Okay, so maybe now after COVID-19 hit, my local library has better support for Ebooks. Well, let’s see. Yes, indeed they do have something very clear in the ways of support now. They use an app called OverDrive, that’s how they manage Ebook lending. The purpose, of course, is to adequately support DRM. Also, the Adobe standard format that offers the equivalent? Well, PDF files with DRM strings attached, those require Adobe’s new special reader, Adobe Digital Editions (ADE), and unfortunately, it does not work on Linux. Neither does the OverDrive dedicated app. But fortunately, you can read in-browser, but that means you can’t download for non-networked use.
NOTE: Digital archival collections are distinctively different than commercially published digital books.
20200922/DuckDuckGo hennepin county digital library
20200922/https://digitalcollections.hclib.org/digital/custom/home
20200922/DuckDuckGo hennepin county librrary ebooks
20200922/https://hclib.overdrive.com/
20200922/DuckDuckGo hennepin county library overdrive
20200922/https://www.hclib.org/browse/online-resources/online-resources-container/online-resources-section/online-resources-o-r/overdrive-digital-library
Okay, so we’re almost there, we just need to push through the last sprint of this trip. Can you trade out a physical book for an Ebook? That would make it super-slick to donate your books to your public library, plus they would not need to worry so much… or maybe not at all, about storage space, both physical and digital.
20200922/DuckDuckGo trade a physical book for an ebook
20200922/https://www.huffpost.com/entry/shelfie-app-ebooks_n_567489fde4b0b958f656d261
Okay, so it is possible. Reading this through, this is what I glean. It really depends on the publisher, they each have their own terms, whether it be redeeming the Ebook for free upon proof of the physical book,’ getting a discount, or needing to pay full price. So this is where app development comes into play to make it easy for users.
Now, that article linked this interesting article about comparing reading on paper versus on screens, saying there are some subtle advantages to reading on paper? Really? Well, not really, here’s why.
20200922/https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/reading-paper-screens/
So, if you read through the article, I can summarize the important points that it makes as follows.
-
The fact that there are studies that reading on paper is more efficient, more accurate, or more comprehensive than reading digitally hinges both on technology development and on generational effects.
-
Related to the hardware technology aspects, printed book technology is simply a more mature technology than digital reading. Earlier CRT monitors introduced flicker (due to being optimized for moving pictures) that made reading stationary text eye-straining. TFT LCDs with capacitors to persistently back up pixel values during the entire refresh duration have improved legibility of stationary text, at the expense of decreasing legibility of moving pictures. Also, glossy monitor surfaces introduce more eye-strain than matte monitor surfaces. And E-ink which is illuminated by ambient light rather than backlit are ideal for eye comfort during reading.
-
Scroll versus codex? Historically, Scrolls were promptly thrown out as soon as the codex was introduced because it was technologically superior due to the ability to quickly access any page at random, as opposed to linear-access scrolls. But apparently, the advantage of the codex goes further than that. From studies of the modern digital world, paginated media is touted as easier to read than scrolled media because it provides more “landmarks” by which to navigate particular locations in the textual information.
-
Related to the software technology aspects, another issue found was that not all Ebook readers use the best possible user interface design. Poorly designed Ebook user interfaces contribute to more cognitive overhead and less comprehension while reading. In particular, not having a clear sense of position in the writing in scrolled media is a challenge.
Likewise, some folks really like to highlight and take notes directly in the books that they read, but lots of digital software falls short in providing an equivalent interface in this regard. I personally disparage at this practice because the book can no longer be resold as similar to new. And besides, most of us go through elementary school where it is strictly forbidden since it is the school’s goal to reuse the books year-over-year.
-
Not all readers come to books because they are truly motivated in the act of reading in its own right. Especially, in the case of primary school and secondary school where it is not uncommon for reading and learning to happen “under duress.” The lack of providing for sufficient physical distractions like dimensions, weight, page thickness, texture, tactile feel, smell, and even taste causes some readers to steer away from Ebooks.
As the running joke among my close family calls it, this is the “grape-throwing.” Don’t play with your food! So therefore, don’t “food” around with your books!
-
Finally, the generational aspect. It is hypothesized that current generation readers go into reading with a less serious. However, we have no reason to believe that this will continue to be true with the next generation, who is being trained to interact with computers differently from a young age. Yes… you do have to understand that it can take quite a while for those non-technologists to learn simple lessons that we have already learned and have ingrained decades earlier.
-
Keep in mind, when the studies find differences, they truly are focused on “slight” differences. Point in hand, paper is not compellingly better than digital unless you have a very strong technology-based reason to support otherwise.
In any case, I have to agree that the points raised for technology improvement are good solid points. They are something that any technology designer needs to keep in mind when they create software that supports the act of reading. Interestingly enough, when watching videos, people do not have so much of the expectation of seeing a clear progress indicator while performing the act. If they do want to get that information, though, they would have checked the run time of the video/movie themself in advance, and they can check their own personal watch or time-keeping device to know how much farther the end is from where they are currently.
Now, for my really personal commentary. One of the biggest things I disliked about professionally published, printed books is that there is such a big divide between what you see them able to put on paper versus what you put on paper. The fact of the matter as we know it is, all printed published books are authored on computers. Don’t get me wrong! I mean, how else are you going to have a typeset book? It has to be typed into a computer. Without the author typing directly into a computer, you need a secretary or a machine to transcribe, a secretary costs money, and it’s even beside the point. The point is that if you write on paper, you do not see the result in a form that equals what is printed in a professionally published book. And that is the direct point I take issue with.
So, if you’re going to read the result of someone typing on a computer, or the transcription of a computer for that matter, why not read the result in its most direct form, on a computer? That way, you are closest to the equivalent media authoring abilities for the sake of writing. The only true, direct way to read and write on paper is handwriting. Or, if you’re really old skool, typewriters.
Matter of fact, that’s one of the reasons why I was so eager to be exclusive to digital publication. Come on, going through school in the 2000s, I knew that all those published books we worked with, they were authored on computers. That’s how all typesetting was done in those days. All this being said, I can conclude by saying I despise adding unnecessary layers and middlemen between the author and the reader.
Sure, the whole idea with publishing is that in order to make copies, it is necessary to add some intermediate middle layers. But still, my emphasis is the same: when it is necessary, those middle layers should be kept as thin as possible.
Okay, but wait, the final torture test of Ebooks in libraries. Suppose you trade-in donate a physical book to an Ebook in your local public library in Minnesota. Then you move to Oklahoma, and you want to be able to checkout the same book you’ve donated. Can you request the ebook from Minnesota to your Oklahoma public library through an inter-library loan? The flat-out answer that universities give, in general, no. Publishers often impose licensing restrictions on Ebooks that explicitly deny this.
However, one curious alternation on these terms and conditions is the restriction that inter-library loans can only be done on individual chapters, not full books. And this only applies when a book is not specified as required course materials ina college class syllabus.
So, at the end of the day, the whole established process of getting books into libraries and accessing them therein, Ebook licensing restrictions provide a thorny thicket to navigate that basically invalidate the old standard practice. If you do want this economic pipeline, you are recommended to primarily use physical books and only use Ebooks as a last resort.
DuckDuckGo ebook interlibrary loan
https://help.oclc.org/Resource_Sharing/WorldShare_Interlibrary_Loan/Troubleshooting/How_to_create_an_eBook_ILL_request
https://ncu.libguides.com/ebooks/ill
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/233477879_Ebooks_and_Interlibrary_Loan_Licensed_to_Fill
https://scholars.ttu.edu/en/publications/oh-the-possibilities-ebook-lending-and-interlibrary-loan-6
https://umd.libanswers.com/faq/219050