iPad excels in everything except being an e-reader. As e-reader it totally sucks - heavy, big, unusable in sunlight. This is on the contrary to what Tim Cook said at the last keynote about iPad being a favorite device for reading books. I guess he is not good at lying and field-distorting as Steve used to be.
well, it IS my favorite device for reading books... and everything else.
What is the deal? Anyways, iPad excels in everything except being an e-reader. As e-reader it totally sucks - heavy, big, unusable in sunlight. This is on the contrary to what Tim Cook said at the last keynote about iPad being a favorite device for reading books. I guess he is not good at lying and field-distorting as Steve used to be.
I guess bad day for news today...
It's great for picture books and magazines and short-term reading i.e. NYTimes, NY Post.
Not that I wouldn't want this to be available in iBooks, but what's the point? Hasn't anyone even remotely interested in the series read all the books by now?
This might have been bigger news five years ago before the final book came out.
They're probably giving 30% (or more) to Amazon, et al, so that's probably not the issue.
I would guess that it has to do with some detail in the contract and will eventually be worked out. Regardless, it's not that big a deal because you can read HP on your iPad, anyway.
Just ignore 'I'm a zzz'. He never has anything intelligent to say.
No. J.K. Rowling owns the rights to the digital versions of her books (an unprecedented allowance) and since she has the power to do so she's selling them on her own (partnered with Sony). As long as sales of HP books through her Pottermore Shop (where she essentially keeps 100% of the sales) are steady, the books won't show up on other book stores. There's simply no reason for her to give 30% of her sales to a retailer (Apple, Amazon, whomever) when she most likely has to power to sell just as much on her own and keep all the cash. It's a very smart business move.
I bought all seven Harry Potter eBooks this morning and imported them into iTunes with no hassle. They show up on iPad just as any other book purchased from the iBookstore with no loss of functionality (page turns, fonts choice, etc.). Even all the illustrations are included in the eBook versions. Pricing is very reasonable and you can re-download purchased books up to eight times. I can't see a negative to this set-up no matter how I look at it.
J.K. Rowling is in an extremely unique situation that we're not likely to see any other author obtain anytime soon. Why shouldn't she take advantage of it? Especially if it works out so well for end users.
We prefer the unabridged audiobooks. The UK versions narriated by Stephen Fry, of course.
To each their own I suppose. While I like Stephen Fry, I never have understood why anyone would want an "audiobook" (except for the obvious case of being blind).
To have someone nattering on in the background is terribly annoying IMO. You can't possibly concentrate on anything else at the same time. And if you have the time and attention for it, then you might as well read it yourself since you aren't doing anything else.
What is the deal? Anyways, iPad excels in everything except being an e-reader. As e-reader it totally sucks - heavy, big, unusable in sunlight. This is on the contrary to what Tim Cook said at the last keynote about iPad being a favorite device for reading books. I guess he is not good at lying and field-distorting as Steve used to be. ..
I think you are conflating your personal dislike for the iPad as an eReader with facts about it's popularity. In your opinion it isn't very good, but Tim Cooks statement can still be true if your opinion is a minority one.
Ergo and ipso facto, it's really just more likely that what you are looking for in an eReader isn't the same as what most people are looking for in an eReader (reading in sunlight for example).
He specifically said, "if you already own a print copy."
So it's not piracy.
Indeed, and I may be making too many assumptions here, but bittorrent will require you to seed as you download. You can turn off seeding, but good luck actually getting your files to finish downloading* (since many dedicated pirates won't just let people mooch without "giving back to the community"). While the act of downloading isn't illegal since he owns the copy, the act of uploading what he's getting IS, and the uploading is for what most people are actually arrested/fined.
*I tried this once with a video. Since it's actually illegal to rip DVDs that you own but ISN'T illegal to own the DVD and then download yourself a copy for free, I picked one and turned off seeding during the download. Just dropped to infinity after a few hours and stayed there.
I think you are conflating your personal dislike for the iPad as an eReader with facts about it's popularity. In your opinion it isn't very good, but Tim Cooks statement can still be true if your opinion is a minority one.
Ergo and ipso facto, it's really just more likely that what you are looking for in an eReader isn't the same as what most people are looking for in an eReader (reading in sunlight for example).
Well, so you really like iPad for reading e-books (simple, not magazines, not interactive) more than e-paper devices such as Kindle Touch, Nook Touch?
To each their own I suppose. While I like Stephen Fry, I never have understood why anyone would want an "audiobook" (except for the obvious case of being blind).
I know several people who listen to audiobooks while commuting.
Well, so you really like iPad for reading e-books (simple, not magazines, not interactive) more than e-paper devices such as Kindle Touch, Nook Touch?
Any reason why?
Me too ... I read in the dark ... can't do that with a kindle (maybe with the fire?)
I often read outdoors too. That bit about not being able to read in sunlight is just not true. Yes, you have to turn the brightness up, and that might take the battery down from 10 hours to 6... but still more than enough for my needs.
The NEW iPad display is just as clear and sharp as E-paper (and does color).... MUCH less eye-strain than the old display.
Now... there's nothing wrong with the Kindle/Nook/et al ... but I also do a lot more than JUST reading on the iPad. Stuff that is just not possible on those devices. So they are not adequate for MY purposes.
I decided I wanted to read "The Hunger Games." First place I went was the iBookstore. fast, easy, convenient. It is the eBook reader I use, and I like to click and be done. But lo and behold, I find it isn't available on iBookstore (although the trailers and music are all on iTunes). So, I obtained the ePUB from another source, drag and dropped it to iTunes, sync and done. Bit of a pain to do so, but works.
The publishing world needs to get their act together. iTunes was a monumental success because the music industry bought into it at reasonable prices. In the nearly 1600 years since movable type and paper were invented, we've always been dependent on the makers of the books to tell us what is good to read. "Getting published" had the mark of some editing quality and peer review. No longer. They guy that owns the "publishing company" no on longer has any value added. The Next Big Thing for books is the social media connection - once my preferences for reading can be quanitifed, *anyone* can recommend a book to me, and that book might come directly from the author.
I have some favorite authors. Without exception, once they get popular, their subsequent work goes downhill fast. Their "publisher" will print whatever they write, as soon as they write it, with little polish or craft. To hit the big time, authors had to work, and they lose that ethic real quickly once the bucks roll in.
If AAPL wanted to kill it all, they'd make a eBook reader as a one-trick pony with eInk that syncs as an iOS device. Then give the thing away with the purchase of 10 books in the iBookstore. And if BN, Amazon, et. al. had any sense, they'd beat them to the punch by doing that now. No money in the devices - just the content.
Not that I wouldn't want this to be available in iBooks, but what's the point? Hasn't anyone even remotely interested in the series read all the books by now?
This might have been bigger news five years ago before the final book came out.
You're aware that new people are born every day, right, and that some kids books have been around for a century or more, right?
If you bothered to research a little better, you'd know that you can only purchase the books through Rowling's Pottermore site. Take a look on the Kindle store - it only provides a link for purchase on her site - they aren't getting any revenue. So they aren't actually boxing out Apple.
Exactly right, this article totally blew it. NONE of the other stores are selling it, just linking to Rowling's site (and amazon.com and the Kindle store don't even seem to have links from their website yet that I can find, assuming they do at all at some point). So nothing specific to apple at all, she's just selling them herself.
It's really more of a surprise that Apple isn't selling the Hunger Games series, those are available from Amazon as ebooks.
Also, if you want to see something hilarious, search for Rowling in the Kindle app's store. There's quite a title to show up as the first listing for someone trying to find a Harry Potter ebook.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody
While I like Stephen Fry, I never have understood why anyone would want an "audiobook" (except for the obvious case of being blind).
Driving, exercising, doing basic mindless things like housework etc. It's a great way to take in more books during time that's otherwise wasted.
The big news here is that the lucrative books are available in an open (unlocked) format (ePub).
Brava to Rowling.
Indeed. After buying my first (and last) book from the iBookstore and finding that I could only read it on an iDevice linked to my Apple account (i.e. not my Mac laptop), I wasn't thrilled. I'll be looking for more open options (like this) for my future eBook purchases.
Note that Apple uses ePub too, it's just the DRM that's the problem. And for me, it would be fine if they had a reader application for Mac OS X (or they were readable in iTunes), but they don't/aren't.
Comments
iPad excels in everything except being an e-reader. As e-reader it totally sucks - heavy, big, unusable in sunlight. This is on the contrary to what Tim Cook said at the last keynote about iPad being a favorite device for reading books. I guess he is not good at lying and field-distorting as Steve used to be.
well, it IS my favorite device for reading books... and everything else.
Bittorrent is like magic.
What is the deal? Anyways, iPad excels in everything except being an e-reader. As e-reader it totally sucks - heavy, big, unusable in sunlight. This is on the contrary to what Tim Cook said at the last keynote about iPad being a favorite device for reading books. I guess he is not good at lying and field-distorting as Steve used to be.
I guess bad day for news today...
It's great for picture books and magazines and short-term reading i.e. NYTimes, NY Post.
Or, you could bittorrent the books. Bittorrent is like magic.
We're not fans of piracy here.
This might have been bigger news five years ago before the final book came out.
Brava to Rowling.
The audio version should be read by Rhys Darby.
They're probably giving 30% (or more) to Amazon, et al, so that's probably not the issue.
I would guess that it has to do with some detail in the contract and will eventually be worked out. Regardless, it's not that big a deal because you can read HP on your iPad, anyway.
Just ignore 'I'm a zzz'. He never has anything intelligent to say.
No. J.K. Rowling owns the rights to the digital versions of her books (an unprecedented allowance) and since she has the power to do so she's selling them on her own (partnered with Sony). As long as sales of HP books through her Pottermore Shop (where she essentially keeps 100% of the sales) are steady, the books won't show up on other book stores. There's simply no reason for her to give 30% of her sales to a retailer (Apple, Amazon, whomever) when she most likely has to power to sell just as much on her own and keep all the cash. It's a very smart business move.
I bought all seven Harry Potter eBooks this morning and imported them into iTunes with no hassle. They show up on iPad just as any other book purchased from the iBookstore with no loss of functionality (page turns, fonts choice, etc.). Even all the illustrations are included in the eBook versions. Pricing is very reasonable and you can re-download purchased books up to eight times. I can't see a negative to this set-up no matter how I look at it.
J.K. Rowling is in an extremely unique situation that we're not likely to see any other author obtain anytime soon. Why shouldn't she take advantage of it? Especially if it works out so well for end users.
<goes back to reading Harry Potter on the iPad>
We're not fans of piracy here.
He specifically said, "if you already own a print copy." (paraphrased)
So it's not piracy.
He already paid for a license to own/read the book... Format conversion doesn't change that.
Not EVERYTHING on peer-to-peer network is piracy. (Most, probably... But not everything.)
We prefer the unabridged audiobooks. The UK versions narriated by Stephen Fry, of course.
To each their own I suppose. While I like Stephen Fry, I never have understood why anyone would want an "audiobook" (except for the obvious case of being blind).
To have someone nattering on in the background is terribly annoying IMO. You can't possibly concentrate on anything else at the same time. And if you have the time and attention for it, then you might as well read it yourself since you aren't doing anything else.
What is the deal? Anyways, iPad excels in everything except being an e-reader. As e-reader it totally sucks - heavy, big, unusable in sunlight. This is on the contrary to what Tim Cook said at the last keynote about iPad being a favorite device for reading books. I guess he is not good at lying and field-distorting as Steve used to be.
I think you are conflating your personal dislike for the iPad as an eReader with facts about it's popularity. In your opinion it isn't very good, but Tim Cooks statement can still be true if your opinion is a minority one.
Ergo and ipso facto, it's really just more likely that what you are looking for in an eReader isn't the same as what most people are looking for in an eReader (reading in sunlight for example).
He specifically said, "if you already own a print copy."
So it's not piracy.
Indeed, and I may be making too many assumptions here, but bittorrent will require you to seed as you download. You can turn off seeding, but good luck actually getting your files to finish downloading* (since many dedicated pirates won't just let people mooch without "giving back to the community"). While the act of downloading isn't illegal since he owns the copy, the act of uploading what he's getting IS, and the uploading is for what most people are actually arrested/fined.
*I tried this once with a video. Since it's actually illegal to rip DVDs that you own but ISN'T illegal to own the DVD and then download yourself a copy for free, I picked one and turned off seeding during the download. Just dropped to infinity after a few hours and stayed there.
I think you are conflating your personal dislike for the iPad as an eReader with facts about it's popularity. In your opinion it isn't very good, but Tim Cooks statement can still be true if your opinion is a minority one.
Ergo and ipso facto, it's really just more likely that what you are looking for in an eReader isn't the same as what most people are looking for in an eReader (reading in sunlight for example).
Well, so you really like iPad for reading e-books (simple, not magazines, not interactive) more than e-paper devices such as Kindle Touch, Nook Touch?
Any reason why?
Any reason why?
On the bed. Night mode. Turning bed light off so my wife could sleep.
To each their own I suppose. While I like Stephen Fry, I never have understood why anyone would want an "audiobook" (except for the obvious case of being blind).
I know several people who listen to audiobooks while commuting.
Can you imagine that?
Well, so you really like iPad for reading e-books (simple, not magazines, not interactive) more than e-paper devices such as Kindle Touch, Nook Touch?
Any reason why?
Me too ... I read in the dark ... can't do that with a kindle (maybe with the fire?)
I often read outdoors too. That bit about not being able to read in sunlight is just not true. Yes, you have to turn the brightness up, and that might take the battery down from 10 hours to 6... but still more than enough for my needs.
The NEW iPad display is just as clear and sharp as E-paper (and does color).... MUCH less eye-strain than the old display.
Now... there's nothing wrong with the Kindle/Nook/et al ... but I also do a lot more than JUST reading on the iPad. Stuff that is just not possible on those devices. So they are not adequate for MY purposes.
The publishing world needs to get their act together. iTunes was a monumental success because the music industry bought into it at reasonable prices. In the nearly 1600 years since movable type and paper were invented, we've always been dependent on the makers of the books to tell us what is good to read. "Getting published" had the mark of some editing quality and peer review. No longer. They guy that owns the "publishing company" no on longer has any value added. The Next Big Thing for books is the social media connection - once my preferences for reading can be quanitifed, *anyone* can recommend a book to me, and that book might come directly from the author.
I have some favorite authors. Without exception, once they get popular, their subsequent work goes downhill fast. Their "publisher" will print whatever they write, as soon as they write it, with little polish or craft. To hit the big time, authors had to work, and they lose that ethic real quickly once the bucks roll in.
If AAPL wanted to kill it all, they'd make a eBook reader as a one-trick pony with eInk that syncs as an iOS device. Then give the thing away with the purchase of 10 books in the iBookstore. And if BN, Amazon, et. al. had any sense, they'd beat them to the punch by doing that now. No money in the devices - just the content.
1. Downloaded ePub book, drag to DropBox, and open to iBooks.
OR
2. download ePub book, email to yourself as attachment, and open attachment in Mail.app to launch it in iBooks.
Pottermore should include this information for users.
Not that I wouldn't want this to be available in iBooks, but what's the point? Hasn't anyone even remotely interested in the series read all the books by now?
This might have been bigger news five years ago before the final book came out.
You're aware that new people are born every day, right, and that some kids books have been around for a century or more, right?
If you bothered to research a little better, you'd know that you can only purchase the books through Rowling's Pottermore site. Take a look on the Kindle store - it only provides a link for purchase on her site - they aren't getting any revenue. So they aren't actually boxing out Apple.
Exactly right, this article totally blew it. NONE of the other stores are selling it, just linking to Rowling's site (and amazon.com and the Kindle store don't even seem to have links from their website yet that I can find, assuming they do at all at some point). So nothing specific to apple at all, she's just selling them herself.
It's really more of a surprise that Apple isn't selling the Hunger Games series, those are available from Amazon as ebooks.
Also, if you want to see something hilarious, search for Rowling in the Kindle app's store. There's quite a title to show up as the first listing for someone trying to find a Harry Potter ebook.
While I like Stephen Fry, I never have understood why anyone would want an "audiobook" (except for the obvious case of being blind).
Driving, exercising, doing basic mindless things like housework etc. It's a great way to take in more books during time that's otherwise wasted.
The big news here is that the lucrative books are available in an open (unlocked) format (ePub).
Brava to Rowling.
Indeed. After buying my first (and last) book from the iBookstore and finding that I could only read it on an iDevice linked to my Apple account (i.e. not my Mac laptop), I wasn't thrilled. I'll be looking for more open options (like this) for my future eBook purchases.
Note that Apple uses ePub too, it's just the DRM that's the problem. And for me, it would be fine if they had a reader application for Mac OS X (or they were readable in iTunes), but they don't/aren't.