Google Offering Print Versions of Online Books 147
carluva writes "Google is teaming up with On Demand Books to offer paperback versions of its collection of over 2 million public domain books. The books will be able to be printed using ODB's Espresso Book Machine, which is already in use at several book stores and libraries and can print and bind a complete, paperback copy of a 300-page book in less than 5 minutes. Google and ODB each get $1 in royalties per book sold (Google has pledged to donate its proceeds to charities and nonprofit organizations). See also ODB's PDF press release."
No thanks. (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:No thanks. (Score:5, Funny)
Re:No thanks. (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
"Given your user name, I don't want to imagine anything about you, lest I become a gibbering heap of slag-brained insanity."
Quite right. Safer to imagine ME instead.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
According to Websters the 14th century:
* Main Entry: 2image
* Function: transitive verb
* Inflected Form(s): imaged; imaging
* Date: 14th century
1 : to call up a mental picture of : imagine
2 : to describe or portray in language especially in a vivid manner
3 a : to create a representation of; also : to form an image of b : to represent symbolically
Of course, he could have also made a simple typo
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Well spell check wouldn't have helped you there. Even grammar check would have give you a pass probably. There was no reason for the guy to call you out on it. I am pretty sure everybody reading it understood what you meant and knew it to be a typo.
On the other hand, he made himself look like an idiot for not knowing that image actually can be used as a verb (especially somebody reading a tech forum - has he never imaged a computer?).
Re:No thanks. (Score:5, Insightful)
I can download public domain books to my Palm.
In case you missed it, this is for people who prefer to read from paper over reading from a screen.
I see your Palm and raise you my iPhone. I can download books to that and have a very nifty app for doing so without having to turn pages (the phone's tilt controls the speed of the scroll) but to be honest I'm more inclined to read paper books. There's just something distracting about it being on a screen.
Re: (Score:1)
On other news, good bye trees!
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Books sequester carbon. So long as the ultimate source of the wood is a tree farm rather than a forest, not a big deal. (Of course paper from hemp, sisal, or other fibers would be even better.)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I really wish more people understood this... Trees are a renewable resource. There are more planted for those that are used for construction and for paper production. It's what allows those industries to continue. It's the clear cutting and deforestation for other purposes that's bad.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
The big problem with the iPhone (I have one) is that the screen is very small compared to a book, and I know that it will damage my eyesite if I read on it for a prolonged period, even with larger zoomed text. (then you have a too-frequent line wrapping problem) It is not pleasurable to read books articles on the iPhone. I only do it to alleviate boredom while waiting in line for something or sitting on the john.
I have 20/20 vision and I wish to keep it that way. I retain my eyesite by taking frequent b
Re: (Score:2)
[citation needed]
(Here *is* a semi-citation http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/1107/will-sitting-too-close-to-the-tv-reading-with-bad-light-etc-ruin-your-eyes [straightdope.com], but it too doesn't say that there's definitive proof.)
Now *that's* circular (Score:4, Funny)
How long before google starts a service to provide scanned copies of these new dead tree versions online and indexed?
Re:Now *that's* circular (Score:5, Insightful)
One old, fragile book just became a dozen, semi-decent copies in the hands of those who actually value that information.
Looks good from where I am sitting.
Wu-Tang Forever (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Come on. With that many mentions of ODB in the summary, I'm surprised it's not ALL references to Big Baby Jesus.
Any more resolution in the prints? (Score:5, Interesting)
I wonder if they will have any more resolution than the PDFs you can get from their online service. Some of the books have technical drawings that could use ahout 50 - 75 more DPI. Does anyone know if they were scanned in a higher native resolution than what they present online?
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Great! (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
When you can get a tablet that will take a decent stylus or your finger, and has e-Ink but does video, THAT is going to revolutionize reading. Right now you can get all but e-Ink, or all but Video. The XO is as close as it gets and it's no book reader. Shareable annotations are a must. Open formats, likewise. Many are close...
Re: (Score:2)
Right now, e-ink is VERY slow to refresh. Your video would be at 1 frame every second or two. But the savings on battery, and the super-crisp image are worth trading away video. Or just get a device with two screens.
Re: (Score:2)
I really don't see any reason we can't have e-Ink overlaid with a transparent OLED video screen. They keep talking about how cheap OLED is supposed to become, why can't we just have a trivially replaceable screen if the lifetime of OLED is a problem? Perhaps if they got really crafty, it could have the booklite printed on the back of the video screen.
Re: (Score:2)
If you don't see any reason, don't go on and detail out the reason. I'm sure that's something we'll see in the future, but you're right - we're not there yet.
Re: (Score:2)
I detailed the reason the standard objection is silly. OLED screens are alleged to be cheap to make but lifetimes are poor. So let's just replace them when they fail. We have digitizer calibration routines for a reason.
Re: (Score:2)
I get the feeling that they are only cheap to *make*. They still have to recoup their research expenses. The prices are going to be high until the patents expire or until the next big screen technology tries to compete heavily on price.
Not quite (Score:2)
When you can get a tablet that will take a decent stylus or your finger, and has e-Ink but does video, THAT is going to revolutionize reading.
No, what is going to revolutionize reading is not the device but the DRM. When you can read any electronic book on a multitude of devices without DRM and format getting in the way, that will revolutionize reading. As it stands now proprietary hardware lock-in stinks and needs to be done away with fast if e-books are to surpass the dead tree kind.
Re: (Score:2)
So... (Score:2)
>> Google is teaming up with On Demand Books to offer paperback versions of its collection of over 2 million public domain books
So... this is the long tail in action?
And can I order these for delivery from the Google website?
Already done for over two years (Score:2, Informative)
There is already a site offering POD services for both Google Books and Internet Archive for over two years and it is done at cost:
PublicDomainReprints.org [publicdomainreprints.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Done at cost ? I just looked at Treasure Island to get an idea and the cheapest estimate is $14 to $17 for softcover and up to $30 for hardcover. With the price estimated at $8 for the Google Books publicdomainreprints must be doing something wrong.
oh, the irony (Score:2, Informative)
Thanks for lousy the AP article. Let's see...for a story about a great technology used to print books, I'll submit a link to a website read by those most hostile to science/technology, those who are not to keen about books that cover anything outside their narrow ideological realm. AND it's a friggin AP release. thank you so much for the effort!
Do they realize it could be used to print books about queers and such?!?!? Oh dear god nooooo... /sarcasm
yeah, mod me -1024 flamebait. Or, try this link http://ww [wired.com]
About damn time (Score:3, Insightful)
on demand printing started picking up.
really, I shoudl be able to go to a bok store and get the book I want made on the spot. At software stores, they should burn the software on demand.
Re: (Score:2)
That makes sense for items with low demand. But I wonder if traditional distribution is more efficient for items with large demand.
I'd also question the quality control for the small on-demand printing setups... as well as the quality of on-demand burnt software (there's no way they'll last as long as pressed discs).
For software it's kind of moot, anyway... o
Books yes, software no (Score:3, Insightful)
really, I shoudl be able to go to a bok store and get the book I want made on the spot. At software stores, they should burn the software on demand.
For book stores, yes, good idea. But software stores are basically obsolete. Geekoid, I don't know what country you live in, but in most industrialized countries, this would already be obsolete for software. The difference between the two markets is one of tactile preference; most people prefer to read paper pages still. But with software, there's no such factor. Software is software, no matter who burns it for you. And there simply aren't enough dial-up only users left to justify a physical software store
Re: (Score:2)
Books are not that different. A run of 10k books is very cheap per book. On the order of dollars or less.
Re: (Score:2)
Not true. Most places will charge for transfer on the 95th percentile, and you get a bundled transfer allowance anyway. If you know you're likely to regularly go over your allowance you get an unmetered connection which is only getting cheaper as far as I can see. You can get a dual core xeon server with 2.5 TB of transfer allowance for £99/month. Assuming a 6 GB filesize, your costs are 23 pence per download. Can you pre
Re: (Score:2)
We have tried these things, it does not work with these cheap accounts. I have friends in the ISP industry as well. I am not out of the
$2 books plus shipping and handling? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Discounting the cost of printing the book. POD (print on demand) publication as compared to traditional mass press printings is still expensive due to the cost of developing and operating the machine and individually handling each book. Black and white interior paperbacks have become fairly inexpensive however. For what you're getting for ~$8, it's pretty reasonable. I'm still hoping that full color POD printing will come down in price. If I want to make a POD photo book, the cost through the vario
Re: (Score:2)
How many pages and, if you don't mind, how much of a markup are you putting on it?
Glossy is still fairly expensive, although I've gotten some nice quotes from non-POD places
Re: (Score:2)
So will all the books be $2 plus shipping?
Forgetting the price for a minute, there is a definite "no" on shipping:
Neller said heâ(TM)d love to see the day when Google Book Searchers can press a button next to a search result and find the closest local printer, but Google says thatâ(TM)s a long way off. -- wired.com [wired.com]
Another implication is that this is limited to brick-and-mortar shops where OnDemandBooks have a presence, which in turn means that to use this service you have to be physically present at one of just thirteen locations in the world [ondemandbooks.com] -- five in the US, four in Canada, two in the UK, and one each in Egypt and Australia. More locations coming soon, none of them in my country. :-(
Print this book (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Abbie Hoffman isn't going to appreciate this, me thinks.
Just need to invent a print splitter that looks like one printer on the network, but is many.
Re: (Score:2)
"....Abbie Hoffman isn't going to appreciate this, me thinks."
Probably not, since he either suicided or OD'ed in 1989.
Re: (Score:2)
Elvis says he'll be sure to pass that along when he gets back to the island where Abbie & Hendrix are hangin'
Location Location Location? (Score:2)
Yay! at any of a handful of US locations! Great!
Unfortunately the machine to print these books starts around $80k (slow black and white printer) goes to $100k (fast color printer) (does not include instillation, training, or a 10mbit internet connection with a static IP)... I'm guessing that the rate of new instillation won't be all that great for quite some time... I'll be waiting a long while (or driving more than 6 hours) to get my printed, out-of-print books...
Re:Public domain!!! (Score:5, Insightful)
There are LOTS of public domain books that are very hard to get a hold of in paper form. No publisher is going to reprint 200 year old books on obscure topics for which there is a market of 20 people. This makes those books accessible to those that need them, without the economies of scale that publishers rely on.
And pending the much-debated acquisition by Google of orphan books, they'll be a lot more obscure out-of-print books seeing life again.
Re: (Score:1)
If Lulu.com were able to strike a deal with Google to be the service provider for this, they would have. Lulu.com is EXPENSIVE for creating books. It's not clear what Google is planning on charging, but buying through Lulu.com costs a minimum of about $5 and that's without making a profit. If Google and the ODB are truly only scamming $2 off the top of sales then a comparable price compared to Lulu.com would be $7. I'd expect the price point for a Google/ODB copy to be closer to $4-5 to ensure nobody ca
Re:Public domain!!! (Score:4, Informative)
It's not clear what Google is planning on charging...
FTA, about $8 per book (including the pair of $1 fees going to ODB and Google), although a definite price hasn't been set.
$8 seems pretty fair to me...
Re: (Score:2)
Sounds fair to me too. These include rare and out-of-print works. The kind of works that automatically cost $100 extra just because the target customer is university libraries who can afford it.
Re:Public domain!!! (Score:4, Insightful)
Meanwhile google's doing the smartest move: they're donating their $1 to charity. So both a: doing a good cause and b: earning themselves a tax break.
That's what I call smart capitalism.
I do think the book deal needs to have some of the issues kinked out, but overall google is taking this in a very smart way.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Donating money is a dumb way to make money, unless the returns you get (PR, market-building, etc) outweigh the lost dollars. That doesn't mean it's not a good idea, or a good thing to do -- it's just that the tax writeoff is never more than the amount donated, so net cash impact is never positive.
Re:Public domain!!! (Score:4, Insightful)
"reputation capital" (Score:2)
it is a good way to buy reputation capital...
Reputation capital. Such a great concept. If only we could survive on reputation capital, the world would be a much better place.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm watching Microsoft to see how long they can survive _without_ reputation capital...
Re: (Score:2)
that tax break can *easily* in many instances add up to more than you would have if you received the money, if it can lower your taxes overall. Also makes for easier end of year tax planning.
Re: (Score:2)
good point, its 100% google benefit and I didn't think about that temporary investment idea like how a bank would do it. Makes sense.
Re: (Score:2)
If I were running this show, I'd offer the purchaser to buy one of three products at the time of purchase. One would be the low-grade book that costs five bucks. The next would be a higher-grade book suitable for rebinding with a decent cover for ten bucks. If you don't like it that much, you don't have to jump up to the better binding. Then you could order a nicer, more expensive version through the post, media mail, as the third level. I'd really rather have this than have shelves full of books; I see the
Re: (Score:2)
I guess the question is whether it uses the scans or the OCR'd text as the source for the reprint. If it's the scan, then that right puts it in a different league than the PG suggestion.
Re:print? (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Assuming, of course, that you use solar energy to power your ebook reader and not batteries...
Re: (Score:2)
According to actual research, you're wrong. eBook readers reduce net CO2 emissions.
http://earth2tech.com/2009/08/19/why-the-kindle-is-good-for-the-planet/ [earth2tech.com]
Re: (Score:2)
If you read the comments section of that link you see it isn't as clearcut as the article makes it seem. Even if the emissions end up on the plus side, the disposal and/or recycling of paper vs batteries probably offsets it.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
According to actual research, you're wrong. eBook readers reduce net CO2 emissions.
The solution is to scale up the number of books you're talking about. If you have enough, you can do what I do and line the walls with them, thus increasing the effective insulation of your home. :)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
A little googling revealed this Master's Thesis [umich.edu] on exactly this topic. I haven't read it in-depth yet, but it looks to strongly favor e-rea
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
It can never be an exact comparison. Think about those used textbooks you used to get in college. Those things were probably used by dozens of other students. The environmental cost of that book essentially stops immediately after it is created. The same title on eBook on the other hand has continuing cost every time it is read.
Re: (Score:2)
The same title on eBook on the other hand has continuing cost every time it is read.
Unless you're reading it on a PC (as I have spent long hours doing, don't get me wrong) the cost is very low, because most of the devices you'd actually want to read an eBook on are very low-power. I have an LED spot that I use as a late night reading light, and it only consumes 4W, way less than my netbook; at idle and dimmed screen, over 10W. (Another netbook here uses right about spot on 10W at idle.) But if you have an e-Ink device with an LED side-light then your power consumption is very low, and if y
Re: (Score:2)
Dozens? Ha, Engineering books MAY have gotten used once before they were 'out of date'.
You're better off just keeping your used books. (Advice I wish I didn't listen to). Because the books are laid out in the exact way you learned it. The few books I did keep I can open my books nearly straight to the page of the topic I'm interested in.
Re: (Score:2)
http://news.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1372965&cid=29458445 [slashdot.org]
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Agreed. Print on demand is much more efficient in regards to resource utilization. Many books printed today do not sell completely and are returned to the publisher. They then tear off the covers, rendering them un-sellable. Hopefully these books are recycled into pulp for making more books.
With POD (print on demand) publishing, you get no wastage. The downside is the higher cost to publish a POD book. However, at the $8 level, depending on the page count or usefulness of the content, that price is
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Unless things have changed in the past five years, that's not entirely accurate. What actually happened was: for mass market paperback books (the most common type), we'd strip the covers in the store, sort the covers by publishing house (to mail back once we had enough to be worth the time), then the employees would typically pick through the coverless books and take a couple for personal enjoyment, then the rest went out with the trash.
The same process was applied to magazines, except that was happening a
Re: (Score:2)
Re:print? (Score:4, Insightful)
I'm one of those people that greatly savors a paper book. I have a nice little library of books that I keep around on two bookcases, and every now and then I'll browse over the shelves and go "Oh yea, I haven't read this one in 10 years, it deserves another go round." I also have a good sized collection of oversized art and photography books. These are particularly well suited to a permanent print format.
The thing is, if a major catastrophic event breaks down modern civilization, little to none of this electronic stuff is going to survive. There will be a big black hole, made especially worse with anything that was encrypted with DRM.
Think about things from antiquity that have survived to modern day - very well stored paper books, scrolls and things made out of clay, granite, stone and marble and very occasionally steel. That's about it.
Re: (Score:2)
I think about the same thing with our newspapers, photographs, music, etc. My father has hundreds of slides of us as kids. Even if the technology of a slide machine goes away it is still possible to view those pictures. Can't say the same thing for all the pictures I've take on recent vacations - some of which I probably haven't backed up.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm going to respect the slashdot tradition of bad car analogies, here...
And many people greatly savor riding horses. That didn't stop the automobile.
Yes, with the breakdown of civilization, the horse riders will be in better shape, too. Do you ride a horse to prepare for this potential catastrophe?
At any rate, flash drives containing thousands of books each spread accross the entire earth
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Your NASA example demonstrates the opposite of what you think it does. NASA had only a single copy of some data. That's a risky proposition no matter what the technology. But other data NASA tried to recover--the moon landing footage--actually was recovered because there were multiple copies. This is the case with ebooks today.
With thousands of copies of ebooks living of flash chips, RAIDs, optical disks, and magnetic disks throughout the Earth and the nearby celestial bodies, it won't be hard to recover ol
Re: (Score:2)
As long as those thousands of copies are not DRM encrypted.
Also, all the books I own were mass produced using the printing press, something the monk scholars did not have. So there already are thousands of copies of the books I have circulating around. Bad analogy is right. Most good old books do not get thrown away or destroyed on purpose, they are passed around, bought and sold and remain in private collections and in libraries. The electronic books kept on a thumb drive have the same chance of bei
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
And your mass-produced paperbacks will be yellowed flakes in a 100-200 years or so.
I've got books less than 50 years old that are already yellow and brittle, despite the lack of sunlight and low humidity in my proverbial basement.
Re: (Score:2)
I realize that just about every argument I come up with for the superiority of printed books is pretty weak; the only four that are significant are 1) Books (good ones) can last 100's of years, 2) No power source needed, 3) Readability better (600 dpi+ vs. 160 dpi for typica
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Um, my friend...if your "library" fits on two bookcases, you are not one of those people that greatly savors a paper book. :-) Come back when vistors aren't sure if they've found your house, or a used book store.
Re: (Score:2)
I have a few friends with large book collections. I consider them hoarders. I only keep books that I really like and also feel would bring benefit to read or reference again down the road. That narrows it down quite a bit. The only legitimate excuse for a giant library is if you are an academic researcher or an author. A good writer is a good reader, as they say. I am not a writer so I have no such need to keep things on file like that.
I went through a phase in my life where I collected a bunch of c
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Your concerns are with backlit screens. eBook readers use an entirely different technology: eink. They effectively print pages on demand, erasing the print-out each time you turn the page.
Re: (Score:2)
using an electronic device is not even close to being greener than the cost of producing something from paper.
Difference: we grow the trees we use to make paper, thus the CO2 cost is only twice: negatively (loss) upon creation (growing the tree, not processing the paper), and upon recycling (positively (gain). Does this CO2 get released into the atmosphere? No. The paper manufacturers actually use a techniques to recycle the same CO2 back to power the machines used to produce the paper, net 0. KapStone pape [blogvesting.com]
Re: (Score:2)
You just said that books don't require shipping, and that all of them somehow use zero net carbon in manufacturing. You are undeniably factually incorrect.
Re: (Score:2)
The manufacturing process is indeed carbon neutral. It's in every paper manufacturing company's interest to do so as it actually diminishes their power usage. Go do some research before you simply label things "factually incorrect", as I was quite correct and happen to know well of the company that I mentioned, which was why I mentioned them.
I can add all sorts of extraneous situations to the kindle too, but then we wouldn't be truly comparing things, would we?
Shipping has something to do with it? Or how di
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
This is slashdot, not Digg. If someone here was to make a joke about ODB, it would more likely have something to do with ODBC being originally developed by Microsoft, yet ODB is publishing books with Google and that conundrum is leading to the end of civilization as we know it, or something.
Re: (Score:2)
This is slashdot, not Digg. If someone here was to make a joke about ODB, it would more likely have something to do with ODBC being originally developed by Microsoft, yet ODB is publishing books with Google and that conundrum is leading to the end of civilization as we know it, or something.
This is Slashdot, explaining how both of you managed to miss this post [slashdot.org].
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe because Google knows that you aren't likely to write a $1 check to charity each time you buy a book, and it can make a bigger impact donating in larger sums.
I'm also completely confident still getting a financial incentive of the tax write-off for donations to charity while gaining some moral high-ground on those opposed to them having so much control over books has absolutely nothing to do with it. *shifty eyes*
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Tax deductions. If they reduce the price by a $1 they receive absolutely no benefit. By taking your dollar and then donating to a charity they get a tax deduction.
Re: (Score:3)
either your tax system is retarded OR you really don't get how tax deductions work. If you donate you don't pay tax on your donation, you however don't get more money back than if you had never had that money at all.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)