You are right. I know that.

“It’ll never fly, Orville.”

“Why do movies need to talk?”

“People will never use those small computer keyboards/those smaller PDA keyboards/those microscopic Blackberry keyboards.”

“Who needs a cellphone? There are phones everywhere.”

“Who needs books? What’s wrong with this scroll?”

Sometimes I think to myself: If only the people who were so passionate about paper would apply their passion to something that mattered…

At any rate, time will tell the tale. Books are on the way to being curios and boutique gifts. The vast majority of lit will be electronic, for practicality’s sake alone.

“I, too, love the convenience if reading on my iPhone. Nothing beats the heft and the smells and the feel of a good hardcover book, but standing on the subway for 20 minutes is the true test and iphone is a great way to read. “

“I am genuinely saddened that e-books have gained purchase (no pun intended)in the reading world, but I am not surprised. There are obvious financial incentives for the companies that purvey electronic “books” including money earned from sales and re-sales of devices; additional funds generated from the need to purchase more than one “copy” in order to share with another reader; the inability of the original purchaser to pass along a copy gratis to a friend, thereby generating another purchase; fixed prices; fewer sources so less competition: I am sure there are others, as well. Rarely considered is the economic impact on used bookstores (can’t sell a “used” e-book!) and libraries (can’t loan electronic copies and e-readers in the present structure).

There are intangibles that must be considered: How does the electronic reader compensate for the absence of tactile and visual pleasure experienced when opening a new or (better still) very old volume? How to compensate for the sterility of the reading experience as one endures these machines? What about the missing sense of peace and contentment that comes from sitting in a quiet room whose walls are covered with booklined shelves?

I can only conclude that, since there was nothing clearly “wrong” with the original print medium and since the many, many advantages of books as they currently exist are patently obvious, the impetus for the e-book was pecuniary interest by publishing houses and major corporate business interests, rather than being an expression of a genuine need.”

Just food for thought. I can see both sides now. I support ebooks. I support p-books. Treebooks, Ebooks. But the debate rages on….

But there are many other comments that tell a completely different story, both pro and con, the e-reading experiencee, mostly pro. Go look!

Among the 133 comments on the Times piece, comments closed now however, someone from NC writes:

“Then there’s the minor, unreported problem that reading from a screen has been shown to be “dumber” reading. From published, peer-reviewed academic research:

“…strong results imply that there is a difference between the printed page and the screen that should not be ignored, and it makes a difference, at minimum, to memory for information… Print is consistently better for recall than screen…”

“These findings suggest that even though youth may report a greater preference for interactive digital media, traditional printed formats may provide a more effective environment for learning and persuasion.”

There’s lots more of this…”

He says. But I have no idea where this research comes from as there are no refs given. We will know more about this next year when a major national magazine does a cover story about the neuroscience of reading on paper and reading screens, and my sources inside the publishing industry tell me that the cover story has already been assigned an editor and team of staff writers is working on it right now: might me Time magazine, might be Newsweek magazine, might be the NY Times Sunday Magazine, might be the Boston Globe Sunday magazine, might be WIRED, but I am positive one of those magazines is working on this story right now. From a neuroscience view point. When the results are published, it will make a great read, online or on paper, but I don’t think it will change anything at all. The digital revolution is here to stay and it’s not over for another 500 years…

It turns out that the apps might be what people end up reading on screens in the future, after the Kindles and nooks and SONY Readers fade away. The reporters never came out and said this, but if you read between the lines, it does appear that the apps have it.

As Whisky above said too: “I am reading a book a week on my iphone and have no intention of buying a dedicated device.”

this is key here: “We’ve known for a long time that a lot more people read e-books on multi-purpose than dedicated devices—they’re cheaper, they do more, they’re easier to pocket.”

Still, for the life of me (not that I’ve got that much left now, but it’s still better than the alternative; thanks you Mr Stent!), for the life of me, I wanted to tell Motoko and Brad, the photo in the Times with their article of the Dad reading to his little girl: THAT is not “READING”. We need a new word for this kind of screen-reading, not a prioro to say it is better or worse than real reading on paper surfaces, but reading on screens is looking more and more like a horse of a completely different color. It’s still a kind of reading, and it’s still cool and useful and it works, but it does not seem like reading to me. I wonder when a new word for this new kind of reading on screens will enter common usage? Ten more years? 2015? The more I read about e-readers and apps for small screens, the more I am convinced A NEW WORD is coming. I just don’t know what that new word will be. Nobody does. I might be something simple like “e-reading”. It might also be something simple like “screening”. But it will come to use unannounced, by complete surprise. Just like listening to an audiobook is NOT reading a book, screen-reading a book on a screen is NOT reading a book. It’s a new human experience. Needs a new word to better frame it. Food for thought, if nothing else. We don’t NEED a new word. But I am pretty sure it will happen. Certainly not in my lifetime. I got one foot in the grave already. SIGH.

If Freed likes the Kindle, fine. But he needs to stop thinking he speaks for the rest of the world… he certainly does not.

Frankly my “phone” is used for phone calls less than any other task I ever use it for. Period. And hours be counted, I read on it more than I game even, and that’s saying something because I’m not a big reader but I am a big gamer.

Fact is, to me this is a portable computer, and reading text on it seems quite naturally an expected fit. To think people won’t use these devices for electronic reading is quite ignorant indeed. I guarantee people are buying iphones and other smartphones for one huge reason: READING THINGS. Maybe not books? I don’t care. People read web pages, facebook updates, tweets, news articles, email, etc. Reading is clearly the point. If they really aren’t reading eBooks then that’s because they don’t read books or at least don’t read them electronically. That’s, imho, a failing of the eBook marketers. You’re an idiot to push eBooks and not try to include every possible venue that anyone might wish to tolerate.

Frustrating! I shouldn’t let myself get so worked up over idiotic statements.