
62% of 16-24s prefer books as physical products - shawndumas
http://www.voxburner.com/publications/347-62-of-16-24s-prefer-books-as-physical-products
======
rayiner
I recently switched to a job where I deal mainly in bound paper documents. I
have to say, I forgot how much more awesome paper is than computers. For
processing complex documents, there is no technology that matches a big desk
strewn with printed documents. It's like having dozens of lightweight flexible
high resolution 13" displays. Marking up a piece of paper with post it notes,
pencil marks, and highlighter is a tactile experience that even the best
styluses simply can't match. The lack of "UI" between you and the annotations
helps tremendously with processing and retention.[1]

It's a shame that so few companies are exploring the synergies of paper and
digital. I keep trying the livescribe, but the company can't write decent
software to save their lives. I want to be able to print a document from my
ipad onto dot paper, and have my markup automagically show up in the pdf copy.
It can't be hard.

[1] In school, I found the low tech approach of carrying around heavy case
books to be the most effective. My pop psychology explanation for this is that
computers don't take advantage of our spatial memory. I can go back and
visualize myself highlighting something in specific physical book, but on a
screen it all just blends together in my memory.

~~~
arh68
I'm very pro-paper. Flipping back and forth in a book (is there any _other_
way to read a textbook?) is just a much better experience than swiping madly
or spamming PgDwn. I feel trapped inside that little rectangle of a viewport,
waiting for pixels to change.

> _computers don 't take advantage of our spatial memory. I can go back and
> visualize_

I still remember the page of my linear algebra textbook that related rowspace,
nullspace, transpose. It seemed terribly confusing at the time so I was
staring more than reading. I remember the layout on the page, the red lines. I
don't recall the exact formula, so it's not magic, but the memory is so
unusually sticky I can't help but agree.

> _It 's a shame that so few companies are exploring the synergies of paper
> and digital._

If there's a (cheap) way to use a whiteboard and not resort to _A)_ writing
down the novel bits, _B)_ taking a picture, I am all ears. Putting the tech in
the board is probably too expensive.. perhaps a marker attachment would be
more realistic. Once it's digitized, OCR / vector drawings can be tried &
improved. I like the idea of the Evernote/Moleskine duo, but I just don't use
moleskines like that.

Random tidbit: in the Mad Men-styled issue of TIME (2012?), there was a very
good full-page ad on the real benefits of reading/using paper. Might have it
somewhere.

~~~
alnis
[http://www.colourtime.com/wp-
content/uploads/2013/03/Domtar-...](http://www.colourtime.com/wp-
content/uploads/2013/03/Domtar-Newsweek-Ad.jpg)

This one?

~~~
arh68
Yeah, that's the one. It was an interesting issue.

------
yangez
Here's an important piece of demographic information for the survey:

> 45% of those surveyed don’t own a device that can read ebooks – this
> includes both e-readers and smartphones.

So almost half of those polled don't actually have steady access to ebooks. I
wonder how the statistics change for a sample who have ready access to both.

~~~
jdminhbg
Either many of those 45% don't realize they don't have access to devices that
can read ebooks (may not know their iOS/Android device can run
Kindle/iBooks/whatever) or this was a really weird sample.

> Twenty-somethings are the leading smartphone users in the U.S., with a full
> 81% of Americans aged 25 to 34 using the devices. Teens aren’t far behind,
> with almost 70% of those aged 13 to 17 already using a smartphone.

via [http://www.webpronews.com/u-s-smartphone-penetration-
hits-64...](http://www.webpronews.com/u-s-smartphone-penetration-
hits-64-young-people-lead-the-way-2013-09)

~~~
rtpg
I have never used my smartphone to try and read a book, I think most people
around me would agree that it would not be a fun experience (most people
around me have older smartphones with small screes).

I do own a Kindle, though, but my point is that I think many people don't
consider their smartphone a "reading device".

~~~
lucaspiller
I used to do this a few years ago when I was in London. When you have 5
minutes to wait for the next tube there wasn't much else to do as there was no
wifi then :)

------
intopieces
> Imagine reading a book, and after a mention of a famous Italian structure,
> press on the name and have a Wikipedia description of its history appear,
> with an image.

I'm a great believer in ebooks. However, this is one feature I don't want.
It's a distraction, it pulls me away from my book and I end up on a Wikipedia
binge instead of finishing what I set out to do. It's not good for my
attention span.

~~~
swift
There are some novels (Gravity's Rainbow comes to mind) where I frequently had
to look up various events and people that were mentioned in the text. I can
see this being helpful, but I'd probably prefer an "annotated edition" where
you could view notes written specifically for the book you were reading
instead of generic Wikipedia links.

Unfortunately I haven't encountered any ebooks that handle annotations in a
pleasant way that takes advantage of the technology. The few I've seen that
had annotations just had hyperlinks to a different page in the ebook, which
makes you lose the context. With ebooks, endnotes like these seem absurd to
me; the annotation should be viewable inline on the original page.

~~~
dunham
iBooks/epub3 will do popup footnotes, if you mark up the document just right.
For more info see: [http://www.pigsgourdsandwikis.com/2012/05/creating-pop-up-
fo...](http://www.pigsgourdsandwikis.com/2012/05/creating-pop-up-footnotes-in-
epub-3-and.html)

The blog article doesn't mention it, but I've found that the footnotes have to
be in the same XHTML file as the reference for this to work in iBooks. Also,
iBooks for OSX doesn't display these popup footnotes yet.

------
maaarghk
I disagree for novels etc, but for textbooks and review papers it is really
unbelievably better to have a printed copy. The ability to flick back and
forward and quickly take notes is so, so useful. Nothing to do with the smell
or cracked spine though. Fuck cracked spines.

~~~
kcorbitt
I agree that currently this is the case. But why should it be any harder to
flip between bookmarks in an ebook than switch tabs in a browser?

~~~
ivan_ah
I find keeping track of "context" is much easier with a real book. For
example, I know that I saw an equation 3 or 4 pages ago on the top left, so I
can quickly flip back and find it, whereas on a digital form a would have to
PGUP a couple of times and be presented with a "blur" of pixels and try to
catch the same equation.

Then again, I'm not sure what UI modern eBook readers have for setting and
going to bookmarks.

------
owenjones
Minus any (totally valid) concerns about DRM, I find eBooks to be completely
superior to their dead tree versions. As a heavy reader the benefits are
enormous:

My kindle weighs less than a pound making reading large books a snap I haven't
purchased a paper book since I got the kindle and I'm always pairing down my
collection, yet still moving my paper books to a new apartment is an
incredibly heavy task A few people have pointed out that "eReaders can hold
thousands of books" is silly, until your on a vacation and you finish your
current book

I guess I lack the sentimentality of proudly displaying a full bookshelf of my
"trophies" with their creased spines. No one seems to lament the
sentimentality of the passing of the VHS...

~~~
Theodores
When I was a child I felt odd when visiting a friend's house if there were no
books on the shelves, as well as the books being missing I wondered if their
education was missing. I felt much happier in places where the walls were
lined with books. Particularly notable were the places where video cassettes
adorned the walls, I never really knew what to make of that - did they just
watch the TV screen all day?

Nowadays I don't have books on shelves at all, whatsoever, under any
circumstances. The books I have to buy because they are not available in a
digital format tend to be really good and I end up giving them away, for them
to not need to be returned. I really do not see a long term future for printed
books, there is no need for them, except in museum-libraries.

What would be cool is if you could buy books for people in a digital format on
a 'sale or return basis'. They would get the book from you, then, if they
actually read past the first few pages, your account get charged. In this way
you could give out books to people for birthdays, Christmas and so on without
them feeling obliged to read through whatever it is that you have sent them.
Equally you could be more generous with gifting as there would be a fair
likelihood that some of the books gifted would not be read.

------
coldpie
I'm just outside of this age rage, but I strongly prefer physical books to
ebooks, for one major reason: lending. I gave the Kindle app on my phone a
solid effort for about a year, but shortly afterwards I realized I wanted to
lend the book I had just finished to my friend. While I know some apps have
limited "lending" features, even ignoring their limitations they are far, far
more complicated than just taking a book off a shelf and handing it to your
friend. No worries about compatibilities or email addresses or suspended
accounts or any such nonsense.

In addition, I ride public transit to and from work every day, and having high
end electronics does make you a target for thieves. Smartphone theft is very
common, and flaunting a $50-200 ereader makes you stand out from the crowd.
And, if someone yanks my bag, I'm out a $10 book instead of a $200 tablet and
whatever personal information happens to be on it.

Then there's everything else the article mentions, including liking books with
cracked spines filling the "trophy cases" (bookshelves) in my reading room.

All this adds up, and as a result I haven't bought an ebook in 2 years, and
can't think of ever going back.

------
WD-42
"E-book readers have the capacity to carry thousands of books while still
being incredibly lightweight."

This is one argument I never understand. Why would you care if you can carry
thousands of books at once? I rarely read more than one at a time.

I don't use ebooks. Physical books are still more attractive. You can abuse
them without worrying about damaging them. And most importantly, when you have
finished reading a spectacular book, you can give it to a friend to read.

~~~
sipior
I used to think this as well, until I moved across an ocean. I'm a big fan of
packing light nowadays.

~~~
jballanc
I was going to say exactly this. After two cross-city moves and one cross-
country move, my wife and I converted our sizable (~100-150) book collection
completely over to e-books before moving overseas. The most annoying thing
about physical books is that they are so dense. Movers (especially long-
distance movers) will charge on both weight _and_ space, so even though it may
not seem like you have a lot of stuff, the added cost of moving a couple dozen
books can quickly eclipse the expense of replacing them electronically.

------
vcherubini
As a parent, it's incredibly important to read physical books.

First, it shows your children you can be entertained without an electronic
device. My oldest son is three and already an expert on the iPad and iPhone.
It worries me how much he wants to use the device, and telling him he can't
use it and the whole family is taking a timeout from electronics is important
to his growth. He can draw while I read a book, for example.

Second, buying physical books at a bookstore is a great bonding experience. I
love taking my little guys to the local Half Price Books which always has a
great dedicated kids section.

These reasons aren't only for parents, of course, but as a parent I find
having physical books present is important.

~~~
buckerine
I'm a parent, too, but to me the fear of giving children too much "screen
time" is anachronistic in this day and age. Not to say that screen time
SHOULDN'T be limited, but the reasons for that are primarily because of the
passive nature of, say, watching videos where images on screen change quickly.
There is evidence that this sort of constant passive entertainment can erode
attention spans. What we're concerned primarily about is !) instilling self
control, which in and of itself has nothing to do with electronic devices, and
2) exposing our kids to a variety of stimuli and not just whatever appears on
a screen. But again, this latter point is important irrespective of whether
we're talking about electronic devices, legos, or barbie dolls.

As to buying physical books being a great bonding experience, I agree, but I
think it's also beside the point.

~~~
rodgerd
> to me the fear of giving children too much "screen time" is anachronistic in
> this day and age.

Given that there's overwhelming evidence that screen time is completely
worthless for language aquisition in children, as one example, not worrying
about screen time demonstrates ignorance around different modes of learning
and interaction.

------
scrrr
I prefer the paper version of my books, too. However, sometimes I like to have
a digital copy, for example in order to search for content using a phrase.

When I buy a vinyl record nowadays, I often get a download-code for the
mp3-version. Book publishers should do the same. Buy a printed book, get the
digital for free.

Or just buy the digital, at a lower price.

But hey, I'm not holding my breath for that to happen soon.

~~~
mkr-hn
That's what Kindle Matchbook is: [https://www.amazon.com/gp/digital/ep-
landing-page?ie=UTF8&*V...](https://www.amazon.com/gp/digital/ep-landing-
page?ie=UTF8&*Version*=1&*entries*=0)

~~~
scrrr
"For thousands of qualifying books, your past, present, and future print-
edition purchases now allow you to buy the Kindle edition for $2.99, $1.99,
$0.99, or free."

Nice, but it should be free.

------
kijin
I was beginning to like the Kindle when Amazon decided that they wanted to
focus on producing full-fledged Android tablets instead. They still make e-ink
Kindles, but the cheaper ones have annoying ads, and the entire e-ink lineup
feels like they've been neglected for the last couple of years.

I don't like LCD/LED screens for reading books, especially at night when my
eyes are tired. Even e-ink is inferior to good ol' paper books, with their
crappy contrast, crappy resolution, and ugly fonts that make every book look
like just another blog using the same WordPress theme. E-books have a long way
to go before they can match the beauty, natural feeling, and personality of a
physical book. After all, physical books have been around for centuries. They
are a mature technology.

Do you know how much time a good publisher spends trying to find the perfect
paper, color, layout, and typography for a book? Do you ever notice the small
paragraph at the end of a book where the typographer explains his or her
choice of typeface and gives you a brief history of it? The cover is not the
only part of a book that needs a designer. I sorely miss that touch of
humanity when I read an e-book.

Another commenter says that novels are suitable for digital delivery. I
disagree. An e-book might give me the same content, but it certainly doesn't
give me the same experience, and a work of literature is really about the
experience as a whole, not just the literal content.

~~~
NoPiece
Amazon really hasn't abandoned the e-ink Kindles. They continue to release a
new one every single year, and the Paperwhites are solid improvements. It is
only $139 for the no ad version (the first Kindle launched at $399). There is
only so much visible change they can make until there is some leap in the
e-ink technology so the yearly changes may seem smaller, but they are
definitely committed and improving the kindle!

~~~
baq
i'll add that the most recent paperwhite has a really great display, much
better than anything before it.

------
programminggeek
People liking physical books has less to do with nostalgia and more to do with
the fact that physical books have much better and more refined formats in many
cases. Ebooks are actually a lot better in some formats than other formats.

Digital magazines seem to not work as well because they are different formats
and they try to either maintain their existing format and business model or
they are basically websites. I have yet to see the digital magazine format
really be awesome. Also, one could argue that a monthly curated collection of
photos and articles doesn't make much sense when they could be delivered
instantly for minimal cost.

Novels feel like they are way better in digital format. A 300-1000 page novel
as a paperback is an ok reading experience, but on a e-ink device, you get an
improved experience due to the easier storage, retrieval, lightness, etc. of
the e-ink Kindle type devices. Even on a Kindle Fire or iPad, the ebook
reading experience of reading a novel is pretty great.

The Bible as an ebook in standard epub or kindle format kind of sucks because
it is often referenced in particular book/chapter/verse and it's a big enough
book that navigation doesn't work super well on a kindle type device, but
Bible apps are fantastic because they make it easy and fast to navigate, get
multiple translations, etc. Same content, different formats/presentation.

Programming or bigger reference type books I don't think work as well in epub
or kindle format yet, because you need something more like a full size iPad to
really be close to the original format and a smaller kindle or kindle fire
sized device loses enough formatting that it doesn't work as well. If those
books were redone to be something formatted for specific device size, it could
work really well potentially, but then the cost structure changes a lot from
the traditional publishing model of do a book in one format and sell it in
lots of places. Instead, you have something closer to video games where you
might have the same game ported to various platforms specifically with varying
formats/fidelity.

Comic books feel hit or miss on tablets because again it really depends on the
format. Full size iPad is a lot closer to the original comic book size and
format than something like a Kindle Fire or iPad Mini. To get around this you
can zoom into panels and that can be decent, but that feels like a mixed bag.

I think books in various forms going digital is going to be really a work of
figuring out what the right formats are and how to translate the books into
those formats at a reasonable cost. Some formats are cheap and easy to go
digital right away and provide a great experience, some formats are going to
take a lot more work.

How much people like digital books is going to depend largely on the
experience of reading them. If publishers can create a great experience,
people will like that. If the experience sucks, people won't buy.

One reason Amazon is so successful is they have understood from the beginning
that ebooks have to be better than physical books for people to care. It took
a while, but they really made it work for novels on the kindle.

I think an approach similar to responsive design might help, but it's really
going to come down to making great products for each device/format/platform.

~~~
SapphireSun
The thing preventing me from buying an e-reader: Being able to scribble on it.
It's very helpful when reading dense technical books. That and if I'm buying a
book, I don't want to deal with battery power - so e-ink or nothing. The
display size for paper textbooks is much larger too.

~~~
ezequiel-garzon
Sony's Digital Paper looks promising... and pricey! [1]

[1] [http://news.softpedia.com/news/Sony-Digital-Paper-
Has-13-3-I...](http://news.softpedia.com/news/Sony-Digital-Paper-
Has-13-3-Inch-Touchscreen-E-Ink-Display-Will-Cost-1-000-746-398334.shtml)

~~~
SapphireSun
That's really cool! Thanks for the tip. :)

------
trustfundbaby
When I got my ipad, I went crazy buying ebooks ... first epubs until then I
realized that I really hated how those didn't match the actual book layout,
fonts, etc ... then I started buying pdf versions of the books. I liked those
a lot better because they looked exactly like the book and the page numbers
matched. But after the excitement wore off, I realized that I wasn't finishing
any of the books, I'd start reading one, get distracted, and never come back
to finish it.

So now I'm back to buying the physical book, if I need to travel and want the
books with me, the night before I leave, I just go online and purchase them,
then load them on my ipad. I do the same thing with magazines (Amazon's
newstand will usually give you access to the digital and physical copies of
the magazine).

I've come to realize that ebooks in their current form will complement but not
replace physical books, until they find a better way to imitate the ui
physical version much better than they do now

------
mdm_
>45% of those surveyed don’t own a device that can read ebooks – this includes
both e-readers and smartphones.

Completely anecdotal evidence here, but as someone who works at a university
and sees a lot of people age 16-24, noses in their
tablets/smartphones/laptops, I have serious doubts about the accuracy of this
number.

First of all, "a device that can read ebooks" could be anything from a desktop
PC to a smartphone. I find it highly unlikely that in 2013, 45% of people ages
16-24 don't own ANY devices like this. Even if that number is accurate, it's
misleading, as many teenagers perhaps don't OWN a device, but have access to a
shared PC or the like.

Second, I'm curious about how the survey was conducted. Did they just ask a
random sample of people in this group if they have a device that reads ebooks?
How many of those people own a capable device and are simply unaware of it, I
wonder?

------
lallysingh
No, no, and no.

I think this depends on how much you read. If reading books is just a past-
time, maybe those responses make sense? But if you're a heavy reader, there's
just no competition.

\- The physical feeling of a book is nice until you need to carry it around.
Or more than one, if you're reading more than one book at a time. I'll take my
nexus 7 over a mid-sized paperback (or 4) any day of the week.

\- Bookstores in my home town were filled with "Network Marketing" people who
just walked around there all day with paper planners, trying to get people
into their pyramid schemes.

\- E-readers are getting better at note-taking. And you can search your notes,
and search the text. I wish there was better math support, obviously, but I
also don't get constrained by how much margin space there is in the book.

Still, my daughter's getting a bunch of paper Dr. Suess (&etc) books for some
time :-)

~~~
colomon
It really seems to me it depends on the book and the circumstances. A nice,
reasonably sized paperback or hardcover is great for reading; it's less great
for carrying around with you or storing. On the other hand, a 1000+ page
monster is much easier to read as an e-book. (Though it might look beautiful
on your bookshelf.) And the convenience of having 5000+ pages of reading
material on my phone is completely unbeatable.

The great thing is, there's absolutely no reason not to do both. Usually at
any time I'm reading two or three physical books and two or three e-books.

------
lifeisstillgood
sorry folks - too much focus on technology. The reason why is much simpler -
if you are reading a dog-eared paperback book and a pretty girl glances over
at you, you (think you) look erudite, quiet, self-possessed and cool. Reading
a kindle you look like a nerd playing video games.

"How will your software help your users get laid"

------
geuis
I'm calling bullshit. They are selling a product, namely the survey. Here's
the Buy link if anyone is so inclined.
[http://pul.ly/b/85744](http://pul.ly/b/85744)

If you want to make claims like this, perform a proper scientific study.
Document your steps thoroughly, verify your questions aren't leading, use a
control group, then publish somewhere appropriate (preferably an open access
journal) and let other sociologists attempt to replicate your results.

I can't tell if that was done here because they want hundreds of pounds to
find out.

------
jurassic
This statistic is not very useful in isolation. What percentage of people in
this age group have tried using ebooks? They say that 45% of those surveyed
don't have an ebook-ready device... what percent of the ebook naysayers have
not even tried it?

It also seems odd to me that they treat 16-24 as one group. 24 year olds are
adults who hopefully have college degrees, jobs, perhaps have a long commute,
and nontrivial income. 16 year olds are most commonly living with parents and
unemployed. It's not hard to imagine these differences being a factor in
digital media habits.

~~~
moonka
Also, I can imagine differences between people who have had to move a few
times on their own with limited funds (most adults), and those who haven't
(most teenagers). That was what originally pushed me into ebooks, and since
then I've become very glad to have it.

------
kurtfunai
When asked if I prefer physical or digital books, I always want to say that I
prefer paper. The truth is, while I switch back and forth pretty regularly, I
find paper is pretty annoying.

I'm reading The Wheel of Time series right now, entirely on paperback, and I'm
constantly aware of how it is physically more annoying to read. I have to
constantly switch positions depending on lighting, or which side of the page I
am on.

While reading on my kindle, I get to sit still in a comfortable position and
not worry about flopping around to catch the light differently on a each side
of the book.

------
austinl
Wholly anecdotal: I find that a lot of people I've talked to who say they
prefer physical books actually don't read very often at all.

They go to the library once or twice a year, possibly order a few books online
- but that's it. Don't get me wrong, I love physical books, but ebooks are the
only way I can keep up with the amount I read - which is usually one book
every few weeks, possibly 30 books a year or more.

For anyone looking for a good ereader, I would highly recommend Readmill
([https://readmill.com/](https://readmill.com/)).

~~~
niuzeta
> but ebooks are the only way I can keep up with the amount I read - which is
> usually one book every few weeks, possibly 30 books a year or more.

This was one of the reasons I've seriously contemplated getting a ebook.

Then I found the ireward
card([http://www.chapters.indigo.ca/irewards/](http://www.chapters.indigo.ca/irewards/))...
Now I save more than a kindle's price every year.

Okay, maybe I solved a wrong problem.

------
gvm
I have a Nook but I don't really use it that much and still buy lots of
printed books. I don't know how to explain it, but every physical book has a
sort of personality (size, color, font) that goes with it and with the nook
all books are the same. I only ever buy books online if they are hard to
obtain or are digital only.

Ebooks are also very expensive, often as expensive as a phyisical copy and
until the publishers start to bundle every printed book with it's digital copy
I don't see myself spending more money on them.

------
maga
Humans have been around for tens of thousands of years and we are still
burning fossil fuels and exchanging information by the means of painting
pieces of wood. Fascinating.

~~~
goldenkey
We're also using remote-controlled stealth fighter planes to bomb dissenting
peoples out of existence. With pin-point accuracy through gps, gyroscopes, and
million dollars worth of tech. I'd say there's more pressing priorities than
using organic renewable paper to exchange information..E-ink looks like crap.
I know a bunch of people who prefer to read without a backlight, and e-ink
doesn't cut it either. I'm really surprised many HNers are saying they would
read a book on an iPad..all I can say is good luck with their vision after 20+
books read. They might need an eye doctor.

------
ivan_ah
Two observations:

1\. As much as the reading on an electronic device is "convenient," there is
also the problem that the same electronic device can be used to check your
email, read hacker news, and do other procrastination activity. This
availability of "other things to do" has a terrible effect on the attention
span of the reader.

2\. Also, I don't like phrasing the debate print VS. eBook. A book is an
informational product, distilled knowledge organized by an author for his/her
readers. The _information_ is the product, not its physical(or digital)
manifestations. As far as I'm concerned it should be print AND eBook, so that
the readers can enjoy the same material as they find more convenient. This is
the approach I follow with my math textbook
([http://minireference.com/#book_details](http://minireference.com/#book_details)):
people who purchase the printed version get the PDF for free.

Okay, three things. This article reminded me of a previous study on digital
books at the UC system of schools:
[http://www.roughtype.com/?p=2922](http://www.roughtype.com/?p=2922) TL;DR
students are not ready to switch to fully digital.

------
marknutter
As always, context is king. Sure, physical books are desirable in certain
contexts. They don't need to be recharged, they smell nice, you can proudly
display them in your bookshelf, and you feel like you actually _own something_
since you can hold it in your hands. But I'm guessing a percentage of 16-24
year olds much higher than 38% prefer ebooks when traveling long distances.

~~~
bronbron
Why? Even on longer train rides (3+ days) I've never wished that I was
carrying more than a book or two at most. A novel or two of adequate length
and complexity is more than enough, unless you plan to be reading literally
the entire time.

Sure, maybe an e-reader is superior for those 14-day treks, but the vast
majority of people don't make those kinds of trips anymore considering that
most of the world is reachable within a day at most.

~~~
icebraining
But what about when you're at the location you traveled to?

~~~
niuzeta
you pick up another book there.

------
smackfu
I wonder what percentage of that population actually reads books outside of
school. Probably a depressingly low number.

~~~
icebraining
[http://libraries.pewinternet.org/2012/04/04/part-2-the-
gener...](http://libraries.pewinternet.org/2012/04/04/part-2-the-general-
reading-habits-of-americans/)

~~~
GFischer
That's a great site, with all the stats you might want about the subject :) .
Thanks for sharing.

For book readership:

"22% who told us they had not read a book in the previous 12 months"

"72% of Americans age 16 and older read at least one book in the past year in
print; 16% read at least one e-book; 11% listened to at least one audiobook."

That's a surprisingly high number for audiobooks, didn't know it was that big
a market.

"Among those who had read a book in the past 12 months:

8% said they had read 1 book

17% had read 2-3 books

16% had read 4-5 books

19% had read 6-10 books

18% had read 11-20 books

22% had read more than 20 books"

Actually, I think that study is more interesting that the submitted article :)
(less catchy headline and less processed data)

"In June 2010, 95% of the book readers “yesterday” were reading print books
and 4% were reading e-books.

By December 2011 in our survey, 84% of the “yesterday” readers were reading
print books and 15% were reading e-books.

The shift toward e-book reading on a typical day is being driven by those who
are college educated, those living in higher-income households, and those ages
30-49.

Those groups disproportionately report they were reading e-books yesterday."

------
antocv
I prefer artificially unrestricted texts, the best so far is in epub format
and to read it on a Kobo Aura or Aura HD reader.

The physical books I still want to own just as decoration for living space and
a conversation starter. But to carry around a fat book - no thanks, thats what
e-ink readers are for.

The ebook market is not mature yet, most ereaders are too small and offer
shitty support for various formats and are too restricted.

The interface on the ereaders can also be improved a lot, for example the Aura
HD is showing the book cover when it is sleeping - there should be a setting
to let the last read page be shown instead. Flipping pages offers no animation
- some people would like that. Fast flipping through a book is also not
supported, it is still faster to flip through a physical book than one on
ereader. But these are all technical issues that can be solved.

------
kadabra9
Does anyone have any statistics or articles about the price differential
between ebooks and print? I use my kindle for things like biographies and
novels, and exclusively print for things like technical books, mostly due to
the poor experience I've had with technical books on e-readers.

More and more though, I've been buying print books simply because, in my own
experience, the last couple of books I've purchased have BARELY been cheaper
in ebook format than in print. I don't have any data to support me, but I
can't help but feel like over the last few years, the gap between prices of
ebooks and print books has closed, and with it, one of the big selling points
(for me at least) for ebooks.

I'm curious to see if this is actually the case, or just my own personal
experience.

------
jl6
Ebooks may just be like digital cameras were in the 1990s: full of promises,
but some way off a compelling replacement for film cameras.

How long before iPads come with hundreds of 600dpi screens, each double sided,
flexible, 0.1mm thick, and stacked in a hinged pile to form a truly digital
book?

~~~
jasomill
That'd be an incredibly wasteful and extravagant way to simulate the paper
book UI, especially given that paper books have wildly different form factors.
Do you really want to lug around a device the size of _The Structure of
Evolutionary Theory_ † to read a comic book?

† 1464 pages, weighs more than 11 Kindle Paperwhites in hardcover

------
trekky1700
I prefer paper to computers in most cases. I prefer reading fiction on an
ereader because it's easier to pickup where I left off and switch between
devices. Anything I'd read cover to cover I prefer ebooks for. Reference
materials in the form of books I much prefer paper because I find it easier to
reference back, but I buy them almost exclusively in ebook format because it's
much cheaper. Notes I prefer paper, just because of the much more precise
doodling/handwriting ability. If I could use a tablet with the same precision
and feeling that I could get from paper, I'd switch notes too. But
technologies not there yet.

------
clarry
I'd probably prefer ebooks if I could find a good e-reader. I don't want to
stare at a backlight, so it'd have to be e-ink. However, the e-ink readers
I've found are too small and lacking in resolution.

------
owenfi
The Guardian article includes a few more of the raw numbers.[1]

I particularly like 'The top-rated reasons for preferring physical to digital
products were: ... "I am not restricted to a particular device" (20%)'. A good
concept to be aware of, but physical books are by definition restricted to a
single device.

[1] [http://www.theguardian.com/books/2013/nov/25/young-adult-
rea...](http://www.theguardian.com/books/2013/nov/25/young-adult-readers-
prefer-printed-ebooks)

------
jcarpio
From [http://www.voxburner.com/publications/323-buying-digital-
con...](http://www.voxburner.com/publications/323-buying-digital-content)

wrt the survey details in the OP

>Voxburner sourced 1,420 respondents and surveyed them between 25 September
and 18 October 2013. Follow-up interviews were conducted and the report
includes comment from marketing professionals.

>It is available for download only at £495.

------
erbo
Let's also keep one advantage of physical books over e-books in mind:

If I take a book into the bathtub, and drop it, the book may very well be
salvageable. At worst, I'm out the price of the book.

If I take an e-book into the bathtub, and drop it, I've likely just hosed a
very expensive e-reader or tablet.

Has anyone designed an e-reader which properly handles the "reading in the
bathtub" use case?

~~~
smileysteve
There are multiple waterproof cases for all sorts of phones (including the
note) to I have a friend that takes his iPhone in the hot tub to play music.

All of these devices also have e-reader apps.

I'll just add to this that Amazon got me to buy a kindle @ a $9 price point.

------
neovive
I think another key factor is genre. Maintaining a large collection of
technical books takes up a lot of space and many of the books become outdated
quickly. Ebooks have the advantage of being "upgraded" at a lower price.

However, books with many illustrations, photos, or even novels, do seem to
feel better in their physical form.

------
jarjoura
I prefer reading novels in ebook format, but most other forms I prefer having
the physical dead-tree version.

One thing I think holds some ebook formats back is the insistence on
replicating the physical experience. I do not need page turn animations or
things broken up into slices.

Though, once some startup figures it out, it will seem obvious at the time.

------
dominotw
16-24 is college aged age group and most college textbooks are hard to format
for ebooks. So nothing surprising here.

------
lucian1900
I truly loathe physical books and have done so since before ebooks were
practical. Not having spines is amazing, I can read with my hands relaxed, in
any position I wish at any time. Not having to carry a book is great,
especially since I can read on my phone for short periods too.

------
nhebb
This age group includes college students, but do we know whether the surveys
filtered out textbooks when polling physical vs. ebook preferences? I didn't
see that mentioned in the article, and it would have a significant impact on
the results.

------
JulianMorrison
Print books basically have two overwhelming disadvantages for me. (1) They
mass a LOT. (2) Due to #1, they AREN'T HERE. My tablet is here, my phone is
here. My ebooks are here. My squashed tree books are at home.

------
deletes
A piece of processed wood should not be preferred over a notebook sized device
capable of storing over 3000 books and capable of wireless connection
basically removing the size limit.

Nostalgia is great, but so is our environment.

~~~
rjohnk
Wood is a renewable resource. Environmentalists also tell me it traps carbon.
The ereader still has to be made with parts from the environment.

Plus, when the dystopian future arrives, I'll have plenty of kindling with my
growing collection of books. Plus entertainment after all the ereaders grow
dark.

------
001sky
Honestly, they are more 'information efficient'. Digital is more space &
volume efficient. Both have their place, IMHO.

------
_volkan_
One of the things I like about physical books, when you are done, you can just
give it away to a friend or a local library.

------
skriticos2
Before I got my Kindle Paperwhite, I had the same attitude. It changed
dramatically.

------
silveira
In my case, physical games/books because DRM.

~~~
grammaton
It literally takes me about five seconds to strip the DRM off of an epub, and
then I can have backup copies of my own library. No losing books because a
pipe bursts or a trunk gets lost during a move.

------
mikecane
Meanwhile, 99% of those in the survey buy/download MP3s instead of buying CDs.
Next!

------
davidf18
With many books and journal articles I have both the paper and the Kindle/pdf
version. The hard copy is useful for initial comprehension of the material
with underlining and notation and the electronic copy for lightweight, quick
reference of that material once I basically understand it.

------
ommunist
Which means 38% prefer them electronically. And taking into account the
historical trend, this is good for e-books business! Do you remember these
days when Macs were only 9% of the US laptop market? And look at them now.
Customers love convenience.

------
beachstartup
is it possible to buy a physical title on amazon, and have access to the
kindle version until the physical copy arrives?

if not, why not?

~~~
rjohnk
That's the ecclesiastical argument, my friend.

------
KaoruAoiShiho
Coincidentally 62% don't have tablets.

------
BrownBuffalo
Hipsters wrote this article.

