Tiny eBook Reader for the Pocket PC won’t win friends at Microsoft, Adobe and the like. If you’re as big on public-domain books as I am, you’ll vastly prefer TinyReader—given the wonders it can perform on plain vanilla text. No fuss, no time-wasting conversions. What’s more, you can tweak the view far better than you can with Microsoft Reader and certainly better than you can with the horridly inflexible mess from Corporation A. Whether for e-books or most other apps, Adobe still sucks.

By contrast, TinyReader is for humans, not Masters of the E-Book World. Do you want to go far beyond just changing the size of the type? Hoping to fiddle with the precise space between the lines? Or between paragraphs? The distance from the text to the edges of the page? Turn justification on or off? Choose boldface? TinyReader’s feature set in this regard is stellar, with one major exception. On my Dell Axim, at least, I can choose only between Tahoma and Courier fonts. But Golden Crater Software, the little Ontario firm that came up with the $12 bargain, is open to the possibility of including special fonts if it finds them at the right price. Meanwhile I’m enjoying the ability to choose between light and dark backgrounds, one way to vary the view as I wend my way through a long book. Not to mention the possibilities for reading in bed without disturbing a sleeping spouse.

Just when will the big software houses and book publishers be as clueful as Golden Crater? User-customized text display is what counts. No, it won’t hurt for publishers to be able supply default views; but the reader, the human in this case, not the software, should prevail in the end. TinyReader reflects such a philosophy.

Also, despite the low price, TinyReader works with ClearType, on machines equipped with it, so the type will be clear and you can squeeze in more on your screen.

Plus, as noted, the software eagerly laps up text in the Gutenberg format. Just tap on Info > About this eBook and check Book contains line breaks and Repaginate. Then tap on OK. That’s it. No need to take the ASCII and make it digestible for your reading software beforehand. And remember, you can manipulate plain text so well—line spacing and so on—that you’ll actually fare better than you would with Microsoft Reader and the rest.

Blessedly, HTML capabilities for TinyReader will be on the way. So if you’re keen on italics and the rest, you’ll be in luck. For recreational reading, at least, I myself care far more about a highly customized display than I do about all the trimmings.

Oh, and even now TinyReader can work with ZIP-format files, greatly expanding the number of public-domain titles that you can squeeze on your Pocket PC. What’s more, the reader lives up to its name and isn’t bloated; and, as described by Golden Crater, “no more than 64K is kept in memory at any given time.”

This isn’t to say that TinyReader is perfect. Besides the font limitations, you’ll need to deal with a pokey response if you toggle in the horizontal scroll bar that shows your position in the book. Golden Crater’s Jim Koornneef, tells me he’s working on that issue. I’ve also suggested that he might want an auto scroll feature and the ability to search backwards, not just forwards, for words.

I’d welcome a slicker interface, too, and more detailed documentation. Relax, however. If you care enough about e-books to be reading this blog, you’ll have no trouble.

Even with TinyReader’s shortcomings, I’m an unabashed fan. And well I should be—given Koornneef’s outstanding responsiveness to my suggestions for user control in areas such as line and paragraph spacing. He is Microsoft NOT.

At the same time, Koornneef is a realist. I suspect that like me, he sees Microsoft’s PDA efforts as more durable than Palm’s. In fact, before TinyReader for the Pocket PC, he created a different version for Microsoft’s Smartphone format. A Linux incarnation someday? I hope so. Especially if Linux could offer ClearType-style capabilities. If freeware programmers can follow in Koornneef’s footsteps, by the way, so much the better. Hopefully not too soon, though—given the support he deserves for his hard work.

But why am I so gung ho on an ASCII reader after having pressed the Open eBook Forum so hard for a standardized OeBF consumer format in the Noring vein? Yes, Jon Noring’s approach would let publishers display the same goodies as in paper books—while also allowing readers to come up with their own favorite views instead. I’m just as enthusiastic as ever about it. But even if the OeBF wakes up and acts immediately, the Noring solution will be many months off. Some important people on Jon’s eBook Community List are beginning to acknowledge the obvious. The short-term commercial interests of certain OeBF members—as opposed simply to copy-protection issues--are a major reason why the organization refuses to do a consumer standard. Don’t expect miracles, readers. Just keep up the fight!

Meanwhile, it’s great to know that plain vanilla ASCII is still around and that TinyReader can make it look better—for your eyes--than the proprietary formats of Microsoft and Adobe.

Buying information

--Product description. Keep in mind that I haven't mentioned all features, including a basic one, bookmarking.

--Try the Pocket PC version of Tiny eBook Reader

--Buy it

--Try the SmartPhone version

--Buy it

Note: TeleRead is an advocacy site--for e-books and well-stocked national digital libraries--rather than a software reviewing outlet. TinyReader caught my eye because of TeleRead’s eagerness to promote public-domain books and standardized e-book formats at the consumer level.

Also of interest: The uBook reader, which lets you change font colors and sizes and a number of other variables but not with the precision that TinyReader offers (at least in areas I care about). What's more, at least on my system, the images don't seem to be quite as sharp as with TinyReader even though I've experimented with various options. I'll keep both programs on my Axim, however. uBook can handle HTML, TXT, RTF, PDB and insecure PRC files and even let you choose between portrait and landscape display. Digests Gutenberg text just fine. uBook is free, although the site does let you make PayPal donations--well-deserved. At some point I may also do a full review of uBook (which I won't go ahead with for the moment because of time constraints).
posted by David Rothman at 4:22 AM | permanent link

Optics.org has a pretty good description of E Ink's latest prototype. Also see the display company's own material, especially a picture of the technology in action.
posted by David Rothman at 2:55 AM | permanent link

Just spotted...a helpful piece from Reuters on free books...

Project Gutenberg, which started it all and has supplied the digital copies used on many other sites, could have gotten more attention, but overall the piece should do more good than harm.

Suggestion: When the press writes about free books on the Internet, perhaps it can mention the copyright-term-extension legislation that deprived the Net of such classics as The Great Gatsby (or at least deprived U.S. users). The Reuters piece refers to Eldritch Press without noting its key role in the recent legal efforts to undo the damage. Via Eldritch, by the way, you can enjoy an HTML edition of The Rise of David Levinsky--discussed recently in this blog.

Coming soon: A quick write-up of software that I found especially helpful for reading ASCII editions of free books.
posted by David Rothman at 1:50 AM | permanent link

The Open eBook Forum is collecting stats from publishers, including nonmembers. Links:

--Press release announcing program

--Registration and methodology for statistics program

As much as TeleRead disagrees with the OeBF's failure to come up with consumer-level format standards, we very much support the existence of the organization and hope that publishers will cooperate on matters such as the above.

With accurate stats, the group can more effectively cope with misunderstandings in the press about the extent of e-book growth.
posted by David Rothman at 2:58 PM | permanent link

Jon Noring's appeal for a universal consumer-level format for e-books is getting around. Why, it's even being translated into Italian. No surprise. This undoubtedly is the most important e-book-related article that you'll read in '03.

Alas, some in the e-book biz still don't get it. Gasp, there's talk that standards could threaten business models.

Jon and I have another take on this. Lack of standards would be a lot more lethal to the prosperity of the e-book industry. Worry less about the welfare of companies dependent on the proprietary approach and more about the business as a whole.

And remember the best kind of competition in e-books. Content-related. Proprietary standards enforced by big boys such as Microsoft and Adobe will harm publishers of all sizes. Let the real fight be over the most gripping plots and fascinating characters, or the most essential insights, as opposed to: "Who's done the best business deal?"

Especially I'd encourage people outside the States to speak up. And don't just talk about "VHS-vs.-Beta times ten." Do something. Tell others about the Noring article and have it translated into still more languages. I've suggested to Glenn Sanders, publisher of eBookWeb, where Jon's article came out, that the site link to translations as they appear. Net activities could be just the start. I myself would rather not see government regulate e-book formats, but in the States and elsewhere, this could be a useful way to force the OeBF to do what it promised five years ago. So tell your politicians about Jon's piece. Here's in the States, of course, the big angle is proprietary formats vs. accessibility for the disabled.

Pesky reminder: Italy is the home of Mario Monti, the European Union's most fearsome trust buster, who demolished GE's plans for expansion. I wonder if he or colleagues just might find some regulatory angles. Again I'd much rather see the industry clean up this mess on its own. But pressure won't hurt. Wouldn't it be interesting if the EU or a similar body presented the OeBF--the dominant standards organization within e-bookdom--with a deadline?


posted by David Rothman at 9:46 AM | permanent link

It's breakfast time here in the Washington suburbs, and my wife and I have once again pondered a cosmic question. "Do you think Safeway will ever order enough black cherry yogurt?" I ask.

"Always runs out first when yogurt's on sale," Carly acknowledges.

But when we ask the grocery chain, we always get the same answer. "We're not going to order any more." No explanation.

Might communications giants be a little like Safeway? Even if your tastes are no more exotic than cherry yogurt, you often lose out. And a proposal to relax Federal Communications Commission rules would just aggravate matters in rather obnoxious ways. Speak up before the commission votes June 2.

I, of all people, know the risks from unchecked media monopolies. You think you've seen many TeleRead articles in the popular press? Hardly a coincidence. TeleRead challenges the perverted copyright system, and while the plan actually might be very good for media of all sizes, the giants would rather not disturb the system that they see as so good for them. No cherry yogurt. And that, Virginia, is a great example of why we have laws restricting the influence of the big media. Oh, it isn't as if they mind some forms of government intervention. Observe the millions that Disney, AOL Time Warner and friends have lavished on campaign contributions to inflict DMCA tyranny on the rest of us.

What's really amusing is when big media corporations run commentaries with such headlines such as Free the Media, which is exactly what Scripps Howard did--in an article that I read on a radio station site run by Clear Channel Communications, the giant that is one of the biggest advocates of "consolidation." May I suggest that the laissez-faire people drop by the TeleRead site and read excerpts from The Brass Check, in which Upton Sinclair vividly documents the risks? (The full book will be online this summer.) Meanwhile, within the private sector, the small fry suffer--not just individual citizens but also small local businesses that are looking for affordable advertising outlets.

Does this mean that every item from the big media is suspect? Of course not. Just the same, media concentrate increases the possibility of Jayson Blairish situations where corporate arrogance prevails over journalistic ethics (oxymoron alert).

Fed up with the proposed changes? Strike back by researching the issues and, yes, contacting your local Congress member. You can also add your name to the petition of MoveOn.org.

Yes, I know. Big media will say, "See, this massive campaign proves that we can be successfully bypassed, that we really don't count that much." Bunk. Robert McCheney, a University of Illinois professor, correctly notes the discrepancy between the general inflation rate and rise of the values of radio stations despite the growth of the Internet.

Perhaps someday, when we have small radio stations available over IP-based wireless, things could be different. But not now. You can drive home and hear the usual media suspects; you cannot tune in the latest from TeleRead.org or the thousands of other little sites.

posted by David Rothman at 6:09 AM | permanent link

I've been revisiting Bleak House via my PDA and a text from Project Gutenberg. Copyright zealots remind me of Dickens' legal leeches. Think about it. The longer the copyright term, the more possibilities for lawyering. And guess what is among the more common occupations of members of Congress? No, it isn't as if copyright law is a major legal specialty of the lawyer-members on Capitol the Hill. But my theory is that lawyers tend to watch out for fellow lawyers or at least care less about the damage they do to society by fighting for lengthened copyright terms and other mischief, such as the attack on the doctrine of first sale. Campaign donations bring out natural tendencies.

Here's an interesting project for a class in law or economics. Why not draw a graph with two lines representing the inflation-adjusted incomes of typical writers and the amount of money frittered away on copyright-related legalities, including the lobbying that aggravated the mess? I suspect we might well see a strong inverse relationship, making a mockery of Hollywood's claim that it's watching out for creators.

Meanwhile Shift Magazine has run an interesting piece on the Privatization of Culture, which, in some ways, you might actually rename the Lawyering of Culture--since this privatization is not without its opportunities for leeches.

Thought: Might be fun to see how many Congress members who rant against overpaid trial lawyers (a little déclassé because they often take on corporate fatcats) are doing the same against overpaid entertainment industry lawyers and the costs that they'll create for the rest of us in the new legal environment. To think that Hilary Rosen--in other words, RIAA lawyers--is helping to create the New Order of IP Law for Iraq and presumably other countries we occupy in the future. Oh, well, I suppose it'll help us here in the States by making the rest of the world that much less competitive.
posted by David Rothman at 6:43 AM | permanent link

Hey, it's wicked, wicked, wicked to make a backup copy of your DVD, 'cause the DMCA sez so. That's the word from Chairman Jack of the Motion Picture Association of America.

PC World asked: "Why can't people who legally purchase DVDs make one backup copy? How come the same fair use rights that let you make a backup copy of other media do not extend to DVDs?"

"That question," said Jack Valenti, "has nothing to do with fair use because a DVD is encrypted and the Digital Millennium Copyright Act says to circumvent an encryption violates that law."

Oh, the glories of vanity laws--bought with millions in campaign donations.

Thanks for the laugh, Jack.

(PC World, via Jenny, the Shifted Librarian.)
posted by David Rothman at 9:22 AM | permanent link

Some researchers worry that IM-crazed kids will abandon standard English usage for language in the LOL vein, according to today's New York Times.

The TeleRead take: LOL ;-). The cure? Don't ban Instant Messaging. Do expose children to standard English, and what better way than a well-stocked national digital library system of the TeleRead variety?
posted by David Rothman at 8:57 AM | permanent link

"Bookish researchers at Hewlett-Packard Labs in Bristol, England, are working on an experimental e-book that allows users to flick through pages just as they would reading real books, magazines, and newspapers. 'We want to convince users that they are real books,' said Anthony Sowden, a researcher at HP Labs Bristol. 'The devices, dubbed Digital Media Viewers, were previewed to a group of European press this week as an example of the kind of digital-media research taking place at the company's U.K. research lab.'" - IDG News Service, May 22.

The TeleRead take: The viewers are said to be "lightweight and roughly the size of an opened book, with displays that feature about the same resolution as the screen of an average laptop computer. Much of the innovation lies in the software, however, which allows the user to turn pages using built-in touch pads." The biggest obstacles for the prototypes--they aren't actual products--happen to be battery power and screen res. But guess what. It isn't as if other vendors are standing still in the problem areas. Perhaps through licensing, HP's gizmo will hit the market sooner than skeptics might think.

One other comment. I'm delighted to see anything that promotes e-book use, but the above innovation doesn't excite me that much if it's limited to page-turning alone. The jog lever on my Dell Axim does just fine, thanks. Perhaps, however, the article fails to mention some nifty navigation schemes that would make a difference.
posted by David Rothman at 7:42 AM | permanent link

By promoting the right hardware--appropriate for e-forms for commerce and government, not just for reading books and other apps--TeleRead would help justify the costs of a well-stocked national digital library system.

And that leads to a few thoughts on Net security, which right now, in a net.commerce context, is too often an oxymoron. The issue should be addressed in a way friendly to consumers rather than simply megacorporations. We shouldn't have to go the Faustian route and give up privacy in return for "secure computing" and access to DMCA-protected material.

Meanwhile, first-hand today, I witnessed an example of the need for better security. Turns out that a hacker-spammer isn't just sending out "verification" email that asks for a credit card numbers and looks like something from a large Net corporation. Why, you'll even end up on an accompanying Web page with the domain name of the corporation. I suspect that a good two-thirds of the recipients may be falling for this slick con. Yes, I've alerted the appropriate anti-fraud team.

The large corporation mentioned above isn't Microsoft, by the way. I assume the Softies already know of a countfeit "Support" letter--with a virus-ridden attachment--that I've received several times.
posted by David Rothman at 2:18 PM | permanent link

"...the continuing shift in customer preference to standards-based technology--and away from expensive proprietary systems--is further reducing the total cost of computing." - Michael Dell, as quoted in the May 26 BusinessWeek.

The TeleRead take: No, e-books aren't the same as corporate servers and the like. But the same concepts apply. The law in computing is "cheapest and best." If the Open eBook Forum doesn't come around, different organizations might end up setting consumer-level standards. Or, worse, the e-book business could never reach its full potential.

Speaking of Dell, what if a large vendor, with an interest in moving general-purpose hand-helds by the millions, played a major role in the OeBF to balance out the influence of the usual suspects?

That might not be such a bad way to get the group to focus more on long-term growth of the industry and less on the current products of individual software vendors. Coming out ahead would be not only readers and publishers, but software houses able to adapt.
posted by David Rothman at 5:53 PM | permanent link

Tablet PCs will make up just one to two percent of PC sales this year and next, according to tech research firm In-Stat/MDR, as quoted in USA Today. Surprise of surprise, tighter corporate budgets are to blame. Time for more attention to the consumer side? A well-integrated national digital library system, needless to say, with local libraries lending out units for borrowers to try, could increase the demand for the technology. Strip away some of the frills from the Tabet PC and prices could drop dramatically.

Keep in mind a related TeleRead angle. Tablet PCs would be great for e-forms to help drive down the costs of government and business and help cost-justify a well-stocked national digital library in the TeleRead vein. No Microsoft bribes involved here. Years and years before the Tablet PC, TeleRead was advocating a similar multipurpose machine--albeit not with the obnoxious copy-protection schemes that Microsoft wants to inflict on the innocent populace.
posted by David Rothman at 4:28 AM | permanent link

"They have movie stars. We have professors and guys in pony tails." - Lawrence Lessig on the challenges of educating the public about fair use.

The TeleRead take--on Hollywood's weapons: And don't forget campaign contributions, too.
posted by David Rothman at 4:07 AM | permanent link

Keep an eye on Tiny eBook Reader from Golden Crater Software. I haven't tried it, but the registered version of the program is said to "allow reading of TXT files stored in ZIP format," not just plain text. Plus, Golden Crater says you can easily return to where you where in a book. Just the ticket for enjoying free books from Project Gutenberg. And at $12, we're not talking about a major investment here. The software is available for Smartphone devices and soon will be for the Pocket PC.
posted by David Rothman at 3:25 AM | permanent link

Random House will use Fictionwise to distribute three books in unencrypted form, according to Publishers Weekly. That's an event. Of course, the deal is a one-timer, and Random will keep relying on encryption for other books. Just the same, PW notes that Random is "the first large publisher to announce a promotion involving unencrypted ebooks."

Meanwhile, in character, Scott Pendergast at Fictionwise has made some pretty clueful comments to PW: "Unencrypted outsells encrypted, even though you could argue the encrypted gets 100 times the publicity. We'd like to see a lot of publishers sell authors in [unencrypted] formats. But these are baby steps."

According to Pendergast, piracy of unprotected titles has been minimal. Who knows? Perhaps with big, big money involved, the problem would grow. But then again, so might sales. PW quotes Pendergast: "There's a very large percentage of buyers who will not buy encrypted titles, mostly because of ease-of-use or they're worried they are buying a title that will not be supported in a few years." Exactly! I assume sooner or later I'll succumb, but so far I have yet to buy my first encrypted title. The big boys in this respect have done a great job of "protecting" themselves against my money.

Many readers would feel the same. A good compromise, of course, would be what we TeleReaders have been advocating for years--a well-stocked national digital library system whose business model would be as Carnegie-like as possible. That would be the logical way to reduce piracy and assure proper compensation for publishers and writers, who could be paid through a national digital library fund. At the same time, yes, there could be not-so-intrusive encryption built around a public domain model of the kind that Jon Norning has been suggesting.

Meanwhile I hope that the Open eBook Forum, which has yet to adopt Noring's valuable suggestion to make a standard consumer format possible, will keep a close eye on the Random House/Fictionwise partnership. Let's end this fixation on proprietary encryption and do away with the VHS-vs.-Beta-times-ten debacle,

The issue isn't, "Hey, let's take the profit out of publishing." Just the opposite. It's, "Let's make our wares and business model a lot friendlier to consumers." A standard e-book format based on nonproprietary encryption would not be the same as no encryption, but, like the latter, it could go a long way toward "friendlier." You'd at least know that your e-book format wouldn't be obsolete, especially if a library model existed to preserve content, reading software and conversion programs.

Willl the OeBF catch on, return to its roots and do the long-promised standard for a consumer-level format? The group's annual meeting on May 29 should be interesting. Among the speakers, besides President Steve Potach and Executive Director Nick Bogaty, are both Jon Noring (on formats) and Amanda Kimmel of Random House (on rights and rules), as well as Bob Mathews of Adobe (on "Rights & Rules Spec: A Users Perspective"). Also talking will be Evan Cox, a partner at Covington & Burling (on the DMCA law against electronic piracy).

One hopes that the publishing and legal types will appreciate the practicality of the Noring approach, and that even the software houses will watch out for the long-term interests of e-bookdom, as opposed to just the here and now. Keep in mind that any practical OeBF consumer format would most likely be at least a year off, meaning that the group's members will go through yet another Christmas season without living up to the 1998 ballyhoo promising such a standard.
posted by David Rothman at 2:09 AM | permanent link

Faithful readers will recall the plans of the e-book biz in South Korea to do a multi-format reader. A common e-book format, of course, would be the most elegant solution. But then again, what if a neighbor on the cusp of becoming a nuclear power ends up writing some literary masterpieces published in .pdf? Tricky, eh? And not entirely hypothetical. North Korean President Kim Il Sung has done just that, and so have colleagues. (Spotted via Infomaniac.)
posted by David Rothman at 5:38 AM | permanent link

Gunmakers would no longer be legally responsible for the death and mayhem that their products caused. So reads a new bill out of DC. Now Dan Gilmore asks a pesky question. Mightn't the same logic apply to technology that was used at times to violate copyright?

Indeed! Why not insulate file-sharing services from the wrath of the RIAA and the like? A little consistency, no?

Furthermore, here's my own technological solution. Congress should change the bill to include all functions of handguns, including any wi-fi capabilities that the Sat Night Special gang would care to build in. Then Napster-style services could spring up with music encrypted so it could be heard only on weapon-enabled machines. Presto! An end to the file-sharing debate.

The same logic, of course, could apply to e-book-reading machines. In keeping with the industry's love of proprietary formats, these deadly hybrids could shoot only bullets designed by the respective makers of the machines.

(Humor alert.)
posted by David Rothman at 4:35 AM | permanent link

"Confronted by more competition for consumers' time and money than ever before, publishers need to lower prices and spend more money on marketing, attendees at Publishers Weekly's first annual Publishers Summit were advised by a range of speakers." - Publishers Weekly.

The TeleRead take: Exactly! And electronic books could play an important role in driving down costs--and also in addressing another concern mentioned in PW: older readers, who need large print. The technology is actually at the point now where my elderly mother can read blown-up letters rather easily. But the e-book industry has yet to come up with tech-simplifying standards and an uncomplicated distribution system for people like her.

Memo to the Open eBook Forum: Time to end your proscrastination and get on with the standards work at the consumer level to help pave the way for a well-stocked national digital library. Standardization and the synergies from the library model would boost revenue. With all the entertainment alternatives, let's make e-books easier to use for readers of all ages.

The technology keeps getting better and better. Now for the e-book biz to catch up!
posted by David Rothman at 4:43 AM | permanent link

"There’s a technology consortium in Cairo that had made digital images of all of the artifacts in the collection of the Egyptian Museum. They called up WIPO and said, 'Look, we might want to put these out on the Web. What should we do about it?' And the response was: call the IIPI. And we talked to them and told them, 'No, don’t do that just quite yet.' We sent a copyright lawyer to help them understand that when you create a visual image of something, even though it might be in the public domain, that you can copyright it and that you should license these things." - Bruce Lehman, IP czar and Patent Office head under Bill Clinton, as quoted in Technology Review.

The TeleRead take: This is progress? Got to hand it to Bruce Lehman. He's set up the International Intellectual Property Institute (IIPI) to help inflict some of our more obnoxious copyright and patent outrages on countries we've thuggishly bullied with trade threats. Yes, the photographers should be paid. But will the consortium go on to burden schools and libraries with oppressive, copyright-related paperwork in the above situation? If the Egyptians want licenses, they'd be far, far better off dealing with a group such as Creative Commons--which actually would be a great way to guarantee public access to the fullest. Surprise of surprise, funding for the IIPI comes from such disinterested sources as Ford, IBM, Microsoft, Merck and AOL Time Warner, all of which will want the IIPI to err on the side of strict copyright interpretation. So what's next? Will Lehman help Hilary Rosen write copyright law for Iraq?

Update: Linking back to us, Creative Commons Chairman Larry Lessig describes Bruce Lehman as a "debate no-show (he’s scheduled and not shown at at least two debates that I know of--one with Jamie Boyle, and one with me)." That would be in character. When I was researching my book Networld, Lehman refused to comment on rather detailed evidence that the Clinton Administration had stacked the decks in favor of the big boys--especially campaign donors like Lehman's buddies--in coming up with copyright policy for the Net. Lehman was a copyright lobbyist before his Clinton appointment and never took a break during his services for the administration.
posted by David Rothman at 3:12 AM | permanent link

My white-haired mother held up the silvery object and looked at the words on the screen, from a biography of Thomas Edison.

"Can you really read a book with this?" she asked.

"Here’s the lever you press down to move on to the next page," I said, pointing it out on my Dell Axim.

"What can you read?"

"All kinds of things," I said. "I use it for old books. My Antonia. Hard Times. Stuff I’d always be late and pay fines on if they were library books.” That’s my weakness, juggling too many books around at once.

"But I want to read new books,” my mother said. "Could I read Miss Julia Speaks Her Mind?"

"Only if it’s online and in the right electronic format," I said. "That’s what I’ve been working on all this time. Trying to persuade the right people do to the obvious, the right thing. You could get as many books online for free as possible." Even those still under copyright, if they were in a TeleRead-style library system and covered by a national digital library fund. "And the rest you could find easily enough in one place--able to read off any standard machine."

My mother nodded. "But you can’t get me Miss Julia Speaks Her Mind? To read from that thing."

"I doubt it." Later I would seek an e-version on Amazon.com, at least, without any luck.

"I think I’ll stick to paper books," my mother said.

Tell you the truth, she might well have other reasons for preferring paper books. But then again, maybe not.

A lesson for the e-book business?

posted by David Rothman at 1:21 PM | permanent link

George Morrow, who died at 69 this week, came up with the Pivot portable in 1985. It appeared a few years after the Osborne One, whose creator, Adam Osborne, himself died in March.

The first page of the Pivot manual said: "If you're someone who holds manuals in contempt as a matter of principle, at least familiarize yourself with the contents of the first section. It's short, and there are lots of pictures."
posted by David Rothman at 5:52 AM | permanent link

So why did Grokster and Morpheus win, while Napster Lost, and what's the future of P2P? Check out a FindLaw article.

"If the decision is indeed upheld on appeal, will that be good news for consumers?" Chris Sprigman, an antitrust and intellectual property attorney, asks of the Grokster-Morpheus case. That "depends heavily on Hollywood's reaction.

"Will it continue its battle on other fronts--focusing perhaps not on the services, but on their users?

"Or will it, instead, launch new strategies to take advantage of the powerful business opportunities that peer-to-peer might provide?"
posted by Jerry Justianto at 9:05 PM | permanent link

At just $130 from Computer Geeks, a refurbished Dell Axim was too cheap to resist. Problem is, it's a Pocket PC--with the usual copyright-related hassles. Sure enough, I wasted close to an hour because of a glitch in the "activation" process required to take advantage of various e-book freebies. And this is before the era of "secure computing"? I suspect that proponents will argue, "Oh, the technology will make it easier for you." We'll see.
posted by David Rothman at 2:08 AM | permanent link