I’m completely obsessed with efficiency. I try to be as ruthlessly efficient as I possibly can, simply because I want to get as much done as possible. If there’s a new system that saves me time, whether it’s accepting e-queries, embracing Google docs so I can work anywhere, getting an e-reader so I can read anywhere, you name it, I’ll do it.
But I’m also obsessed with efficiency in a broader sense as well, because I think it is something critically important to society and history and technology. We humans, whether we’re conscious of it or not, are all obsessed with efficiency.
Nearly every single thing that has ever been invented and achieved mass adoption has one thing in common: it’s an improvement in efficiency.
Whether it’s speech, writing, the postal service, telephone, or e-mails, we have been moving closer and closer to efficient, instantaneous communication across vast distances.
Whether it’s domesticated animals, chariots, railroads, cars, planes, we have been moving closer and closer to efficient travel across vast distances.
Whether it’s fire, windmills, steam engines, or the internal combustion engine, we have been moving closer and closer to the most efficient energy production possible.
And as we decide whether to adopt or dismiss a new inventions, nearly every consideration other than efficiency (usually) dwindles in importance.
Cars aren’t as safe as railroad travel or walking (or at least walking where there are no cars), but we’re willing to make that sacrifice because cars are efficient. Every energy technology seems to pollute more than the last, but we make the tradeoff because the other technologies are less efficient. Nothing can compare to the experience of listening to live music or, barring that, vinyl records, but we’d much rather listen to music on mp3 players because we can listen to music whenever we want.
Human beings are always scurrying around trying to find more efficient ways of doing things and freeing up time for the things we’d rather be doing. Efficiency allows us to be more productive and relax more and spend time creating still more efficiency.
And this is why I believe e-books are going to win in the end, and probably sooner than we think. It’s simply vastly more efficient to download any book you could possibly want instantaneously and read a book on a screen (even better if it’s a screen you already have, hello smartphone) than to cut down a tree, make paper, print ink on it, bind it, ship it across the country in a plane or a truck or both, and make someone walk or drive to a physical store (who may or may not have the book they want) every time they want to read a book.
I think we’ll look back on the print era and marvel about all those people who were responsible for delivering all these individual printed objects, kind of like how there used to be a fleet of milk men in every city rather than one guy driving a truck to a couple of supermarkets.
To be sure, no technology disappears completely – people still ride horses, go to plays, type on typewriters, listen to record players, and send handwritten letters. And printed books aren’t going to disappear either. All of these technologies have advantages and an associated nostalgia that people will always want to preserve and experience. There will still be printed books and physical bookstores, even if there are far fewer of them.
But things tend to move in one direction: toward greater efficiency and productivity. There’s always a delay as people adapt to the new technology, but prices come down, the technology gets better, and the efficiency spreads.
Printed books have their advantages, but they don’t win where it counts. Nature may abhor a vacuum, but human nature abhors a bottleneck.
I'm a book lover, and I just don't feel the experience of reading on a screen is the same as reading with paper. The smell alone of a book is nostalgic to me, and I imagine I'll always be someone who wants actual books.
At the same time, I've become very concerned with environmental issues, and I just think about all of the costs required in terms of cutting down trees for paper (or recycling), shipping heavy books all over the world, etc., and I can't help but think it's good for the world as a whole to switch. I'd be willing to give up print, or at the very least make them an occasional enjoyment to collect, if it would make a major contribution to the environment.
As for poor children not being able to read…I've worked with at-risk students from very poor families, and please forgive the generalization because it obviously isn't true in every case, but most of the children I worked with didn't read books to begin with. Family members were poor readers, it wasn't stressed, and children weren't read to when they were small.
I also believe that schools will likely rent out such devices to students in the near future, which means every student at a public school would have access. And don't forget libraries. They will likely find a way to rent out devices as well.
My main concerns with the issue are piracy and dilution of quality. Electronic formats are easily to steal and reproduce. Also, it is much easier to make a book electronically or for people to make their own and self-publish without as much cost, and I worry that the quality control provided by publishing companies will be diminished.
Reason why I still buy cds and books: I can always own it.
Say what you want, if I'm holding it, I know it's mine. I have books that my grandmother bought in the 70's. It's all mine. I won't stop being able to read it because a new format comes out or my ereader goes haywire. The typo on page 78 will always be there, no one can change it on me. And I can read my book by candle light or flashlight if the world goes nuclear and I don't have power. Unlike music, which has changed the dominate format it plays on all the time, books are still simply words on paper.
Also, I have to wonder how 'efficient' digital books are really? Is simply being able to get it faster making it more efficient? Why? The goal of cars was to make travel faster, and it does, so it wins. But does it really matter if I have to go to a store or have a book shipped versus having it on my ereader in a few seconds? I don't mind the time. It doesn't make the book better because it came faster. It doesn't really save me time–I can do other things that need to be done while waiting for a book to ship, or usually I was looking for some time to kill at the bookstore anyway.
And since I am not a child, I don't need instant gratification.
Perhaps efficiency isn't the sole benefit of an e-book – the Harry Potter/Kurt Vonnegut/J.D. Salinger book burners and the rest may decide that it's just too darn expensive to toss an e-reader into the bonfire to make a point. Or I suppose they could have a virtual book burning….
It's still not the same though. So yes & yay for the e-book movement!
Book burning will be a thing of our sorry past.
The onward march of e-book technology has a silver lining!
Good to know about that format, Nathan.
The first practical digital watch was the pulsar introduced in 1972 at a cost of $2,100. Today low end digital watches are free with a box of cereal. Adjust that $2,100 for inflation and you could get a very big stack of Kindels.
Within a few years e-readers will be the same cost as a paper book. I expect some book of the month club will give a free reader with the commitment to buy some number of books over a year. In my opinion the cost of the device will quickly be irrelevant. So don’t worry about the poor kids. They will have a much bigger selection of books with an e-reader than they do today.
ha! A digital watch in 1972! that cracks me up. I just picture a 70's movie where this guy has a digital watch and everywhere he goes people are like "What is that thing?!"
Great blog. Great comments. You're correct, Nathan, in your prognostication for the future of e-books. They are here. They will become a dominant force.
As standards coalesce, we may see more of the "hive effect." A key inefficiency: Weeding through stuff you don't like to find stuff you do. That's why best-selling authors remain best-selling. People don't have to wonder if the book will be any good. Saves a lot of seek time.
The next generation will be as comfortable with e-format as the baby-boomers are with paper. They already are. There will be an iPhone (or equivalent) in the hand of every kid in every remote village on earth (practically). It's already coming.
Love it or hate it, this is reality. You're spot-on, Nathan. Oh, and that link to that technology chart was too cool! Thanks for that!
Nathan- Even people who are not poor are going to refuse things like e-readers, just like I know people that don't have cell phones. Some people are not interested in advancement.
I do agree that there will be a majority of people that buy e-readers, just like there is a majority that have cell phones or ipods. But I don't think that nearly as many people as you seem to believe will be accepting of this new technology.
…and then they flash forward to show the same guy in 1982 and he's driving while talking on one of those suitcase sized car-phones…
the movie will be called
THE EARLY ADOPTER
a high concept action-comedy
woohoo off to spit this one out.
I actually saw a TV commercial that was such a great commercial I didn't flip the channel. And it turned out the commercial was for the Kindle.
And I recently saw an ad for audible.com in a national magazine.
the technology timeline is interesting, Nathan.
I've had the concept in my head for a while of money as an effective time machine. For example, if you could affford $2100 in 1972 for a watch, you could have had a digital watch even though they wouldn't become commonplace for at least a decade later. When the car was invented, only richpeople had one while everyone else still rode horses. then when everyone had cars, rich people had planes. Now that everyone can at least ride in planes, and some own them, rich people can take vacations to the space station. And so it goes…Money is a kind of time machine, allowing travel to a subset of the future, because it concentrates human endeavor within a short timeframe.
I want some of what anon 5:36 is smokin'!
Kristi and Terry,
Thanks for the kind thoughts, it certainly makes things easier. Three cheers for the writerly community!
As for In Praise of Slow, I don't have a copy right now and likely won't pick one up in the next week and a half. Otherwise I'd ship it off! With a discount for niceness. 🙂
Words are the most important part of a book, but they are not the only part. The medium is an important part of the experience. Is there no difference in two equally comfortable, functional chairs? Your experience of sitting is the same by the more measurable definitions. Yeah, the expensive, designer chair may be less of a money-maker than the mass-produced sweatshop knockoff, but there is a difference.
I'm just bitter about the whole damn thing.
That post and the ideas behind it made me, quite literally, cry.
I've read all the comments regarding concerns about the inability for a hard-drive personal backup of e-books. I understand where everyone is coming from. But honestly, I have to ask myself how many books have I purchased and read that I *really* want to keep around? The truth is, not that many. It just hurts to toss them into the trash, and like most folks, I never seem to find the time to take them to the library for donation.
So, yes, I understand this, "If I buy it, then I have the right to keep it forever" mentality. Honestly, I do! But on the other side of the coin, most of us here are aspiring writers. The price of ebooks is going to change the industry forever, including advances, royalties, etc. Do we *really* want to bring those figures down even more by opening the floodgates to piracy?
Just my thoughts.
When e-readers predominate, then who needs agents and publishers? I would think it more efficient for an author to go directly to take his book directly to the reader. He can hire an editor; conduct his own marketing or hire an expert, and create his own sales platform on the web because the prining press, which has been with us since the 15th century, becomes obsolete.
Everything does get more efficient. Unless of course the government is involved.
I'm not 100% sure I agree on all counts. We move toward efficiency when it comes to getting work done and getting from A to B in our busy days, but when it comes to leisure activities, we have different priorities. We value process and ritual and don't mind spending a bit more time to achieve those things. A shower is a much quicker way to clean; someone who wants to relax draws a bath (and might even waste time lighting candles). If your purpose is to eat, quickly, you whip up EasyMac; if you enjoy cooking and want to spend an afternoon creating a masterpiece, you shred your own Gruyere and make your own pasta. There will certainly be those who will prefer ereaders for leisure reading, but because reading for most is a leisure activity, I don't think efficiency is bound to win out. I do think that ereaders are going to take up a bigger share of the market as leisure readers discover, purchase, and employ them, but I don't think the paper book is going to go the way of horseback riding (enjoyed by only a very small segment of the population) anymore than ovens have been completely replaced by microwaves, at least anytime soon.
jim-
Because the e-publishers aren't going to give the author a good deal out of the goodness of their heart. We'll still be here!
In another vein, the whole e-reader movement to date has been largely all about the benjamins. The overarching need to preserve the revenue stream continues to retard efficient distribution of data. However, half the gross national product of the U.S. involves data management.
That's what's known in political geography circles as a quaternary sector economy.
Primary sector economy, production use of natural resources directly from sources, agriculture, commodities extraction and processing.
Secondary sector economy, manufacturing, processing, value added.
Tertiary sector economy, services, tourism, food service.
Quaternary sector economy, data management.
Quinary sector economy, public safety, education, culture.
Who anymore knows how to mine iron ore and process it into iron? Me, for one, in charcoal bloom furnace. But I also know how to do CGI and . . . and all the modern day techie things that enhance my existence.
I make my living online, on screen, and get paid that way too.
I'm a writer, both in my day job and outside of it. I sit at a computer all day. I have tendonitis from typing and constantly clicking the mouse. I have all the ergonomic gadgets, but it's still a pain.
Books are my refuge.
The last thing I want to do in my freedom and leisure time is stare at words on a computer-like screen, and have to freaking click a button to turn the page.
I'd like the efficiency pendulum to swing back the other way. Too much efficiency and still not enough time to do anything-sad. I think we all need to slow down.
eReaders are dumb. Who wants to drag around a big bulky thing that only does 1 thing? Seems like an 1960's invention.
1 life 1 device™
coming soon
As much as I love technology; I'm a slave to my blackberry, my gps, my wireless internet, I can't see myself enjoying reading a book on a screen. When I pick up a book I enjoy that it isn't anything like my computer which I sit in front of nearly all day. I can hold a book in my hand and feel the pages, smell the ink and I can't see myself giving that up.
God, remember when we had to rewind videotapes! so weird.
Agree with the 1 life guy. If publishers really want to make $ off ebooks, then they need to be able to sell them to anybody, not just people willing to buy a dedicated device. The ebooks need to work on PCs, netbooks, apples, iPhones, iPods even, GPSs, car dashboards, digital watches, any damn electronic thing. Depending on 1 clunky ereader is not going to do it. I know plenty of people who wouldn't buy one, but–if they already have an iPhone, say, they would buy an eBook for it because they already happen to have somehting to read it on.
DUDE! I sure hope you really ldo have that slogan trademarked, cuz that is freakin GOLDEN!!!
Whaaa! Attack of the Internet Hive. I just wrote a post on this subject today.
That you are probably right is bothering me immensely.
The Nook will have a serious advantage over Kindle in that it will be sold in B & N stores, which means people will get to hold it and try it before buying it. When that happens, early next year I believe, e-books and e-readers are going to explode in popularity.
As for people who don't read much not buying in–they don't really count anyway because they don't read much. People who only go to libraries to get books or buy used books are not consumers of the publishing industry, so they don't really matter either. The only consumer that matters is the one who buys new books on a regular basis, and those readers are embracing e-books in a big way.
It doesn't matter if 90% of people never touch an e-reader, because that 90% don't regularly read for pleasure anyway. The 10% who do read for pleasure will all be using e-readers within three years.
I also predict that the technology on these is not going to change a great deal over the years. They have to be a certain size in order to read them comfortably, so they won't get any smaller. They will no doubt adopt a color e-ink screen, and that's fine for illustrated books. They no doubt will become waterproof and shockproof. Otherwise, there just isn't much more you can do with them that isn't already done.
It's true that they will open the publishing industry to everyone, but even if every reader is a published author, some will be popular and some won't, and that's really how things are already.
Good post, Nathan.
Nathan, yes. As a source of information, the internet sucks. Let me explain. That does depend on the information that I am looking for and the quality and reliability of the information that I want.
If I just want to know something in general and don't care how accurate or reliable the information is, then wikipedia gives me the answer or I can google and get an approximate answer. But, if I am researching a specific topic and I want highly reliable information similar to what I would find in either a textbook or a non-fiction book written by an expert in the subject, then searching the internet is really risky. There is so much misinformation out there about any given topic. There are so many websites put up by amateur enthusiasts about a topic, that I've learned to be careful. Many of the amateur enthusiasts put up misconceptions or things that are just plain wrong. It takes me a long time to wade through all those websites and determine whether the person does know what they are talking about or not.
I don't have access to JSTOR and other professional online journals, so the internet is very risky as a source of graduate student, research level information. When I am researching something for a story that I have in mind, then I want that high level of confidence in the information I get. So, I do not use the internet to do my research, I go down to the library or I order the books that I want.
Really, I'm not a nutcase. 😉
To me, reading a book is an experience. I like the experience of opening a book, flipping the pages, snuggled up with my dog on the couch. Just like I love reading newspapers instead of sitting in front of a computer to read everything online (although I do plenty of this, too). As a newspaper editor I especially get what you're saying, having to deal with reinventing ourselves to meet the changing world. And yet, it's sad in a way. I'm all for progress, but I'm in love with the experience. If only we could sell that.
Nathan,
I don't know if you'll ever get down to this–the 235 comment–but I wanted to say what an interesting take on an old subject this was and how incredibly well-written. And to emphasize my sincerity, not only do you not have a query of mine, I currently have no plan to send you one. Like you and your listeners, I just enjoy good writing. Thank you.
Gordon,
You said:
As for people who don't read much not buying in–they don't really count anyway because they don't read much.
The thing is there is a lot, lot, lot more of them than there are of you. Who do you think buys many of those bestsellers? Who do you think drives the market and creates profit margins for the industry? It's those casual readers who don't read too much. E-books will never dominate until you can convert that very large crowd. If or how long that might be… might be an interesting topic for debate.
I went to school for Three more years (after graduate school) to learn how to master the internet and graphics.
I ran into teacher after teacher who could not do their own creative work because the were so busy keeping up with the new software that kept coming out and coming out.
I kept buying and spending time and money learning new software until I ran out of time and money.
If NEW technology won't just give us a format we can learn and become customized to, why should WE, the customers, spend and keep spending the time and money????
The day of the universal e-reader is coming like a host of orcs, yes, and I know I will succumb. And it will be fine.
But last weekend I went to a SF/F Con and after several happy hours of browsing in the dealer room, bought ten new books from three different dealers, each of whom were unflaggingly helpful and pleasantly chatty. It did my heart good. What will happen to these people?
While I understand that people feel emotional attachments to books, fond memories, etc….
I think all writers, and, for that matter, all agents, might want to welcome e-books with open arms, running through a field of daisies saying, "welcome, my e-books friends, welcome, welcome!"
Why? $$$$$$$$$$
Print book royalties = 10%
E-book royalties = 40%
E-books are more lucrative for authors and agents. Less fingers in the pie.
Then there's the wonderful issue of greater control for authors, but I won't confuse the issue.
The opportunities for authors to make a living wage are much more likely with e-books.
True, sad but so true. I think we all know this is inevitable, but it almost hurts to see it happen right in front of our eyes.
And soon enough these devices will be so easily obtainable to everyone that just like the cell phone we will all have a kindle of sorts in our bags, pockets and purses. Our children will no longer carry large back packs to school because all their books and lessons will be on such devices.
It almost makes me wonder if anyone will ever be able to make a living at writing. What with competition and price cuts.
For now I'll stare at my books lined up on my bookshelf and plug away at a story that I hope to see on paper and ink bound nicely in a book to add to my shelf.
Ahh Nathan, I never (rarely) comment on your blog, but this reminds me so entirely of when a teacher in high school preached all year about how paper money would disappear by the time we graduated college… I can't stop myself…. I feel the horror of an analogy coming on. Horror, and even worse, I can see that I'm writing too much here, so no one will read this long comment. Ah well, I can't stop myself so here's my take. Debit cards, (those amazing things), and technology, (maybe like a micro-chip or something), would, according to my preachy teacher, eradicate the need for paper money. And he was right! The need for cash isn't here anymore, technically. Yet… living in L.A., an enormous, diverse place, I know people who still–STILL– deal all in cash. And other people who seem to never, ever use cash. Most people I know, though, tend to do both, using their check card nearly all the time and using cash every now and then. I don't see paper money going away as quickly or completely as my teacher thought it would, but I have to admit, I thought the penny would be gone by now, and I was wrong on that one.
Bartering, to gold, to coins, to coins/paper, to credit/coins/paper… still credit/coins/paper… still credit/coins/paper…
Nathan, (if you haven't skimmed onto better things in life), am I right that you're saying it'll be a complete and total takeover? That people who buy books will be like people who go to swap meets and buy those black things called records? (No offense to people who buy them. You rock, I'm sure). If so, then what you're saying about books, and what my high school teacher was saying about money… well yes, it makes so much sense, it's so much more efficient, it sounds so awesome, and I think it'll happen too, but not as soon as some would imagine. More likely, the people who like paper will use paper, the people who like plastic will use plastic, most people will use both, and, as usual, everyone will be a little bit right.
No one listens to me……
it's so sad……
I'd disagree with this, actually. Even though I'm part of the techno-generation and I love to death the forward motion in connectivity.
Technology is perpetually moving forward for efficiency–but art isn't. And it won't, because it's an aesthetic field. We still make paintings on canvas with real paint, even though you could make digital art instead. Certainly, some do, but it will never replace traditional modes. It'll just stand alongside them. (It's like the argument that video games will replace movies–they just aren't the same thing.)
The person who reads maybe 20 books a year and does it for fun might use an e-reader. But someone who prefers the physical product, the act of shopping for it, holding it, flipping through it–you can't replace that. It's like putting a digital print of the Mona Lisa up instead of the real painting.
People like having libraries. I read about 100+ books every year (I started tallying) and buy most of those. Half of the fun is the library and being able to look through it as I wish and pick up a real, physical object. It's about art, not technology.
Art and technology intersect, yes, but never completely. E-readers and e-books will be popular and grow and I'll probably get one, but they won't replace print books.
(Also, you said that they'll be like cell phones/fridges are now and even the poor will have them–I have friends who can't afford a cell phone for themselves, let alone their child! Poverty is scrabbling for your next meal, not paying a cell phone bill. For someone who has five dollars to spend in a week for something fun… They can get a used book or two or even lucky four somewhere. But they can't get a damned e-reader, no matter how cheap they get.)
Nathan, how many more customers can the publishing industry afford to lose?
There are perhaps a million titles I have not yet read, paper age titles, available for next to nothing on-line.
Why should I adopt a technology that I do not like, to buy a product that will not last longer than any other machine, to read a literary product of increaingly dreary industrial standards?
To make the life of the industry employees more "efficient"?
I'm a guy in a family that buys a hundred books a year.
Hear this or not, you are losing us.
Browsing in bookstores is a lousy way to find books.
Even a 20,000 SF big box has a limited selection of books. Walking down an aisle looking at covers is so ineffective we even have a cliche about it.
The shopping and purchasing experience is by far the best feature of the Kindle. I won't miss bookstores at all.
When e-reading is cheap enough with hand-held devices other than cellphones, I'll be there.
Great discussion, btw. I went cross-eyed after about 150 responses, but it was totally worth it. But seriously.
I gotta be honest, Nathan. As someone hoping to have a book sold in mid-2010, which means I'd likely see it in print in 2012 or 2013 if I succeed at this, this has me questioning whether I should even want to have my first book sell to a traditional publisher. I mean, if the advance is good, then I could handle that. But if the advance is just okay, then going digital and flying solo might be just as good, financially speaking.
Nathan: If we're headed quickly in this direction, what will be the advantages/disadvantages between having a traditional publisher in charge of your ebooks vs your own little self in charge of your ebooks? Thanks very much for all you offer us.
In some ways, ebooks could end up promoting physical books. It'd be easy to set up POD in the store. This hasn't taken off much so far, but I could see that being big in a future where the store has every book on file anyway. For those who like physical books, it'd mean greater choice rather than less.
It'd also mean any books which go to print runs need to be something special. There's already a certain status in having fancy collectors editions. In a world where real books are the minority, a library of books will be something to talk about. We might see more collectors editions if it becomes the fashionable thing to collect.
Nathan,
I'm an aspiring novelist. Let's for arguments sake say that I've got a very promising novel just beginning its long journey from MS to final marketable product. I am looking out for number one. Therefore my greatest fear is what will I get for my 100's and 100's of hours work? Would the move to electronic form change that? Are we – the starving authors – still safe? And are you?
Nathan,
I'm an aspiring novelist. Let's for arguments sake say that I've got a very promising novel just beginning its long journey from MS to final marketable product. I am looking out for number one. Therefore my greatest fear is will I still make the same $$$ for my 100's and 100's of hours of hard work. Would the move to electronic format change that? For better or for worse? Or are we – the starving authors – doomed? Would we still be looking at the same approx $1 (give or take) per book sold. And are you safe?
Ok. How do I delete one of my comments?
The strong point for eReaders is with non-fiction and references. If I'm reading ficiton most of the time I only need 1 book with me. So I don't care that you can load 10,000 books on a Kindle. But for non-fic, it really does make powerful sense.
Pn the other hand, though, my netbook is only slightly bigger than a Kindle and it can hold tons of eBooks AND do other stuff, too.
That's my take as a reader. As a writer, my debut comes out in spring '10, and I have had quite a few potential readers ask me if it will be in Kindle format, which I believe it will be.