Re: BP: Paper books the choice over electronic versions article...
- From: Michael Hart <hart@[redacted]>
- Subject: Re: BP: Paper books the choice over electronic versions article...
- Date: Sat, 18 Feb 2006 09:11:05 PST
On Thu, 16 Feb 2006, Jesse Ephraim wrote:
> Let's see...
>
> You can't print more than 100 pages a week, there are no highlighting or
> note-taking functions, it is only 35% cheaper than paper (despite the
> fact that it is easy and cheap to duplicate), and it expires after a
> year. You can't sell it to anyone else after you finish the semester,
> and there is no enhanced content.
>
> I wouldn't have bought it, either. We need to see them at 50-75% off
> print cover price, since there are very few production costs and
> shipping is MUCH cheaper. They need to have highlighting and
> note-taking functions, no limit on printing, never expire, and allow
> cut-and-paste (so you can construct your own study sheets), at the very
> least.
>
> One has to wonder whether Thomson Corp. is just clueless, or intended
> this to fail - it is obvious that it wouldn't fly.
You have to remember how long it took The Oxford English Dictionary,
Britannica, etc., to learn the same lessons.
Decades!
Each one of these businesses thought they had the only thing on the
market and thus didn't need to compete.
As soon as they realize otherwise, they start the long, slow process
of changing their business plans.
According to The British Library, it won't be long, perhaps 2020,
until 90% of all new material is available digitally.
Hopefully businesses will realize this before the 90% mark,
and will start changing even sooner.