location is something that works incredibly better, and, as those examples in Hamlet demonstrate, if you get another identical word combination, just hit the search key again, much easier than scan and scan to find the phrase on any given page. Quoting eBooks is also quick and easy, and of course accurate for eBooks in comparison to paper books. Gone are the stacks, stacks and stacks of 3x5 index cards or notebooks full of quotations and the labor of writing each one out longhand. Gone is is the quote you wanted to use and just can't find, even though you remember a card you laboriously wrote it down on. And, thankfully, gone are the errors you made in the quotations, the ones marked in red and made you wonder how your instructor knew the quotes so well as to nail you for leaving out that comma. Footnoting those quotations is trivial with most word processors, as are indices, bibliographies, concordances, etc. Cost is a huge factor, too, as most of the eBooks in the world of research papers, particularly in literature classes, are free, as are millions of other eBooks. Yes, there still is The Digital Divide, but for those willing and and able to use their cellphones, many of the functions of eBooks are available to the vast majority of the world with cellphones-- about 4.5 billion by the end of 2009. The Least The thing I perhaps like least about eBooks is how many people in the world think it is my job to make eBooks come out exactly that way they think is the best in the world, and constantly harass me to change to this format or that one as the only, or primary, one of all the formats in the world. Sorry, CONTENT is what Project Gutenberg provides but not FORMAT, FORM, FORMALITY, etc. Let's face it, but when even the plainest of plain text eBooks is created, 99% of the work of re-creating it into another format is already done, all YOU have to do is change 1% and you can have it any other way you want it. On top of this, there are many format conversion programs out there that will do most of this for you. It's funny how something that has already done 99% of the labor's time and effort can be so vilified for not doing the other 1%. I suppose these people also feel that mass-produced clothing that they buy should be made their own exact fittings, along with cars and every other product. Not to mention, of course, that this product is free of charge. Yes, there are those who insist that we vacillate between formats as quickly as a new set of them come out: insisting that we join with some new effort by The Billionaire Boys club, then dropping, like a hot potato, that format in favor of another one. Some are even insisting that we do ALL formats. Sorry again, but what we provide is CONTENT not FORM. Anyone is welcome to impose their own FORM on our CONTENT, and we will even help them in the process by publicizing their wish, and asking for volunteers to help them. However, in the end, it nearly always turns out just the same, as it all comes out as hot air, with none left over to turn wheels a new industry needs to turn to create new products. I must admit, but sometimes it appears that everyone in the world seems to know how to run Project Gutenberg better than I. However, then when I offer them the keys to the kingdom to create their own competitive effort, that the effort is not there. Just more hot air. . . . All in all, of course, there are many more things about eBooks in general that I like, respect and even love.
On Thu, 3 Dec 2009, Michael S. Hart wrote:
The thing I perhaps like least about eBooks is how many people in the world think it is my job to make eBooks come out exactly that way they think is the best in the world, and constantly harass me to change to this format or that one as the only, or primary, one of all the formats in the world.
Hmm.... It also strikes me as a little ironic that people would be harassing you, because I don't believe you have been directly involved in making _any_ choices about format or presentation of PG texts for years now. --Andrew
On Thu, 3 Dec 2009, Andrew Sly wrote:
On Thu, 3 Dec 2009, Michael S. Hart wrote:
The thing I perhaps like least about eBooks is how many people in the world think it is my job to make eBooks come out exactly that way they think is the best in the world, and constantly harass me to change to this format or that one as the only, or primary, one of all the formats in the world.
Hmm.... It also strikes me as a little ironic that people would be harassing you, because I don't believe you have been directly involved in making _any_ choices about format or presentation of PG texts for years now.
--Andrew
Just look at Marcello's well thought out Philippic. Or Rothman's. Or bowerbird, who at least argues both sides. . . .
_______________________________________________ gutvol-d mailing list gutvol-d@lists.pglaf.org http://lists.pglaf.org/mailman/listinfo/gutvol-d
Michael S. Hart wrote:
Just look at Marcello's well thought out Philippic.
Or Rothman's.
Or bowerbird, who at least argues both sides. . . .
Yerrr.... Riiight. Now I do not intend wasting time on anyone who thinks that I am in any way anyone's fan more than my own (After all, no one else specialises in being my fan, so though it does not pay well, at least it attracts very little competition. I find it downright lonely here at the top; splendid isolation I call it) and I have moderate, if tolerant, reservations on some of Michael's views, but a lot of the chunderings hurled at him remind me of a criticism of the Almighty that has had some currency in recent years: "Sure He created Heaven and Earth, but what has he done for us lately?" Right, of course! As certain comments in this thread pointed out, PG isn't ALL MH's output! Who cares for him? Some of the guys who have done yeoman work are barely acknowledged, and some of them disagree with some of his views as well! Cheeeeeze!!! I doubt that Michael takes much of that sort of input more seriously than I do, but they do leave me wondering why some of those guys stick around. It is not so much a question of who is "right" or "wrong", but of personal attitude. They seem to me so much at right angles to the spirit and much of the intent of PG (and largely of each other as well). And they are pretty ineffectual too. I haven't seen a great deal of change in PG's overall structure develop out of their niggles. Nor in any other human initiatives' structures either. Oh well, fortunately I can delete their whingeings and snappings faster than they can write them. Now look at me, for example. I don't waste time on trivialities like trying to change PG; I concentrate on important things like calendar digitisation. So far no one has been listening to me, but just wait till I get the Earth's orbit properly synchronised! THEN they will be sorry, ALL of them! They have to adopt my new calendar for certain!!! (And so far everyone has thought that climate change was all AGW! Heee heee!) Merry Barmitzva or eid, or Xmiss, or whatever it might be, Jon
Thank you Jon. That's the most coherant, well-argued, thought-provoking, enlightening post I've read here recently. --Andrew :) On Fri, 4 Dec 2009, Jon Richfield wrote:
Now look at me, for example. I don't waste time on trivialities like trying to change PG; I concentrate on important things like calendar digitisation. So far no one has been listening to me, but just wait till I get the Earth's orbit properly synchronised! THEN they will be sorry, ALL of them! They have to adopt my new calendar for certain!!! (And so far everyone has thought that climate change was all AGW! Heee heee!)
Merry Barmitzva or eid, or Xmiss, or whatever it might be,
Thanks Andrew, Your appreciation much appreciated. As I was saying to Giordano Bruno just the other day, we innovators work in the face of unreasonable opposition and hot resentment. Your encouragement moves me to sell the idea to Bill G. BB, Sorry, but publication of the swimming pool issue of the calendar has been delayed by the international kerfuffel about hi-tech bathing costumes. Bloody interfering Phelps and his lot! I am thinking of dropping the whole business in favour of solar powered topees exploiting the extra UVB that comes in through the ozone holes. Even if pessimists prove correct in claiming that the increased flux of high energy photons cannot sufficiently power personal flight through helicopter blades attached to the helmets, they should be able to support head-mounted kindles for people to read while commuting through the traffic on their solar-cycles. Cheers all, Jon
Thank you Jon.
That's the most coherant, well-argued, thought-provoking, enlightening post I've read here recently.
--Andrew :)
On Fri, 4 Dec 2009, Jon Richfield wrote:
Now look at me, for example. I don't waste time on trivialities like trying to change PG; I concentrate on important things like calendar digitisation. So far no one has been listening to me, but just wait till I get the Earth's orbit properly synchronised! THEN they will be sorry, ALL of them! They have to adopt my new calendar for certain!!! (And so far everyone has thought that climate change was all AGW! Heee heee!)
Merry Barmitzva or eid, or Xmiss, or whatever it might be,
_______________________________________________ gutvol-d mailing list gutvol-d@lists.pglaf.org http://lists.pglaf.org/mailman/listinfo/gutvol-d
On Fri, Dec 04, 2009 at 10:28:38AM +0200, Jon Richfield wrote:
I haven't seen a great deal of change in PG's overall structure develop out of their niggles. Nor in any other human initiatives' structures either.
I have never had a problem with MH or Greg, but I can certainly tell you that once upon a time, I was interested in being more than a "voice" in the PG community - I tried to help in several different areas. However, there's a strange sense of glaciation and organizational conservatism that really stymied all of my efforts to see PG change. Maybe that's for the best - I can believe that there are some people in PG that are of the opinion that "it's not broke, so quit trying to fix it". However, speaking for a few of us that tried (and ultimately failed) to become more involved, it was both disheartening and demotivating - and when you care about a cause, and it feels like you're offering up your soul for them to examine, it can end up feeling like you've been personally rejected. I mention this only because it might help others understand why they might sometimes feel negative things about individual members of PG, etc. I can say it's definitely part of what makes it so hard for me to hold a rational conversation with BB. Maybe instead of attacking the people who are running PG, you could spend your efforts in a parallel project such as what manybooks has done, or just find some other passion to pour yourself into. At least that way, it would mean one fewer person who MH might feel was attacking *him*.
.... Maybe instead of attacking the people who are running PG, you could spend your efforts in a parallel project such as what manybooks has done, or just find some other passion to pour yourself into.
I think that some of us have done that. I have created several books personally for PG. I have submitted several to DP. I answer volunteer questions on many websites about how to "fix" PG books to make them work on your choice of machine. I tell people where they can get copies of PG books already "fixed" for their machines. I provided 25,000 translations of PG books in MOBI format over the course of two years work before PG finally decided to start supporting the format directly, etc. I just think it's silly that I and others have to put so much time and effort into "routing around damage" when it would be so much less time and effort for PG to wake up, get on the ball, and bring their site and organization up to date instead of living in the past. What I want is something very simple: books which IN PRACTICE people can read -- the same way they open the cover of a paperback novel and start reading. I know it can be done because I do it every day. But is PG doing it IN PRACTICE? Nope. And I think that is sad.
On Fri, 4 Dec 2009, Joey Smith wrote:
On Fri, Dec 04, 2009 at 10:28:38AM +0200, Jon Richfield wrote:
I haven't seen a great deal of change in PG's overall structure develop out of their niggles. Nor in any other human initiatives' structures either.
I have never had a problem with MH or Greg, but I can certainly tell you that once upon a time, I was interested in being more than a "voice" in the PG community - I tried to help in several different areas. However, there's a strange sense of glaciation and organizational conservatism that really stymied all of my efforts to see PG change. Maybe that's for the best - I can believe that there are some people in PG that are of the opinion that "it's not broke, so quit trying to fix it". However, speaking for a few of us that tried (and ultimately failed) to become more involved, it was both disheartening and demotivating - and when you care about a cause, and it feels like you're offering up your soul for them to examine, it can end up feeling like you've been personally rejected.
I mention this only because it might help others understand why they might sometimes feel negative things about individual members of PG, etc. I can say it's definitely part of what makes it so hard for me to hold a rational conversation with BB. Maybe instead of attacking the people who are running PG, you could spend your efforts in a parallel project such as what manybooks has done, or just find some other passion to pour yourself into. At least that way, it would mean one fewer person who MH might feel was attacking *him*.
People have attacked me aplenty since before hardly anyone ever saw eBooks, and as much from those some would think as "insiders" than as "outsiders." I'm used to it, so don't worry about until I yell for help or assistance. Speaking of assistance, I should state for the record that Greg Newby and I offer literally all the assistance we can to ANYONE wanting to set up kinds of "parallel" projects, including fileservers, listservers, email accounts, and even requests for volunteers in our newsletters. We are interested in seeing ALL of these proposal get some real airtime. Our basic suggestions is simply to create a small library of eBooks in what type of format you are interested in, put in some publicity about it, get a number of volunteers to help, and then do larger and larger libraries. Rinse, lather, repeat, until done to your satisfaction. However, you might have to be warned that some of those who make the louder noises about all this refuse any and all offers of assistance, they have it their minds and hearts just to tell other people what to do. Since we are all volunteers here, that doesn't always work so well. However, any ideas YOU want to work on, we'll throw all at our disposal out your direction for you to work with. mh
From the production aspect of ebooks:
- they're educational. I've been exposed to more history and literature from producing ebooks than I ever was in school. - they give you a perspective on modern culture/technology. I've done books where American villages had only a single telephone (in the post-office), high-tech messaging was sending a telegram, a fast car did 40 mph, and a teen-ager built a bi-plane aircraft with a top speed of 60 mph. - you encounter the occasional bit of trivia-contest fodder. One of my productions, Initial Studies in American Letters, by Henry A. Beers, mentioned that "Home, Sweet Home" is from an American-written opera named Clari, circa 1820. - it's fun and rarely boring (well, religion and philosophy are stupefyingly so, but I'm willing to put up with the boredom, while producing an ebook, for the sake of those who may not think so <g>). Al ----- Original Message ----- From: "Michael S. Hart" <hart@pglaf.org> To: "The gutvol-d Mailing List" <gutvol-d@lists.pglaf.org> Sent: Thursday, December 03, 2009 11:27 AM Subject: [gutvol-d] Some Things I Like the Best and the Least About eBooks
Some Things I Like the Best and the Least About eBooks
by Michael S. Hart Founder Project Gutenberg, Inventor of eBooks
One of those things I like best about eBooks is giving them away. Not just giving them away, but how easy it is to give them away-- and how many you can give away with such little effort.
Another wonderful thing about eBooks is that you can correct what you find in error, or just make changes in how YOU think an eBook should look for you and then whenever you give them away everyone you give them to will have the same improved copies.
Of course, you can also send in Project Gutenberg error reports-- and we will gladly check these against various edition, and these will be fixed for the rest of the history of that eBook.
One of my personal favorite things about eBooks is how easy it is to find your way around in them; even a three word phrase such as "not to be" only appears twice in Hamlet, so telling everyone how to find a certain place in an eBook is much easier than on paper, as giving the page number in a paper book only takes you within a thousand or two thousand characters of where you want to go. The idea of giving someone just a three word phrase to find the exact location is something that works incredibly better, and, as those examples in Hamlet demonstrate, if you get another identical word combination, just hit the search key again, much easier than scan and scan to find the phrase on any given page.
Quoting eBooks is also quick and easy, and of course accurate for eBooks in comparison to paper books. Gone are the stacks, stacks and stacks of 3x5 index cards or notebooks full of quotations and the labor of writing each one out longhand. Gone is is the quote you wanted to use and just can't find, even though you remember a card you laboriously wrote it down on. And, thankfully, gone are the errors you made in the quotations, the ones marked in red and made you wonder how your instructor knew the quotes so well as to nail you for leaving out that comma.
Footnoting those quotations is trivial with most word processors, as are indices, bibliographies, concordances, etc.
Cost is a huge factor, too, as most of the eBooks in the world of research papers, particularly in literature classes, are free, as are millions of other eBooks.
Yes, there still is The Digital Divide, but for those willing and and able to use their cellphones, many of the functions of eBooks are available to the vast majority of the world with cellphones-- about 4.5 billion by the end of 2009.
The Least
The thing I perhaps like least about eBooks is how many people in the world think it is my job to make eBooks come out exactly that way they think is the best in the world, and constantly harass me to change to this format or that one as the only, or primary, one of all the formats in the world.
Sorry, CONTENT is what Project Gutenberg provides but not FORMAT, FORM, FORMALITY, etc.
Let's face it, but when even the plainest of plain text eBooks is created, 99% of the work of re-creating it into another format is already done, all YOU have to do is change 1% and you can have it any other way you want it. On top of this, there are many format conversion programs out there that will do most of this for you.
It's funny how something that has already done 99% of the labor's time and effort can be so vilified for not doing the other 1%.
I suppose these people also feel that mass-produced clothing that they buy should be made their own exact fittings, along with cars and every other product.
Not to mention, of course, that this product is free of charge.
Yes, there are those who insist that we vacillate between formats as quickly as a new set of them come out: insisting that we join with some new effort by The Billionaire Boys club, then dropping, like a hot potato, that format in favor of another one. Some are even insisting that we do ALL formats.
Sorry again, but what we provide is CONTENT not FORM.
Anyone is welcome to impose their own FORM on our CONTENT, and we will even help them in the process by publicizing their wish, and asking for volunteers to help them.
However, in the end, it nearly always turns out just the same, as it all comes out as hot air, with none left over to turn wheels a new industry needs to turn to create new products.
I must admit, but sometimes it appears that everyone in the world seems to know how to run Project Gutenberg better than I.
However, then when I offer them the keys to the kingdom to create their own competitive effort, that the effort is not there.
Just more hot air. . . .
All in all, of course, there are many more things about eBooks in general that I like, respect and even love.
_______________________________________________ gutvol-d mailing list gutvol-d@lists.pglaf.org http://lists.pglaf.org/mailman/listinfo/gutvol-d
Michael S. Hart wrote:
Sorry, CONTENT is what Project Gutenberg provides but not FORMAT, FORM, FORMALITY, etc.
Yes, there still is The Digital Divide, but for those willing and and able to use their cellphones, many of the functions of eBooks are available to the vast majority of the world with cellphones-- about 4.5 billion by the end of 2009.
How are people to use PG content on their cellphones if the main format PG offers is unusable on those devices and impossible to convert? Can't you see that your bigotry re. new formats contradicts your push for PG on mobile devices?
Let's face it, but when even the plainest of plain text eBooks is created, 99% of the work of re-creating it into another format is already done, all YOU have to do is change 1% and you can have it any other way you want it.
People might not know how to do that 1% and just give up on PG.
On top of this, there are many format conversion programs out there that will do most of this for you.
There is none that can take your anachronistic pet format and transform it into anything readable by computers.
I must admit, but sometimes it appears that everyone in the world seems to know how to run Project Gutenberg better than I.
Tell me one important decision that you made, championed or suggested in the last twelve month re. PG. -- Marcello Perathoner webmaster@gutenberg.org
I don't know how Marcello Perathoner has managed to avoid cellphones that can read Project Gutenberg .txt files for all these years. After all, he live in an area that is well ahead of where I live, at least in terms of cellphones, and I think many other things. _I_ have several five year old cellphones here that have no troubles reading .txt files. I do it all the time at my demonstrations. If I can do this with such outdated technology from US cellphones it should be much easier from more modern technologies, and in advanced areas well beyond the retarded cellphones we have here in the US. When I was living in Europe 10 years ago I saw cellphones waay ahead of anything I ever saw here until years later. [Remember "The Saint" movie with Val Kilmer made in 1996? It had an awesome Nokia 9000 "Communicator" way beyond what we had until quite literally just a few years ago with the LG eNvy, LG Voyager, then on into the iPhone and all its clones, and of course, Blackberrys. On Thu, 3 Dec 2009, Marcello Perathoner wrote:
Michael S. Hart wrote:
Sorry, CONTENT is what Project Gutenberg provides but not FORMAT, FORM, FORMALITY, etc.
Yes, there still is The Digital Divide, but for those willing and and able to use their cellphones, many of the functions of eBooks are available to the vast majority of the world with cellphones-- about 4.5 billion by the end of 2009.
How are people to use PG content on their cellphones if the main format PG offers is unusable on those devices and impossible to convert?
Can't you see that your bigotry re. new formats contradicts your push for PG on mobile devices?
Let's face it, but when even the plainest of plain text eBooks is created, 99% of the work of re-creating it into another format is already done, all YOU have to do is change 1% and you can have it any other way you want it.
People might not know how to do that 1% and just give up on PG.
On top of this, there are many format conversion programs out there that will do most of this for you.
There is none that can take your anachronistic pet format and transform it into anything readable by computers.
I must admit, but sometimes it appears that everyone in the world seems to know how to run Project Gutenberg better than I.
Tell me one important decision that you made, championed or suggested in the last twelve month re. PG.
Sorry, CONTENT is what Project Gutenberg provides but not FORMAT, FORM, FORMALITY, etc.
Strange. I volunteer my 40+ hours to make and donate a book to PG and the Whitewashers don't complain about the accuracy of my CONTENT, but rather that my FORMAT doesn't in turn match THEIR idea of what the "correct" FORMAT is -- which in turn is something different than the format guides published on the PG site. Again, let me donate content in MY choice of format rather than asking me to mind-read the Whitewashers ideas of "correct" format and then let other volunteers do the last 1% to get the book into THEIR choice of format. Better yet, let volunteers like myself take YOUR [or the whitewashers] choice of format, change that format to a format that actually works on our machines, and resubmit it to the PG website so that people can simply read PG books on their favorite choice of machines, rather than having to "fix" a PG book each time before it can be read on our choice of machines. Even a 1% "fixup" [about a half hours needless busywork] assumes a knowledge of ebook authoring tools -- and patience -- that most book readers simply do not have. I buy a paperback book, I open the front cover and start reading. No 1% "fixup" is required. I buy [or acquire free] an ebook. I open the cover and start reading. No 1% "fixup" is required. What I and I think most readers are asking for is something pretty simple: A book that IN PRACTICE they can read! In my personal, practical experience, PG books frequently fail this simple test. Yes, 99% of the job is done -- yet the book IN PRACTICE remains unreadable! What a terrible waste of volunteer effort, to put that much work into creating CONTENT, and yet still have it unusable IN PRACTICE because of details of "formatting". So on forum after forum I see would-be readers of PG content asking, "Gosh, I just downloaded this book from PG and it almost works on my machine but not quite so how do I fix it?" And I reply "yes you can fix it but if you go to alternative site XYZ you will find that that site probably has the PG content already 'fixed' by some dedicated volunteers so that it will actually offer a pleasant and usable reading experience for you." If I might make a comparison: Microsoft Software is also 99% correct -- so why do customers keep complaining? Answer: Because it doesn't in practice work for them! PS: Both HTML and TXT file formats can be easily shown to be "write only" formats -- neither in practice allows the end user to "fix" all the problems that one may in practice run into using the books in either of these formats.
participants (7)
-
Al Haines (shaw) -
Andrew Sly -
James Adcock -
Joey Smith -
Jon Richfield -
Marcello Perathoner -
Michael S. Hart