# I'm Curious



## philstern (Mar 14, 2011)

To the typical Kindle reader, are Kindle books the "equal" of physical, traditionally published books? Or will Kindle books, no matter how well-written and entertaining a reader may find them, always be considered the minor leagues of books? 

Or, to put it another way, will there always be a stigma to the Kindle book? Or, perhaps, has that stigma already dissipated?


----------



## NogDog (May 1, 2009)

philstern said:


> ...Or, perhaps, has that stigma already dissipated?


Judging by the number of Kindles and other e-readers I see in use every day on the commuter train, it seems many of us have gotten over whatever stigma you perceive (though I can't say I ever perceived any stigma, since to me a book consists of the author's _words_, not the physical medium containing them).


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

One still hears comments about "real" books occasionally, but that's definitely changing.  I almost exclusively read e-books these days, though, so I don't see them as lesser.  The experience, if anything, is better for me.  I consider it a superior medium.

Betsy


----------



## MariaESchneider (Aug 1, 2009)

I view kindle books that can't be lent once as "lesser" than regular Kindle books and of less value than the equivalent paperback.  I view a paperback about the same as a kindle book that can be lent (because I generally lend paperbacks about once, if at all.)  The "worth" to me is about equal, assuming the same cost, although I LOVE, LOVE, LOVE the instant download.  That gives kindle books an edge--especially if they can also be lent one time.  How's that for applying the algorithm of x=8 when y=u and the moon is full


----------



## Beth Dolgner (Nov 11, 2011)

While I love the feel and smell of physical books, I typically find Kindle books to be superior: easier to transport and a huge selection of books without the bulk.


----------



## Patrick Skelton (Jan 7, 2011)

I think that stigma will have completely disappeared within the next 5 years.


----------



## cheriereich (Feb 12, 2011)

A book is a book is a book to me, no matter the packaging. That said, I've grown to prefer reading ebooks and sometimes can't see why people hold onto paperbooks. They're so awkward to read compared to an ebook, although they are much prettier.


----------



## The Hooded Claw (Oct 12, 2009)

For text, I prefer ebooks.  For graphic-intensive books, paper still rules.


----------



## telracs (Jul 12, 2009)

since i never lent out my paperbacks, i don't care that you can't lend out e-books.  and to me, words make a book, not the format of the words.  i don't care if they are on a screen, a piece of paper or a roll of parchment.  it's the story that counts.  that's what real books are, the work of a writer.


----------



## WynneChanning (Jun 2, 2012)

telracs said:


> it's the story that counts. that's what real books are, the work of a writer.


Hear hear. Can I get that on a mug and/or t-shirt?


----------



## jbcohen (Jul 29, 2011)

Don't really care what those unenlightened have to say about our favorite reading media.  Those that are tied to obsolete and outdated methods will eventually find that they will be unable to get any printed books as more and more people join our ranks.  Electronic books will eventually replace the outdated and obsolete printed book.  Sure they do not have that tactile look and feel of printed books, however my ebooks can do three tricks that printed books can't: 1) Try carrying one thousand printed books at the same time, you can't it gets real challenging, no problem with my kindle; 2) Ever take a printed book out in the rain, not good for the printed book, no problem here;  3) Ever go to a book store and discover that they do not have the book you want, not possible with ebooks.  Let's face it the future is ebooks.


----------



## Sebastian Michael (Jun 18, 2012)

The answer is no, there will not always be a stigma attached to Kindle or other eBooks and they will not be considered, by the growing majority of people - be they readers, writers or publishers - as inferior to paper books.

The transition we're experiencing is following very comparable patterns to what happened in the music industry. For a short while, tracks that were first or indeed only released as MP3s were considered 'clearly not good enough' to come out as 'real' records on vinyl. Today that perception has all but vanished and now looks, with hindsight, ridiculous. Vinyl isn't dead, in fact, many music lovers and musicians still swear by it, but if an artist today releases their album purely digitally, nobody who knows anything about music will take that as a sign of inferior quality of what's actually been recorded. The difference lies in the listener's experience of the recording and the qualities (as in the characteristics) of the recording itself.

The process the publishing world is going through is almost exactly analogous. So I think you can rest assured: Kindle is here to stay for a while. (Really until another technology comes along that simply supplants it, which, coming to think of it, in a fast-moving world, may be sooner than we expect...)


----------



## telracs (Jul 12, 2009)

WynneChanning said:


> Hear hear. Can I get that on a mug and/or t-shirt?


have fun with it!


----------



## Phil Berry (Jun 22, 2012)

If I really enjoy a book, I like to see it on my bookshelf now and again.  That way I think about it, go back to it, and it remains part of my life memory.


----------



## Colin Taber (Apr 4, 2011)

I wonder how long until paper book readers are stigmatised?


----------



## bookuniverse (Jul 1, 2012)

I prefer ebook...ebook is taking over


----------



## deckard (Jan 13, 2011)

While I agree with most all that has been said, there is one thing that I don't like about eBooks. And, no, it is not the cost of some books.

I am rereading the J. Robert Oppenheimer biography, American Prometheus, this time as an eBook. No pictures in the eBook. I have several eBooks where the pictures are missing yet present in the paper version. And I don't understand why not in the eBook.

Some maps and diagrams in eBooks are harder to see than in the paper versions.

Other than that-------give me eBooks!

Deckard


----------



## Debbie Bennett (Mar 25, 2011)

deckard said:


> Some maps and diagrams in eBooks are harder to see than in the paper versions.


Harder to *find* as well. It's much more difficult to flip back to the start to check a map. Or as I do with the paperback - have the book open in two places at the same time!


----------



## Dragonfly Editing (Janet) (May 29, 2012)

Before I got a Kindle, I wasn't sure if it was a good thing to be replacing the paper book, but everyone who had one raved about it. That encouraged me to buy one and try it out. Now I'm raving about it and helping to end any kind of stigma that may still exist. In my opinion, the Kindle is better than 'real' books for a number of reasons. There are so many people who only buy books at a store, be it bookstore or grocery store, and they miss out on the entire world of Independent Authors. A world I didn't even know existed until I got my Kindle and discovered Amazon books. Being able to purchase books for under $10.00 means I can feed my book addiction more often!


----------



## bordercollielady (Nov 21, 2008)

The only "paper" books I still buy are cookbooks and knitting pattern books since I make copies of pages and enjoy the photos..  Otherwise - everything is Kindle.    Never thought there was a stigma.  why a stigma?  what's there not to love


----------



## Laura Lond (Nov 6, 2010)

I admit that about 3 years ago, before I published for Kindle or even held one, I thought ebooks to be somewhat "lesser". Now I can't even explain why. I knew there were small publishers offering authors to publish electronically, and authors publishing books for Kindle themselves, and I thought, "Yeah, but I want to do real books." "Real" being paper, of course.  Yes, silly me.

Needless to say, I have made a complete turnaround since then. I found Kindleboards, learned about ereaders and the way Amazon works, asked for a Kindle for Christmas and fell in love with the ease of it: click to buy and read in a moment. Publishing my books electronically has been a blast, too. I think many people are going / will go the same route I did, and whatever stigma they have will disappear.


----------



## Margo Karasek (Feb 29, 2012)

I never considered e-books as "less-than." A book is a book, no matter the format. Would you judge the quality of a movie as less just because you saw it at home on your TV and not in a movie theater? Yes, the two experiences are different but the movie stays the same. 

But what cinches it for me is the experience of my mother--now happily retired and completely computer (frankly, any technology) illiterate. I got her a kindle for X-mas, not expecting much because she was firmly of the "books must be on paper" persuasion. Boy was I shocked when she took to the kindle like a fish to water. She loves it. She won't read books any other way. The paperbacks her friends give her sit untouched while she downloads everything on her kindle. She says the convenience can't be beat. Clearly, to her, e-books are "more-than."


----------



## Ann in Arlington (Oct 27, 2008)

DebBennett said:


> Harder to *find* as well. It's much more difficult to flip back to the start to check a map. Or as I do with the paperback - have the book open in two places at the same time!


What I do is set manual bookmarks at maps or genealogies or anything like that I think I might want to refer to. . . .not too difficult, then, to go to it via 'notes and marks' and then use 'back' to get to where you left off reading the text. . . .


----------



## QuantumIguana (Dec 29, 2010)

If there is any stigma, it might be that a book which there isn't a paper version might be seen in the same light as a direct to DVD movie vs. a movie with a theatrical release.

The old technology is replaced by the old when the advantages of the new technology are overwhelming. Cars replaced horses for transportation, because the advantages the car had were overwhelming. A horse required daily care, a car just needed fuel and occasional maintenance. You could ignore your car for days or weeks. The car was faster than the horse, and you could drive the car all day. And while cars had their own pollution problems, the pollution from horses you had to shovel away. Horses and cars just couldn't coexist on the same roads.

E-books have advantages over paper books, but they aren't as overwhelming, and paper books have their own advantages. When you forget to charge your e-reader, the paper book will still work. I think e-books will take over the majority of the market, but not all of it. Unlike cars and horses, e-books and paper books can coexist.


----------



## mistyd107 (May 22, 2009)

Betsy the Quilter said:


> One still hears comments about "real" books occasionally, but that's definitely changing. I almost exclusively read e-books these days, though, so I don't see them as lesser. The experience, if anything, is better for me. I consider it a superior medium.
> 
> Betsy


ITA


----------



## Krista D. Ball (Mar 8, 2011)

I use books in many different ways. For non-fiction, some I like to read for general knowledge. Those I don't mind as ebooks. For those that are for current and future projects, and will need to be highlightered, tagged and flagged, I want a paper book.

The same with fiction. If it's a book that I'm probably going to read once, I want an ebook. If it's a book I want to collect (either because I'm a superfan or because I know I'll be able to get it autographed one day), I want hardcover.


----------



## Tony Richards (Jul 6, 2011)

telracs said:


> since i never lent out my paperbacks, i don't care that you can't lend out e-books. and to me, words make a book, not the format of the words. i don't care if they are on a screen, a piece of paper or a roll of parchment. it's the story that counts. that's what real books are, the work of a writer.


I second that 'hear, hear.' Thanks, telracs.


----------



## philstern (Mar 14, 2011)

Margo Karasek said:


> I never considered e-books as "less-than." A book is a book, no matter the format. Would you judge the quality of a movie as less just because you saw it at home on your TV and not in a movie theater? Yes, the two experiences are different but the movie stays the same.
> 
> But what cinches it for me is the experience of my mother--now happily retired and completely computer (frankly, any technology) illiterate. I got her a kindle for X-mas, not expecting much because she was firmly of the "books must be on paper" persuasion. Boy was I shocked when she took to the kindle like a fish to water. She loves it. She won't read books any other way. The paperbacks her friends give her sit untouched while she downloads everything on her kindle. She says the convenience can't be beat. Clearly, to her, e-books are "more-than."


Yeah, I had a similar experience with my mother. Once she got over the fear of something electronic, she loves her Kindle Fire.


----------



## That Weird Guy.... (Apr 16, 2012)

telracs said:


> words make a book, not the format of the words. i don't care if they are on a screen, a piece of paper or a roll of parchment. it's the story that counts. that's what real books are, the work of a writer.


I 10000% agree.

Though, I do have a strong dislike of Audiobooks, so that format does not work for me.


----------



## raychensmith (Jul 11, 2012)

I used to not like ebooks because I didn't know much about them, but now that I've bought a Kindle, they're a dream!  Lighter, you can store a bunch of books on them, and most importantly, you can easily read them while peddling away on a stationary bike (this might not be important to some people, I understand that).

As for the stigma, I'm sure it's going to dissipate.  I'm sure before the Model T transformed society, people were waxing poetic about the beautiful horse-drawn carriage and how ugly and impersonal and DEAD the mechanized sardine cans that some people were so gung-ho about.


----------



## LilianaHart (Jun 20, 2011)

I struggled to make the transition at first because I love holding a book, but it doesn't bother me to use my ereader now. In fact, I'm reading more now (if that's even possible) because of the convenience of being able to carry it with me everywhere I go. I do still buy the occasional physical book, but I reserve those for the ones I'll keep forever, like the Outlander books.


----------



## charlesatan (May 8, 2012)

The format itself is just a medium for me (although if your book is ONLY available for the Kindle, then that's a detail that leads to other conclusions...).

If there is bias, it will come from other factors:

Author
Publisher
Cover Art
the text itself

P.S. Among diehard eBook fans, there is also the opposite bias reaction: if it's not available in my preferred format, in my region, I'll never read the book, even if it's available in print/at the local library.


----------



## Harry Shannon (Jul 30, 2010)

I'm still a lover of hardcover books. The Kindle has replaced mass-market editions for me. It is a wonderful option, can carry hundreds at once and control the size of the print


----------



## Austin_Briggs (Aug 21, 2011)

It depends on the purpose, I guess. 

For fiction, I've never felt any stigma to any medium. eBooks are more convenient for me because I travel all the time, and they allow me to avoid bulk and shipment charges from Amazon.com to wherever I happen to be. 

For non-fiction, I still believe that well-designed paper books have more "credibility", especially in the corporate world. They make good hand-outs, library items, can be included into training kits, etc. 

For cook-books, for example, it's paper all the way for me. Or internet. Kinda tough looking up recipes on my e-reader (most of the time it's an iPhone).


----------



## anne_holly (Jun 5, 2011)

Austin_Briggs said:


> It depends on the purpose, I guess.
> 
> For fiction, I've never felt any stigma to any medium. eBooks are more convenient for me because I travel all the time, and they allow me to avoid bulk and shipment charges from Amazon.com to wherever I happen to be.
> 
> ...


I agree. It's purpose-dependent, for me.

I can't imagine not reading paper books when curled up with my 4yo for story time, just like my mum did with me, for example. However, an ereader is an exceptional innovation for travel, commuting, waiting rooms, lunch time reading, etc.


----------



## pamstucky (Sep 16, 2011)

DebBennett said:


> Harder to *find* as well. It's much more difficult to flip back to the start to check a map. Or as I do with the paperback - have the book open in two places at the same time!


Yes, and also for people like me ... don't shoot me ... I'm the type who flips to the end to see how it ends! Don't judge! LOL. I just have a very low tolerance for suspense anxiety so sometime I have to check to make sure everyone is going to be okay. 

I've also heard that with kindles sometimes the endings seem abrupt or unfinished, even if it's the same book people read in print. The idea being that if you're holding a physical book, you know there are only two pages left so you know you're almost done, whereas with the kindle you might not notice, especially if there's endmatter to the book.


----------



## hs (Feb 15, 2011)

In terms of content and quality, I consider ebooks and paper books equivalent. On any given day, I usually read two books at once, one on my Kindle app and another in paper format. I do like the feel of paper better, but for me, it's more a matter of convenience than anything else (e.g., ebooks are handy if I have a few minutes to kill while waiting in line, but paper books are preferable when I'm reading in bed).


----------



## dinojay2 (Jul 12, 2012)

They are all the same to me. As a dedicated ebook reader for 3 years now I do miss being able to easily flip back and forth if I forget something (like the main character's childhood sweetheart, or the butler's favourite flavour of jello) but there is no substitute for carrying a thousand books in one small package when I travel. I believe that 10 years from now physical books will be looked at as antique collectibles, and possible derided as tree-killers (along with lumberjacks).


----------



## Lanesy (Jun 14, 2012)

The Kindle is taking over, absolutely. Technology has and will continue to advance and finally that is beginning to show in sales. Ebooks are outselling the traditional paper back and with programmes such as Amazon KDP, new authors will prefer that to the traditional route.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

pamstucky said:


> I've also heard that with kindles sometimes the endings seem abrupt or unfinished, even if it's the same book people read in print. The idea being that if you're holding a physical book, you know there are only two pages left so you know you're almost done, whereas with the kindle you might not notice, especially if there's endmatter to the book.


I don't think that's just Kindle books. Publishers have been putting bonus material in physical books for years. And sometimes the way the book is written, paper or ebook, even if there aren't many pages left, I feel like the author cut the story off early to meet a deadline (or catch a train ).

Betsy


----------



## emilyward (Mar 5, 2011)

You're asking this on a forum for people who read ebooks. Of course you'll get certain answers. Go to a bricks and mortar bookstore, though, and you'll get much different answers. A lot of people don't see an ebook as a 'real' book and still go off on tangents about holding, touching, smelling, tasting, a physical book. We're still in the minority and I think it's because reading a book is an experience in and of itself. 

For me, words can transport me anywhere, whether I read them on paper or not, but at the same time, once I buy the ebook, that digital file, if it doesn't have lending, then that's it. No chance to lend it or sell it or give it away. I buy Indie ebooks but those that are more expensive, I prefer the paperback. If I'm going to spend $10-$20 on something, I want the physical benefits, too.


----------

