I ran across this little item that suggested e-books will never be embraced quite as fully as print books. The implicit assumption in this is that e-books will never replace print books, either.
For anyone trying to analogize the e-book to downloaded music, the author suggests there's a big difference. To quote the piece: "Books are not songs and the e-reader has a different function to [sic] a Walkman or iPod. For people who devour hundreds of books a year, they will be a boon. But the majority of book readers probably buy – what? – fewer than 25 titles a year: one a fortnight. And they do not need additional technology to enjoy their purchases. So the need to acquire an e-reader is correspondingly less urgent."
Yes, these things may be true, but . . . e-books are much cheaper to produce and, therefore, buy. So even if you're not a speed reader, it must be nice to have ready access to a whole library of books on your e-reader device (for the record, I don't own an e-reader, so I'm just imagining this). And if e-books cost less, then sales should rise--basic economics, yes? Plus it beats lugging all those books around when you're on vacation or going to school. (I believe the academic market is ripe for e-books these days.)
I know that as an author I see e-books as an amazing way to produce books at a low cost and distribute them with ease. And the potential for online marketing is awesome. Authors have little to lose from the success of e-books. (Of course, the specter of illegal downloads may make some authors nervous. But if you're trying for exposure, these considerations seem less important than simply getting your work out there.)
So, while I agree that e-books will never completely replace print books, I think there are reasons why they will succeed. The issue is how successful they'll be. Will e-books eventually become the norm? Or will they always be secondary to their print counterparts?
Good questions. Any thoughts?
No comments:
Post a Comment