[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 33 KB, 800x533, 1594618147772.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
15846153 No.15846153 [Reply] [Original]

I tried to read ebooks instead of books for the last few days and I've concluded that ebooks are awful. I can't believe people subject themselves to this.

>> No.15846164

>>15846153
Then don't, I prefer them. Just cleaner and easier to work with. I can look up words or quotes in a second from any book 1000's of books I have in a few seconds. Can also read faster since I'm scrolling. Tons of more benefits but I get the draw of a book in hand

>> No.15846173

They're free. Plus I read actual books at my computer anyway. I tried laying in bed and reading but I can't find a good position for it.

>> No.15846176

>>15846153
Retarded and boomer-pilled.

>> No.15846202

>>15846173
>They're free
Books are free from the library so I've never agreed with this argument.

>> No.15846212

>>15846202
You have to travel to a library to get a book. And I don't have a library anywhere near me. Even if I did it's still easier to download an ebook rather than go out to the library. If you want to get pedantic enough though going to the library costs you the price of the gas to get there.

>> No.15846252

>>15846212
This is sad.

>> No.15846261

>>15846252
Books from the library suck ass. If they aren't a metropolitan area it's just detective shit and nyt books

>> No.15846329

>>15846202
What if your library doesn't have the book you wanted to read? What if it's been out of print for decades? What if someone tore out one random page and nobody has noticed it?

>> No.15846355

>>15846329
If all of that were true, I'd print the PDF.

>> No.15846462

>>15846153
Having virtually any book I want to read readily available in a matter of seconds triumphs any reasons to explain why paper books are better.

>> No.15846480

>>15846462
I find that paper books are legible.

>> No.15846485
File: 225 KB, 1920x1280, bubble.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
15846485

>>15846212
If you want to get even more pedantic, downloading an ebook costs the increase in your electricity bill it will cause.

>> No.15846532

>>15846212
I think mental problems of ebook readers are of a higher cost than the $0.15 in gasoline to visit the library or the $5 for a used book.

>> No.15846666

>>15846173
unironically get a headlamp, make sure the lamp adjusts in its place. helped me read a lot in bed before someone stole it.

>> No.15848391

bump

>> No.15848415

reading epub on your phone is beyond based

>> No.15848433

>>15848415
>phonefagging on /lit/
Enjoy your eye damage

>> No.15848464

>>15846462
>having virtually any book I want to read readily available in a matter of seconds
Yes, but instead of reading like a normal person you have to stare at a big blue monster that destroys your eyes.

>> No.15848491

>>15848464
>>15848433
i've spent my whole life staring at computer screens. my eyesight is as it has always been.

>> No.15848504

Their only proper purpose is to print a book when copies are unavailable. You're not supposed to read them.

>> No.15848528

I have a Likebook Mars and I think it's perfect. 300ppi on a ~8" screen, which is closer to the size of an actual book page unlike tiny ass Kindles. On top of that it's Android, so I use Moon+ Reader. By far the most customizable ebook app I've used. For PDFs it translates the text into ebook form quite well, just wish it translated the indents in paragraphs. Beats paying for books

>> No.15848562

>>15848491
It's not the screen, but straining your eyes to focus on microscopic letters thats kills them. Stop phonefagging.

>> No.15848588

>>15848562
they're the same size as normal books

>> No.15848852

If books were free and easily available to send to you from online instead of ebooks, then everyone here would claim their superiority over ebooks. They're all NEET losers who can't even afford their own food and barely read anyway.

>> No.15848878

>>15846532
This similar to what Plato thought of written word, that it would carry more problems than benefits: loss of memory... degration of thought and mental capabilities as a whole. But in the case of ebooks compared to paper books is just a stupid fear. They're pretty much the same and what lies behind your fear is some kind of "technology is bad, lets just resort to traditional means of comunication, they're better.". If the purpose is to read, digital ink or conventional ink doesn't make any diference.
I admit that books have a fetishistic presence and it's nice to hold a book and see it in your shelves, but substantially it's pretty much the same.

>> No.15848882

>>15848852
why the fuck would I waste my money that could be spent literally anywhere else on something that can be gotten completely free at the cost of no one else? Being attached to spending money on antiquated physical goods is why you'll never make it.

>> No.15848973

>>15848878
>They're pretty much the same
Feel free to support this claim with the body of evidence which disagrees with you.

>> No.15849074

>>15848882
Your anger is an adequate demonstration of my prediction.

>> No.15849128

>>15848878
plato sounds like more and more of a faggot whenever i hear about him.

>> No.15849132

>pros of ebooks
>can illegally download them
>store thousands easily
>read them in the dark
>some are waterproof

>cons of ebooks
>pricing is retarded if legal
>not simple or legal to share your copy with others
>easy for publishers to censor/alter/redact something if that's a road they want to go down
>always need to eventually use electricity/wifi
>the batteries/ciruits/screens will not last as long as a printed book
>potential to have your reading habits, purchases etc tracked and used against you

All in all, real books are less convenient, but e-readers are only of use for as long as a company like amazon will let you use them.
Do you really want to put your faith in these big monopolies using cheap tech with surveillance and planned obsolescence?
Yes, you can get free books, for now. But how long will the internet remain as it is? How long will ereaders even let you plug them in?
Borrowed time when compared to real books.

>> No.15849133

>>15849074
Your projection of anger onto me is an adequate demonstration of your insecurity.

>> No.15849165

>>15849133
If you write like >>15848882 when you're not angry then you have a problem. A calm person does not act that way.

>> No.15849183

>>15849165
If you didn't start the conversation off aggressively in the first place in >>15848852 than my response would not have to have been aggressive in tone. If you think using "fuck" makes anything angry by default you should grow up.

>> No.15849200

>>15846153
I download books on my ebook first. If i enjoy them enough I buy a physical copy for rereading or finishing the book.

>> No.15849210

>was gonna read today
>lost my book charger
>whole library useless now
mfw

>> No.15849220

>>15849183
So, you were offended?
>If you think using "fuck" makes anything angry by default you should grow up.
That is hypocritical. You should improve your vocabulary.

>> No.15849242

>Reading on a screen is bad, it damages your eyes!
>Says the anon reading this on a screen, after reading other things on his screen, before reading even more on his screen, as he does every day. Just not books though, those need to be physical.

>> No.15849244

>>15849132
I got a cheap ereader out of production from a non existent brand.
I don't connect it to WiFi either, and if electricity's gone, books won't be the first thing to be affected by it, I'll probably notice it sooner.
And with obsolescence, there are plenty of videos showcasing you can make ereaders run again when broke powering them up with an external battery hit, though I don't know how many times can you do that.

>> No.15849259

People who prefer ebooks are literally mentally ill and are too afraid of going to the library or having a job to buy books.

>> No.15849269

>>15848562
I read ebooks on my computer. And you can change the font size to be any size you want.

>> No.15849386

>>15848415
me too brother but really only because books cost money

>> No.15849410

>>15848973
That the culture and habits of reading are changing has nothing to do with the mean used to read.
Care to hand the evidence you're referring to?

>> No.15849442
File: 69 KB, 490x339, 1594658208704.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
15849442

>>15849269
Monitors are 100 PPI. Printers commonly print at 300-2,400 DPI, or 600-4,800 PPI, though economically they are printed by cheap publishers at only 150 DPI, or 300 PPI.

>> No.15849454

>>15846485
probably a fraction of the cost compared to gas still, pongoposter

>> No.15849460

>>15849410
I don't care to, so you're free to believe what you wish. I've read through it years ago.

>> No.15849482

>>15849460
Here, one random article i just found:
Digital reading devices are increasingly popular among university students; however, their effect on reading time and text comprehension has not been examined in depth. The present study compared the Kindle 3 eBook reader and Apple's iPad tablet computer to a printed document to determine if text presentation format had a significant effect on reading time and text comprehension. Results indicated that those reading printed materials had faster reading times than those reading from eBook readers and tablets. Participants found the tablet the most usable, followed by the eBook reader, and the printed material was considered the least usable. There was no effect of text presentation format on reading comprehension, supporting the use of eBook readers and tablet computers in academic environments.

>> No.15849486

>>15849482
I'd have to check the methodology and such but at a first sight it looks pretty correct.

>> No.15849489

>>15849442
>he doesn't have a 4K monitor
lmao I don't either

>> No.15849496
File: 321 KB, 1863x954, ebook.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
15849496

>>15849442
That post said nothing about resolution and I don't even know how that would affect reading text anyway. The point was letter size, which you can raise to whatever you want.

>> No.15849502

>>15849482
>one random article
go through ereader threads on warosu and you'll find a bunch of actual academic studies posted that cover long term information retention.

>> No.15849509

>>15849460
i'm actually estarting this year a phd thesis and the 90% of the time, in every single department, the work is done with digital texts, mostly on computer.
Maybe that's why we don't have geniuses anymore, damn!

>> No.15849529

>>15849489
Well, even 3840x2160 is only 180 PPI with a 23.8" display, and most peoplr choose the 27-28" monitors for this resolution so it is only 160 PPI.
>>15849496
Resolution is extremely important in reading text.

>> No.15849542

>>15849529
>Resolution is extremely important in reading text.
Reading on a phone would be better than a book though by that logic. The resolution of my phone is nearly 600 ppi.

>> No.15849545

>>15849509
People don't realize that a massive part in memory retention is subconscious. The book has texture weight and scent and this works as a sort of unconventional opperant conditioning that helps with memory.

>> No.15849570

>>15849542
It is not the only important feature.
>>15849545
People who read ebooks don't seem to want to accept this.

>> No.15849575

will i be get into trouble if i use lenovo m10 as my eink device than actual kindle or kobo?

>> No.15849581

>>15849570
>It is not the only important feature.
My phone has texture, weight, and scent. As well as a higher resolution than a book going by what you said and I can increase of decrease the font size as much as I want.

>> No.15849590

>>15849545
Why do you assume that the effect you're stating only works for printed books? couldn't it be the same for ebooks? I only use ebook for reading novels i can't get in paper but when i read in my ebook, feel it, feel its ease to hold, scroll though my library of already read books or books waiting to be read, walk thought all the notes and fragments i saved and highlighted, i have a pretty "subconscious" feeling of joy.
It's retarded to see an inherent value on "the texture, weight and scent of the book", there's none.
But whatever, it's not bad that you're supporting the book industry.

>> No.15849610

>>15849590
And actually one of the most brilliant proffessors i've had brought a tablet to class and mostly worked on texts tablet and computer.

>> No.15849629

>>15849581
>>15849590
>My phone has texture, weight, and scent
Every book is unique, even if you do not feel that is so, while your phone or desktop computer does not wholly change its characteristics when you read another ebook. You should read the literature instead of remaining ignorant.

>> No.15849638

>>15849590
>couldn't it be the same for ebooks
Ereaders contain multiple books and are far less tactile. I'm not going to bother arguing with you any more than this because it'd be like beating a dead horse. Go through the past ereader threads if you actually want to find the studies stating that books are more efficient. They've been posted enough times. You people constantly just go into this weird fucking state of denial where you just ask for studies and sources, then don't look at or address them. Total fucking waste of time speaking with you mental dead ends.

>> No.15849651

>>15846202
I live in Turkey, how am I supposed to find fucking Blood Meridian in my local library you cunt?

>> No.15849671

>>15849629
I get what you say and i also felt like that years ago. The fact that specific memories are stuck into specific parcelated fragments of matter might have it's relevance, but i think that it's mostly a form of mistification.
I retain perfectly well when reading on a digital medium and i work with information every day.
I'll check the literature.

>> No.15849701

>>15849610
your argument is fallacious and pathetic
>>15849638
>>15849629
i am pessemistic after arguing with these ebook morons in the past. refer them to archives and stop replying. if people are so pathetic that they refuse to perform their research to improve their own lives just to spite themselves, then let them suffer. it's not an argument that books are superior. we have the entire body of evidence to show it is. it's not an opinion. anyone who turns this into an argument simply denies reality and wnats to live in a fantasy where ebooks are magically equivalent to physical books.

>> No.15849721
File: 23 KB, 240x260, heavy_book_50per.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
15849721

>>15846153
Does everyone that mentions e-readers talking about lit pixels and not e-ink which is a gel and it's no different from a printed page. So confused about "eye strain". I turn my backlight off completely on my kindle and read it under a lamp

>> No.15849727

>>15846153
they're very convenient and imo a necessity if you want to have a big library. i already have a ton of physical books, from now on i'm only gonna buy ones with cool covers/ones that are really good/are only available in physical format

>> No.15849747

>>15846153
In order to read physical books, if I do then like the guy on your picture, my arms eventually get tired and he is in an awful posture. Putting it on a table still has the posture problem as you're looking down, plus some books can't be held open without something holding them open, which is just awkward. Reading on a bed has the same problems of posture and arm tiredness. So I read on a big computer monitor, staring straight ahead with good posture on my chair, as it's the most comfortable way. Plus I live in a tiny apartment, I have no space for a big bookshelf, meanwhile I have few terabytes of space on my PC.

>> No.15849750

>>15849701
If I didn't read ebooks I wouldn't read as many books because I don't have the money or space to buy all the books I read and like I said at the very beginning of the thread I don't have a library that's likely to have much of anything anywhere near me because I live out in the middle of nowhere. Even when I lived closer to a city I checked several libraries and they didn't have some books I wanted to read. But I guess you'll say it's not worth reading at all if you're not reading a physical book but I think that's a pretty stupid opinion. But I like how the argument from the original post I replied to went from letter size, to resolution, to books having mystical powers of memory manipulation like they're fucking fetishes or something.

>> No.15849753

>>15849701
Well, when you have to work with a great quantity of texts, even if spatiality has an effect on memory, there's no other way but to resort to digital materials.
Anyway, it's a good practice to take notes on a notebook whatever you're reading, be it digital or printed.
I've not said that ebooks are better, i actually avoid reading digital texts whenever i can, but in many cases it's just to convenient and many times the only resource at hand.

>> No.15849784

>>15849701
>your argument is fallacious and pathetic
It's not an argument, just a observation, and this proffessor is surprisingly a researcher on digital culture and technology.
I guess her work would be of much better quality if she read printed texts.

>> No.15849833

>>15849750
I think the word "cope" is honestly very overused, but this whole post reeks of bruised ego and is an extremely defensive cope.

>> No.15849854

>>15849833
I'm just giving you my reasons for usually using ebooks as well as remarking at how the goalposts of the argument kept being moved from what they originally were.

>> No.15849889

>>15849750
>>15849854
Multiple people are replying to you. You're saying one dumb thing after another. Nobody is changing posts.

>> No.15850028

>>15849545
>The book has texture weight and scent and this works as a sort of unconventional opperant conditioning that helps with memory.
This doesn't serve as an explanation, this is what i refer to when i say that the belief that printed books are better for comprehension or memory is founded on mistification. There are many factors that surround the reading of texts.
I might see more acceptable that the activity of reading on paper puts more attention on the reading activity because it promotes reading in a certain setting due to the materiality of the printed book.
You could even say that reading in a harsh enviroment, let's say an unconfortable chair in a cold monastic library is better for long term memory and it would probably be true.
But i don't think it makes a great difference to read in paper or ebook when you're doing a light reading when for example lying in bed.
But anyway, i'll check the literature.