> The same can’t be said of the e-book, which is seeing a decline in popularity. A Pew Research Center study in October found that fewer Americans are buying and using e-reading devices like Kindles and Nooks than they did in past years.
Fewer sales of specialized e-book readers can simply mean that more people use tablets and phones to read e-books.
Anyway, I'm glad printed books are most likely here to stay. For studying and reference, a physical book is still much better than their digital counterpart - which instead I prefer for novels.
Ebook readers have not evolved much as they should in usability. Not sure if that is due to their nature as lock-in device, or if there is some other reason.
I am still waiting for a open e-ink ebook reader that has a good interface for managing a ebook collection.
Though I have a feeling that a lot of the books people purchase and display on their shelves are never opened after they are initially read.
I get the desire to actually own a copy of a book, and quite often I'll notice that the Kindle copy on Amazon is close to being the same price as the physical book-why not indulge a bit?
If I'm pretty sure I'll never read it again, or if I feel the least bit worried that I won't enjoy the book, going for the cheaper Kindle option is my first choice (and I don't have tons of money to throw around at books).
E-book pricing has become a lot less attractive than it once was. Aside from the convenience of an e-book being easier to travel with and not taking up much space, there's little incentive if they are the same price.
I've always thought they should be cheaper. Sure we're paying for the convenience but the cost involved in getting an ebook into the reader's hands is SO much lower than getting a physical copy there.
I refuse to buy an ebook if the price is more than the cheapest new, paperback price. I'll either buy the paperback or just not buy it. Usually the latter.
But publishers don't really like ebooks because they don't control the digital supply chain - which is owned by Amazon, and to a lesser extent Apple and a few also-rans do.
Paper pub - B&N, small indies, and the like - has a symbiotic and deferential relationship with the publishers. Amazon is a gorilla the size of New Jersey and would happily eat them all for lunch.
So publishing execs are notorious for overpricing ebooks. They don't really care if the ebook market shrivels as long as it doesn't die completely or take paper with it.
Result: ebooks are vastly overpriced, and fewer people are buying.
Meanwhile the self-pub gold rush of a few years ago has ended. There's not nearly as much 99c "product" being shovelled onto Amazon, and the only writers who are making it are career writers who understand PR and reader retention. The no-talent wannabes saw their sales peak then crash, and they've gone elsewhere.
That gives trad pub a little more leverage over content than it had when the gold rush was its peak, and for a while it looked as if it was going to roll over trad pub altogether.
I think it's a temporary equilibrium. It's only working for trad pub because it has such good historical PR, which means too many naive writers still believe being published is a path to cultural glory. As the current generation of naifs dies out the next generation is going to be more realistic about publishing, and they'll realise trad pub has less to offer.
There will still be the occasional million-seller, but the backlist and mid-list writers will all go direct to digital and manage their own paper print runs if they need to - and they'll earn more doing it, even though prices will be lower.
> E-book pricing has become a lot less attractive than it once was.
On top of that you can only get some ebooks from one reseller if you use that vendors reader device because that reseller doesn't support their app on newer versions of Windows any more.
Seriously Barnes and Noble, lots of Nooks are going to be replaced with iPads and Windows tablets. Trying to create a closed ecosystem for the nook by making it hard for me to get my purchased Nook Books on other devices isn't going to change that.
B&N discontinued their desktop apps before the release of Windows 10. If you didn't have it installed in Windows 8 or earlier and upgraded to Windows 10, you can't install it, it won't even download from the Windows Store.
It's a little difficult to install it on Windows 8 and upgrade to Windows 10 when your device came with Windows 10 because you just bought it.
The nook books would work just fine, it's getting them that is the problem. When you purchase the books, there is no download option; to read them, they show up on the nook.
We tend to compare ebook pricing to physical book pricing based on perceived value. But the cost to print and deliver the book should not have an impact on the value you will get from reading it. Trying to "get my money worth" shouldn't impact your decision. Buy the book in the format you want to enjoy it. The cost to the publisher and distributor are irrelevant.
There are advantages other than physical size of an ebook:
- Lower effort to complete the buy -> starting reading process
- My wife and I share an Amazon account, and therefore we can read an ebook simultaneously
If reading a book in hardcover or paperback form is something you enjoy, they buy it in that format. If you are happy with an ebook, great -- buy an ebook.
If a physical book and an ebook are the same price, then make your decision based onhly on which format you want to read in.
> Trying to "get my money worth" shouldn't impact your decision
Why not?
By purchasing the e-book version a customer is surrendering potential future revenue ( resale of physical book or trade-in against another ), but is not being offered much or any compensation for this loss.
If the Kindle edition is £66.50 and the hardback is £70.00 [0] I'll laugh at the publisher's e-avarice and buy the physical copy; I'll likely make about £45 back when I resell it. So really the price of the e-book edition should be about £25.
> If a physical book and an ebook are the same price, then make your decision based onhly on which format you want to read in.
Why shouldn't consumers benefit from a change in technology making production easier? Why do you propose that all the benefits should remain with the creator?
It's not unreasonable for a society to expect that people who benefit from its progress share that benefit with the other members.
Expecting ebooks to be cheaper because of reduced production costs is precisely that expectation -- that publishers which benefit from society contribute to society.
Where am I proposing that "all the benefits should remain with the creator"? I simply choose the format that I want to read. The cost to produce this format compared to other formats simply does not impact my decision.
I enjoy reading an ebook on my eink screen. It would be foolish of me to choose a paperback copy simply because the publisher and distributor made less of a profit on it.
The long-term downward trend is typical for almost any new product when you look at only the US market. It corresponds to market saturation, and "everyone in the US" becoming aware of the particular search term.
I wonder about the spikes. The year-end ones are probably for Christmas presents, but what are the summer ones - summer holidays maybe? (people might want to bring something lightweight for reading..)
I personally prefer the simplicity of a paper book. I only use Kindles for stuff like travel guides, where I don't want to lug a heavy Lonely Planet paper book around, or if I need something immediately.
There is something like an inherent bias when it comes to change, when ebooks were on the rise we just blatantly assume that 50% people dumped real books for e books, but the fact is there is a steady rise of things when something changes, it doesn't happen that in one day everyone dumped everything.
then due to such assumptions we see such posts where we have to grapple with the fact that okay print books aren't going anywhere, only because we had a bias when we were judging things the last time we reported anything.
yes, one might argue that we see digital books outside in trains, buses and stuff, but that is the whole point of ereaders, mostly everyone uses them while traveling while they prefer hard copies at home
I have always believed that printed books will never go away, the same way that movie theaters didn't stop existing because we now have DVD players. Printed books and e-books present a different experience with their own advantages and disadvantages. E-books are good for quick access to lots of information and have a novelty factor. But traditional books are still easier to read, can be stored for a long time, and work better as gifts, among other advantages.
I think the main, possibly only reason that movie theaters exist is because they get the movie before DVD/Blu Ray/Steams and keep them for a long time. If we could choose to buy them however we wanted to right away I think less people would brave the cinema and risk having the movie ruined by idiots while they get gouged on food.
I, for one, don't want to spend thousands on a home theater system that can deliver an equivalent experience to a movie theater, so I will always go to the theater for movies that I think are worth the ten bucks. If you go to a smaller theater, the chances that the movie is ruined by idiots is small.
Interesting, I'm growing my e-book library but it gets harder to find DRM free books. So I find myself buying a print book, cutting off the spine and scanning it instead. Now with the Surface Pro screen in "clipboard" mode it is pretty much 1:1 from scan to screen (although smaller books get naturally enlarged).
You would save lots of time figuring out the workflow for using DeDRM. It's not difficult at all. You're wasting time and ending up with poor (in visual quality and lack of flowed text) digital copies of your books. The only books that are worth scanning (and possibly proofreading to make them text rather than image-based books) are books that aren't available as ebooks or have some obscure DRM that's not removable by standard software.
I was an early adopter of ebooks. I still enjoy them from time to time, but the number of typographical or OCR errors in even mainstream, retail books has made me jump ship. It's frustrating when you pay close to the same price as a physical copy only to find that the company didn't even bother to check it over.
I've always prefered reference books in paper form; however, novels work very well in kindle. Although there is something about paper books that I miss, I still prefer ebooks. I don't really like moving around from side to side trying to hold the book in the right position when switching pages.
Perhaps people are realizing that "buying" an ebook doesn't mean that you own it. For example, you can't resell it or lend it to your friend. Basically what Stallman says.
This is true in a traditional conception of ownership, but you own an ebook better in other ways.
I.e., I've moved a lot in the last few years to the point where I have given away, or just recycled, most of the paper books I've owned. I still have all the ebook a I've ever purchased.
I lost my kindle in a train station last month. I could still access the books I was reading on my phone the same day, and when I get a new kindle all the books will be there with little effort (including notes).
While Stallman's old essay was amazingly prescient and showed an understanding of how ecosystems around media distribution that few had at the time, the part he didn't understand was how consumers would differently weigh the benefits and definitions of ownership.
This is an interesting thought. However, the fact that you were able to give up the ownership of your paper books doesn't mean that you owned them any less than your ebooks. The opposite is true because it's an integral part of ownership that you can give it up or lose it. Ebooks may be more convenient in some situation but that doesn't mean that we have to redefine the meaning of ownership. Further, I suspect that even Amazon would agree that you technically do not own the ebooks that you "bought" from them.
I've always thought if the DRM can be easily removed, then it's the same as not having DRM at all.
Every purchase I've made from Amazon has the DRM stripped and the files placed in a personal backup. On occasion, I'll send an ebook I purchased to a friend if they expressed an interest. It feels like ownership to me.
Even though in legal terms I have the right of resale of all my physical books, in practical terms there's almost no reason to bother. Outside of a few collectibles, it's not worth much. Therefore, lack of resale on the ebooks doesn't feel much more punishing than the practical lack of resale of the physical books.
Whenever I hear again of that Stallman essay I run this thought experiment - what if e-books came first? Would Stallman have then written an essay about the inherent problems of paper books when compared to e-books? (They are more difficult to transport, they can be lost, stolen or burned, they can't be encrypted or transmitted instantaneously across the planet, negative environmental impact, etc.)
Probably not as none of those points impact the freedoms of the user. If DRM encumbered e-books came first I don't think he would find physical books an acceptable solution because of the points you mentioned but no doubt he would maintain that physical books were superior for freedom.
I don't know about that - I mean book burnings and censorship definitely impact the freedom of the user. Arguably more than the ability to lend/resell the book.
Who knew, if you raise prices of eBooks beyond hardcopy and collude with other book publishers to make them a plain terrible value proposition, print books will sell more.
Couple that with the fact that much of the "data" in this area comes from books with ISBNs (which almost no U.S. indie books have, due to the bizarre pricing scheme that Bowker has foisted on us) and things really don't look very good for the trad publishers.
I buy physical books because I then have full control over it (it's in my hands). With ebooks, Amazon or others have the control (and the data about my reading habits).
So I try to buy an ebook but chances are it will turn out to be part of some DRM scam. So I am supposed to buy it anyway and then hope to break the DRM. That's if I can get it at all using a particular DRM system. I might have the wrong operating system or something.
...or...
I can buy a block of paper at at actual store where I can browse the shelves. Bulky, but for sure I will be able to start reading it on the way home on the bus.
Anecdote: I switched back from a kindle after 2 years. My kindle broke in the middle of a thrilling novel (The Magicians by Lev Grossman, highly recommended), and I decided to buy it hardback. Soon enough, I decided to not bother getting my kindle fixed -- paper books felt so much more focused, more visceral, and more engrossing.
I'm not sure it's inherent. This may be a generational thing -- I grew up on paper books. Still, one data point.
I had a brief fling with ebooks, but it was over pretty much as soon as it started. I will still break out my kindle every now and again I am sure, but I am not a fan of ebooks.
A few things pushed me away from ebooks:
- I feel that in many cases, ebook prices are just ripping me off.
- Lack of good support for all formats: why did I have to root my Kindle to have decent PDF capability? I felt that I was being pushed into a corner I did not want to go.
- Amazon having the ability to delete books I had already bought. In some cases they executed that ability. I mean, seriously, they have the ability to reach out and delete a book I paid for and may be in the middle of reading...!!!
- Propriety formats and DRM.
- I just love the sense of occasion that a real book tends to exude.
- I love reading in the bath, risky with an electronic device.
>- I feel that in many cases, ebook prices are just ripping me off.
I think this is really informative for people who price things, not just for the ebook subject. e-book prices are usually lower than print-book prices. But people feel ripped off, because they know it took the publisher zero marginal effort to make their copy.
I mean, I've been on the other side of this, too... I was really surprised when my royalty check came, because if someone buys the e-book alone, I get a massively higher royalty than if someone buys the print book. - so if you are the sort who thinks the author should get paid more and the publisher should get paid less, then e-books are for you.
but... really, the interesting thing is just how intuitive the 'labor theory of value' is- we expect the price we pay for a thing to have something to do with the effort and capital that went into making it, and we feel ripped off when it doesn't.
I'm pretty much an exclusive e-book reader anymore. They're almost always cheaper unless buying used (not something I tend to do) though the difference is very marginal, my reader is waterproof, it supports the only format I care about (ePub), and I backup all of my books on my computer anyway which removes DRM and renders moot fears of losing my books. Most important to me: I hate carrying books around.
Even so, I wish I could pay $3 extra and just get a physical and digital copy. The only two things I really miss from physical books are 1) ease of lending to others and 2) casual perusal of the collection that call to mind the experience of reading it.
"I love reading in the bath, risky with an electronic device."
Large ziploc bag. Problem solved.
Not to mention that the cheapest Fire tablet is down to about $50, which isn't all that much more than a single hardback book (bath water doesn't do those any good, either, especially with the crap "binding" that publishers use on "hardback" books nowadays).
That's beside the point, since if the Fire dies, you still have the books you bought on your account, whereas if your hardback book is soaked, it's gone for good.
Yes. Same thing if your house catches on fire. Your paper library is just going to be gone, while your Kindle books will still be there safe and sound.
It's also easy to get copyrighted ebooks for no money. You can even go through the exercise of borrowing them from libraries if your moral principles would be compromised.
Funny that you say that. These last days I've been contemplating either:
* Getting a 9.6" or larger tablet for reading "free" technical ebooks (in PDF -- I can't stand the formatting of eBooks for technical stuff).
versus
* Buying used copies of the physical books themselves.
So, based on the recommendation of a HN reader, I bought an old Nook HD+ (9" screen with 250+ ppi) and I tried yesterday. The definition is OK for reading PDFs, but the interface of the PDF reading apps is atrocious. I'm giving the Nook to someone else and I'm spending $300+ on used copies of the technical books I want to read (mostly programming / reference manuals).
eBooks for technical reference are atrocious in several counts, first of all: typography (it's very common to find an orphan heading at the end of the page with the paragraph on the next page. This drives me nuts). Next, equations and diagrams. Terrible. Lastly, navigation.
To be satisfied, I estimate I need a 12"+ screen with around 300ppi. I think the iPad Pro can deliver this, but it's a rather expensive proposition.
Hey, thanks for the report. I've been contemplating ditching my technical books for a while but never looked into it. I'm hoping I can tolerate them on an iPad mini at 326ppi, will definitely look into PDFs.
- Even in a walled garden like Kindle, arbitrary fragmentation of the platform. Books that my Kindle device is technically capable of displaying are locked to iOS/Android Kindle app only, etc. Publishers meddling in spaces they don't understand.
- Stagnation of the eInk device market. Since the Kindle DX 5 years ago, I can "upgrade" to a much smaller device to get a backlight or snappier refresh, but my only choice for a similar or larger device lacks both, costs $800, and because it's from Sony can't do Kindle books and may already be a dead platform.
- Difficult if not impossible to lend books. This isn't just about saving money; the chances of a friend reading a book based solely upon a recommendation are much lower than the chances of them reading a book that you place in their hands, simply because of the lower initiative barrier.
That said I prefer ebooks for the majority (by volume) of my reading, more so for fiction than non-fiction. Or, factoring that a bit, I prefer ebooks for light or recreational reading and physical books for more focused or technical reading. This may be related to the limitations of eInk devices, though, since larger displays, faster refresh/annotation, and meta-reading features are more important for technical reading than for linear fiction.
> I feel that in many cases, ebook prices are just ripping me off.
The material costs of a physical book are probably well under $0.50, and the manufacturing is done by automated machines so that should add very little to the marginal cost. Shipping and storage could very well be the biggest contribution to the marginal cost of a physical book.
The costs for a book other than manufacturing, shipping, and storing should be about the same for ebooks and physical books.
Thus as long as an ebook is maybe $1 or so less than the print edition it seems I'm getting a fair deal (or rather I'm getting as fair a deal as I'd get with the print edition...). Most Kindle books that I've been interested in were priced under the physical editions by at least that much.
I would also like to know how much audio book market increased . I love audio book compared to e book . I could easily listen to it while travelling or in the gym.
60 comments
[ 2.7 ms ] story [ 143 ms ] threadFewer sales of specialized e-book readers can simply mean that more people use tablets and phones to read e-books.
Anyway, I'm glad printed books are most likely here to stay. For studying and reference, a physical book is still much better than their digital counterpart - which instead I prefer for novels.
Ebook readers have not evolved much as they should in usability. Not sure if that is due to their nature as lock-in device, or if there is some other reason.
I am still waiting for a open e-ink ebook reader that has a good interface for managing a ebook collection.
But publishers don't really like ebooks because they don't control the digital supply chain - which is owned by Amazon, and to a lesser extent Apple and a few also-rans do.
Paper pub - B&N, small indies, and the like - has a symbiotic and deferential relationship with the publishers. Amazon is a gorilla the size of New Jersey and would happily eat them all for lunch.
So publishing execs are notorious for overpricing ebooks. They don't really care if the ebook market shrivels as long as it doesn't die completely or take paper with it.
Result: ebooks are vastly overpriced, and fewer people are buying.
Meanwhile the self-pub gold rush of a few years ago has ended. There's not nearly as much 99c "product" being shovelled onto Amazon, and the only writers who are making it are career writers who understand PR and reader retention. The no-talent wannabes saw their sales peak then crash, and they've gone elsewhere.
That gives trad pub a little more leverage over content than it had when the gold rush was its peak, and for a while it looked as if it was going to roll over trad pub altogether.
I think it's a temporary equilibrium. It's only working for trad pub because it has such good historical PR, which means too many naive writers still believe being published is a path to cultural glory. As the current generation of naifs dies out the next generation is going to be more realistic about publishing, and they'll realise trad pub has less to offer.
There will still be the occasional million-seller, but the backlist and mid-list writers will all go direct to digital and manage their own paper print runs if they need to - and they'll earn more doing it, even though prices will be lower.
On top of that you can only get some ebooks from one reseller if you use that vendors reader device because that reseller doesn't support their app on newer versions of Windows any more.
Seriously Barnes and Noble, lots of Nooks are going to be replaced with iPads and Windows tablets. Trying to create a closed ecosystem for the nook by making it hard for me to get my purchased Nook Books on other devices isn't going to change that.
It's a little difficult to install it on Windows 8 and upgrade to Windows 10 when your device came with Windows 10 because you just bought it.
The nook books would work just fine, it's getting them that is the problem. When you purchase the books, there is no download option; to read them, they show up on the nook.
There are advantages other than physical size of an ebook: - Lower effort to complete the buy -> starting reading process - My wife and I share an Amazon account, and therefore we can read an ebook simultaneously
If reading a book in hardcover or paperback form is something you enjoy, they buy it in that format. If you are happy with an ebook, great -- buy an ebook.
If a physical book and an ebook are the same price, then make your decision based onhly on which format you want to read in.
Why not?
By purchasing the e-book version a customer is surrendering potential future revenue ( resale of physical book or trade-in against another ), but is not being offered much or any compensation for this loss.
If the Kindle edition is £66.50 and the hardback is £70.00 [0] I'll laugh at the publisher's e-avarice and buy the physical copy; I'll likely make about £45 back when I resell it. So really the price of the e-book edition should be about £25.
[0] http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B000WDP5DW?keywords=the first helicopter war&qid=1450638593
Why shouldn't consumers benefit from a change in technology making production easier? Why do you propose that all the benefits should remain with the creator?
It's not unreasonable for a society to expect that people who benefit from its progress share that benefit with the other members.
Expecting ebooks to be cheaper because of reduced production costs is precisely that expectation -- that publishers which benefit from society contribute to society.
I enjoy reading an ebook on my eink screen. It would be foolish of me to choose a paperback copy simply because the publisher and distributor made less of a profit on it.
It's not exactly purchase intent (or precise), but it's certainly an interesting curve.
then due to such assumptions we see such posts where we have to grapple with the fact that okay print books aren't going anywhere, only because we had a bias when we were judging things the last time we reported anything.
yes, one might argue that we see digital books outside in trains, buses and stuff, but that is the whole point of ereaders, mostly everyone uses them while traveling while they prefer hard copies at home
https://share.oculus.com/app/vr-cinema
Older people (or anyone with failing vision) would disagree with that statement. Strongly.
Fiction I always prefer as physical books anyway. Only use Kindle for traveling — the weight and small size is the only advantage.
I.e., I've moved a lot in the last few years to the point where I have given away, or just recycled, most of the paper books I've owned. I still have all the ebook a I've ever purchased.
I lost my kindle in a train station last month. I could still access the books I was reading on my phone the same day, and when I get a new kindle all the books will be there with little effort (including notes).
While Stallman's old essay was amazingly prescient and showed an understanding of how ecosystems around media distribution that few had at the time, the part he didn't understand was how consumers would differently weigh the benefits and definitions of ownership.
Every purchase I've made from Amazon has the DRM stripped and the files placed in a personal backup. On occasion, I'll send an ebook I purchased to a friend if they expressed an interest. It feels like ownership to me.
Even though in legal terms I have the right of resale of all my physical books, in practical terms there's almost no reason to bother. Outside of a few collectibles, it's not worth much. Therefore, lack of resale on the ebooks doesn't feel much more punishing than the practical lack of resale of the physical books.
Little more than a stay of execution.
Couple that with the fact that much of the "data" in this area comes from books with ISBNs (which almost no U.S. indie books have, due to the bizarre pricing scheme that Bowker has foisted on us) and things really don't look very good for the trad publishers.
...or...
I can buy a block of paper at at actual store where I can browse the shelves. Bulky, but for sure I will be able to start reading it on the way home on the bus.
...or...
I can get an entire library using bittorrent.
I'm not sure it's inherent. This may be a generational thing -- I grew up on paper books. Still, one data point.
A few things pushed me away from ebooks:
- I feel that in many cases, ebook prices are just ripping me off.
- Lack of good support for all formats: why did I have to root my Kindle to have decent PDF capability? I felt that I was being pushed into a corner I did not want to go.
- Amazon having the ability to delete books I had already bought. In some cases they executed that ability. I mean, seriously, they have the ability to reach out and delete a book I paid for and may be in the middle of reading...!!!
- Propriety formats and DRM.
- I just love the sense of occasion that a real book tends to exude.
- I love reading in the bath, risky with an electronic device.
I think this is really informative for people who price things, not just for the ebook subject. e-book prices are usually lower than print-book prices. But people feel ripped off, because they know it took the publisher zero marginal effort to make their copy.
I mean, I've been on the other side of this, too... I was really surprised when my royalty check came, because if someone buys the e-book alone, I get a massively higher royalty than if someone buys the print book. - so if you are the sort who thinks the author should get paid more and the publisher should get paid less, then e-books are for you.
but... really, the interesting thing is just how intuitive the 'labor theory of value' is- we expect the price we pay for a thing to have something to do with the effort and capital that went into making it, and we feel ripped off when it doesn't.
Even so, I wish I could pay $3 extra and just get a physical and digital copy. The only two things I really miss from physical books are 1) ease of lending to others and 2) casual perusal of the collection that call to mind the experience of reading it.
Large ziploc bag. Problem solved.
Not to mention that the cheapest Fire tablet is down to about $50, which isn't all that much more than a single hardback book (bath water doesn't do those any good, either, especially with the crap "binding" that publishers use on "hardback" books nowadays).
Yes, but the Fire tablet does not come with any books. You still have to pay at least 1/5 of the price of the tablet just for an eBook.
No, you don't.
http://www.gutenberg.org/
* Getting a 9.6" or larger tablet for reading "free" technical ebooks (in PDF -- I can't stand the formatting of eBooks for technical stuff).
versus
* Buying used copies of the physical books themselves.
So, based on the recommendation of a HN reader, I bought an old Nook HD+ (9" screen with 250+ ppi) and I tried yesterday. The definition is OK for reading PDFs, but the interface of the PDF reading apps is atrocious. I'm giving the Nook to someone else and I'm spending $300+ on used copies of the technical books I want to read (mostly programming / reference manuals).
eBooks for technical reference are atrocious in several counts, first of all: typography (it's very common to find an orphan heading at the end of the page with the paragraph on the next page. This drives me nuts). Next, equations and diagrams. Terrible. Lastly, navigation.
To be satisfied, I estimate I need a 12"+ screen with around 300ppi. I think the iPad Pro can deliver this, but it's a rather expensive proposition.
- Even in a walled garden like Kindle, arbitrary fragmentation of the platform. Books that my Kindle device is technically capable of displaying are locked to iOS/Android Kindle app only, etc. Publishers meddling in spaces they don't understand.
- Stagnation of the eInk device market. Since the Kindle DX 5 years ago, I can "upgrade" to a much smaller device to get a backlight or snappier refresh, but my only choice for a similar or larger device lacks both, costs $800, and because it's from Sony can't do Kindle books and may already be a dead platform.
- Difficult if not impossible to lend books. This isn't just about saving money; the chances of a friend reading a book based solely upon a recommendation are much lower than the chances of them reading a book that you place in their hands, simply because of the lower initiative barrier.
That said I prefer ebooks for the majority (by volume) of my reading, more so for fiction than non-fiction. Or, factoring that a bit, I prefer ebooks for light or recreational reading and physical books for more focused or technical reading. This may be related to the limitations of eInk devices, though, since larger displays, faster refresh/annotation, and meta-reading features are more important for technical reading than for linear fiction.
The material costs of a physical book are probably well under $0.50, and the manufacturing is done by automated machines so that should add very little to the marginal cost. Shipping and storage could very well be the biggest contribution to the marginal cost of a physical book.
The costs for a book other than manufacturing, shipping, and storing should be about the same for ebooks and physical books.
Thus as long as an ebook is maybe $1 or so less than the print edition it seems I'm getting a fair deal (or rather I'm getting as fair a deal as I'd get with the print edition...). Most Kindle books that I've been interested in were priced under the physical editions by at least that much.
It's low, but not that low. More like $4 to $5. More if printed in full color.