Mike Cane, a TeleBlog regular, not the little guy in the video, dropped by J&R in New York City and compared the above. Among other things, he worried that the HP Mini—much praised elsewhere—might not be so great for lots of heavy-duty typing.

E-book homework assignment for Mike

OK, now here’s a homework assignment for Mike. Share with us—in detail—what you think about the screens and other ergonomics for e-book reading. The comment area beckons for you and others.

Another perspective: Asus Eee PC: Overview from a 10 year old, a video from his dad, Kevin C. Tofel at jkOnTheRun.

Related: Do you have that portable in midsize? in the New York Times. Also see reviews of the Asus by Ficbot (linux version) and Paul Biba (XP flavor).

Partly as an anti-linux move, Microsoft is offering to sell Windows XP Home to manufacturers for as little as $16 per machine for use in developing countries. The future of the OLPC XO-1’s successors? For more prosperous markets like the U.S., the price tag would be a little higher.

Sure enough, there’s a catch—in fact, a bunch of them. For example, screens can’t be bigger than 10.2 inches, nor drives roomier than 80G, and no touch screens are allowed. In addition, RAM can’t exceed 1G, nor chips be better than  1G single-core processor (at least as a rule).

Besides thwarting linux, one other big goal is to prevent econo-machines from being able to run Vista. Don’t you love the monopoly mindset?

E-book related pros and cons

From an e-book perspective, here are some pros:

• Low-cost machines are fine for reading e-books, as long as the screen resolution is decent. A PC World report doesn’t mention any res limits. So the net effect might be to encourage the production of good, e-book-friendly laptops that can run commercial e-book apps such as Mobipocket and Adobe products, including the ePub-capable Digital Editions.
• The 80G drive limit is no big deal for most e-book readers—at least for now, when multimedia books aren’t so common. Same for the RAM and chip limits.
• Maybe this will be the kick in the pants that linux people need to be more responsive to the needs of ordinary consumers, including e-book-lovers. I want to see more FBReaders out there—and a better existing FBReader.
• Perhaps with all the fine print in the Microsoft offer, linux will actually get a boost from vendors unhappy with the restrictions, and we’ll soon see a wealth of open source apps for e-books. Don’t count on this.

The cons:

• Anything bad for open source, free software, etc., is bad for e-book fans in the long run, and I see this scenario as far more likely than the last one mentioned above. While the linux world hasn’t been too accommodating toward us so far, the potential is there. The open source approach could ultimately mean a greater choice of apps and more customizable ones. Not to mention more difficulties for DRM. But will Microsoft choke off the market for linux on the low-cost machines?
• Touch screens are always nice for e-book users, especially on laptops convertible into tablets. But Microsoft won’t allow this?

So, gang, what’s the bottom line here? Short term, I see positives such as more of the cheapie laptops that can run common commercial programs. Long term, I see more challenges for open source apps in e-books and other areas.

The numbers: Microsoft expects that sales of ultra-low-cost PCs will reach 10-13 million in ‘08. Others are not as optimistic.

Sometimes you can’t win for losing. E-books get dinged for being “too expensive.” But offer great books at super-affordable prices instead—and you might get attacked for that.

Pricing is one of the most controversial aspects of e-books. When I started BooksForABuck.com, my market research indicated that many e-book publishers had set price points above those charged by traditional publishers for paper books. I love e-books and can understand charging more for the portability, adjustable font, and convenience. The problem is, you have to try e-books before you discover the advantages. My market research indicated that high prices kept many from bothering.

Logical savings for the reader

There is a logic that if a publisher doesn’t need to pay for paper, for shipping, invest in printing thousands of books that might not sell and might get returned at some future point, there should be a savings for the reader. That made sense to me. Certainly for small publishers, the cost of printing is non-trivial, and the risks of offset printing a quantity (as opposed to the extremely high price for POD printing) are substantial.

I came up with the “Books For A Buck” concept and sampled everyone I could reach; a high percentage indicated that they’d be intrigued by affordable books, and that a buck was a heck of a price. Many of them indicated that they’d be willing to experiment with a new author if they could buy a book at a price low enough that they wouldn’t feel too disappointed if they ultimately didn’t enjoy it.

Why $1 isn’t the usual price

After some experimentation, I determined that $1 was not a sustainable price. For one thing, most sales come through distributors (like Fictionwise, Mobipocket, the Kindle Store, and All Romance eBooks) rather than directly. And as these distributors normally charge approximately 50 percent of the price, a list price of $1 leaves, well, essentially nothing for the publisher and author.

I decided, therefore, to adopt a pricing model with a $1 introductory price and a still-affordable standard price of $3.99. The $1 introductory price encourages at least some readers to visit our Web site, read the free excerpts (another way I and many other e-publishers reduce the purchase risks), and buy both the books listed at introductory pricing and additional books listed at standard pricing.

Share your thoughts on price

Pink Petal has a point about price being used as a signal. An excessively low price can signal that the item being sold is of low quality (and hence not worth a higher price). I truly believe, however, that the e-book market in general, and BooksForABuck.com in particular, can best grow through offering a high-quality product at a price that’s slightly below the price of paper books. I’d love to hear feedback. Check out the site and post your feedback here.

The Motel 6 precedent

With continuing inflation, it’s possible that the $1 pricing model, even as a promotional price, will become unsustainable (just as Motel 6 no longer can sustain the $6 pricing that originally gave them their name). For now, though, I like to give people a reason to come back often and grab bargains.

Technorati Tags: BooksForABuck.com,BooksForABuck

For most reading, it helps to be able to change font sizes easily—in particular, if your vision is less than perfect. And PDF often limits your options, especially on small-screened machines. It is not a true reflowable format. In plain English, that can mean hassles such as having to scroll from left to right, because enlarging the letters can result in chopped-off lines. No, I don’t want to have to worry about different files for different machines.

The beauty shop angle

Ficbot (not in the above photo) agrees with me about easy size-changing: “Today at the hairdresser I was getting highlights, had to sit under a heatlamp for 45 minutes, and was not allowed to put my glasses back on. Hello, bigger font size!” Overwhelmingly our commenters are on her side in responding to Tamas Simon’s gutsy essay challenging the idea of reflowable formats. But I’m glad Tamas spoke his mind. Let’s not take anything for granted.

Important debate

This little debate is of no small importance to the e-book industry. Right now PDF just may be the most commonly used document format. But for e-reading on small devices, it is generally a disaster since most PDF e-book files are not tagged for reflowability. Yes, I’ll welcome thoughts from PDF-lovin’ folks, especially at Adobe and Wowio, where Gerry Manacsa regards PDF as being more designer friendly at this stage in its development than ePub is. To Adobe’s considerable credit, it’s been a leading advocate of ePub (although, yes, I recognize the business-drive motives).

Image: CC-licensed photo from SpooSpa. Again, that is not Ficbot shown.

Now imagine the possibilities for, say, mobile cellphones that can double as e-book readers.

“Normally used for devices such as the Amazon Kindle or basic displays on flash drives,” says Electronista, “the new cells are as much as 40 percent thinner and can be cut into either unusual 2D shapes or bent into regular forms, such as curves. They also survive harsher temperatures, the designer says, allowing the extremely power-efficient designs to stand more exposure outside.”

Related: E Ink press release.

“The wordless novels of the 21st Century”—that’s how Seattle bookseller Michael Liberman is describing the offerings of DQ Books.

“DQ Books,” he writes in his reader blog in the Seattle Post-Intelligencer, “brings together artists, illustrators and photographers and places their visuals within the context of the book form using Flash technology. Each thematic issue is accompanied by a soundscape created by French composer Avril.”

The TeleRead take: Experiment? Sure. But I wonder if text-heavy novels are already losing sales to graphic novels, containing at least some text. Then again, graphic novels may increase interest in the traditional kind. Can the “wordless” variety?

The TeleRead take: OK, Rob, take it away. As proprietor of BooksForABook, how would you respond to that quote and the rest of the item? Meanwhile people need to keep in mind that, no, Rob Preece does not price every book at that level—far from it. Midlife Murder, Amy Eastlake’s novel shown above, is going for $1 during its introductory month, ending May 13, after which the price will be $3.99.

My own feeling: It’s a book-by-book decision, and as a trained economist, Rob is in a better position than most to consider all the variables. The more chances shoppers take, such as on a new writer, the less pricing power the publisher will enjoy. Good marketing and publicity, including the right blurbs, can increase pricing power for e-publishers. So can interactivity between readers and writers. Good writing? Sure. But first readers have to discover the author and the work. OK, gang, what other factors? And how about fiction vs. nonfiction pricing, and also pricing among genres and topics?

Related: Rob’s guidelines FAQ for writers.

Cost of machine: $144,000.

Date of installation: November 1.

Number of books printed through early February: 2,364 books, totaling 537,754 pages, 1,500 more titles printed since then.

No, I haven’t analyzed the economics. I’d welcome thoughts on this. I still think the real action will be in e-books, but the POD alternative is great to have around for the holdouts. Meanwhile how about the eco angle of E vs. POD? Your other comparisons? Of course, for physical bookstores, on-site POD comes with an inherent appeal—less competition.

Not at all. Instead Fictionwise has undergone an alien invasion, so to speak—of romance fans with loose purse strings. 

“Looking at sales from a single typical month, January 2008,” co-owner Steve Pendergrast reported to the Fictionwise e-mail list, “we find there are about one-third more unique romance buyers than unique SF buyers (someone who bought both would end up in both lists). This is not a huge difference in the absolute number of unique buyers. However, the romance buyers also buy more; on average they buy 62 percent more than SF buyers do in terms of revenue. The combined effect is, Fictionwise now sells about twice as much romance as SF. The reverse was true just a few years ago.”

Possible sea change

So what does this mean for the e-book industry? Definitely a seachange if other stores are experiencing similar results. This suggests:

• The e-book business as a whole needs to take on eBabel and DRM problems sooner than many of the old timers would like, if it doesn’t want to miss out on all the potential business from e-romance fans. As a group, they are probably more tech-hip than the typical reader, but almost surely not as much as the SF crowd. The good news for publishers is that readers of romances probably aren’t as likely to use P2P networks for illegal book-sharing as hardcore techies are. Probably. Anyone feel otherwise?
• For ergonomic reasons, it is important to replace PDF with the reflowable .epub format as soon as possible in most cases—to make it easier for read e-books on cell phones, which many of the new crop of readers will favor. Do you really think they all own Kindles? Of the eBabel formats, the reflowable Mobipocket beats PDF by a long shot in usability. So does ePub, and it’s important for the IDPF and publishers to encourage the development of good reading and creation apps—both commercial and open source.
• Also helpful will be more Kindle-style machines that can download titles without hassles, via wireless. Time for more alliances with phone companies? And what about better software to integrate the shopping and reading functions?

Meanwhile, lest Darrell and friends worry, the less spectacular but still noticeable growth in SF is continuing at Fictionwise. “SF sales are not declining by any means,” Steve told the Fictionwise list. “In terms of unit sales, SF sales in (for example) January 2008 were up 12% over January 2007, and in terms of revenue up even more, 16% year over year. Those are very solid growth rates.”

Your thoughts

So, gang, what do you think are the reasons for romance beating out SF? Part of it, I suspect, is that tech-gear prices are coming down and the number of tech savvy romance fans is increasing—with more women than ever having grown up with tech (reminder: not all romance fans are female). Many, I suspect, love the chance to read E in private without any covers to give them away to the boss or coworkers, or maybe husbands, boyfriends or girlfriends.

Yes, I’d love to hear form other e-stores as well as publishers. Do Steve’s experiences jibe with yours? And what about other genre trends in the e-book world? Just what are the fastest growers, besides romance? I do notice that suspense/thrillers are high up on the Fictionwise list of the top-ten sellers. How does that compare with the past?

You read that right: Panasonic is discontinuing the WordGear. Might the WordGear have survived if the IDPF’s ePub standard had been in widespread use and the WordGear could have displayed a zillion and one e-books in that format? Ideally nonDRMed. Panasonic didn’t help when it apparently used a clumsy DRMcentric approach.

Meanwhile hello to the BEBOOK (330 Euros for such features as the 6-inch E Ink display and the ability to read .doc, .txt, .pdf, .jpg, .htm and .rtf files) from Endless Ideas. So when will we see the BEBOOK selling for $159, the price tentatively mentioned for the basic Astak? And how long until the BEBOOK can handle DRMed Mobipocket  or another common format used for bestsellers? Mobi is supposed to be on the way. If so, will Mobipocket permit other DRM-”capable” formats? Or bully Endless Ideas by saving Mobi must have an exclusive? If you want a bunch of hardware makers around, competing to offer the best gizmo at the lowest price, then root for ePub—especially a nonDRMed flavor. Aren’t you tired of Mobipocket and the like dictating to hardware makers?

(Via MobileRead.)

I read a lot of posts and comments nowadays on the need for a reflowable e-book format. ePub is said to be a “solution” for this. I understand the frustration; I just don’t think reflow is such a big deal, especially not if we look at the long term trends. When do we need reflow anyway? I think there are two cases:

First scenario is when we have some content on a device and we want to change the font size. Honestly, how often does this happen? Once you’ve set the font size for a size that works for you, how often will you change it?

Second scenario is when switching devices. We have some content that looks acceptable on one device and we want to move it to another device that has smaller screen size. If it has larger screen size, we usually don’t even bother, do we?

Wouldn’t you be happy if…

If someone would let you use a different version of the file for the second device—but still a PDF file or something like that, a “final non-reflowable format”—wouldn’t that make you happy? I think what we really need is not one end-user e-book-format that can reflow a hundred different ways but rather a means to access the content in a format that works at the moment. So the “reflow” can very well happen on a server, in the “cloud” or just by being offered a wide variety of formats.

The Feedbooks approach

Check out Feedbooks for instance. You download the book for one device and then download it again for another device. No problem. “Reflow” is done for you by the site. And it very well addresses the first scenario, too;  you want bigger letters, there you go. I don’t see why this could not work for copyrighted works. We just need someone to provide the service.

At least there would be something value added, something that provides convenience, something that consumers would pay for in an era when content itself becomes so abundant that it’s almost impossible to charge for it. The publishing industry is still fighting this trend but have a look at some bittorrent sites, see what happened to music: you’ll most likely agree that the trend is clear.

The ownership issue

What happens then with “owning a book”? Well, I suppose you could “own” the source format TEX, or XML that is used to produce the different outcomes. Or just share what you have on the P2P network and hope that someone has another format of the content that will help you out one day. Chance are there is.

The TeleRead take: Well, Philip, you’re off on the details, but I like the spirit of the above, which, alas, considering the copyright lobby’s influence in D.C., turns out to be less of a joke than you thought. TeleRead, anyone? And new business and access models for libraries, with fair compensation to creators?

Related: This Week Daily’s pickup of my thoughts on the potential of e-books for libraries. Also see Kindles at N.J. public library and Kindle roundup: Library confusion, resisting Amazon’s domain grab, and the K-machine’s influence on reading and writing.

And a reminder: I continue to think that the Kindle is A Good Thing—in having gotten e-books on the cover of Newsweek. Now if Bezos can only address the library, DRM and eBabel angles and stop trying to be John D. Rockefeller.

(Thanks, Gnawingonfoot.)

The positives of Ezra Klein’s CJR article and related video: He’s a new Kindle user and hails the machine as “credible. As a product of Amazon, it’s intertwined with the world’s largest online bookstore, legitimized by the one company that can lay some claim to having already changed the way we use, or at least acquire, books. The real question, though, is what took so long?”

In general, the Klein article is upbeat on E and notes the possibilities of  adjustable font sizes, outbound links, interactivity and updated books (albeit, I’d assume, not the 1984ish variety). At the same time his CJR piece correctly recognizes that the Kindle and the like are not perfect replacements for paper books, given the screen-contrast problems of E Ink, among the other flaws.

The negatives—blindness to the eBabel and DRM issues: Um, Ezra, I mostly liked your piece, but as an e-book newbie, you unwittingly left out a few details. Unless we want the whole bleepin’ e-book world to revolve around Jeff Bezos, we deserve nonproprietary e-book standards in areas ranging from the basic format to guidelines for shared annotations and interbook linking.

An improved ePub, not the Kindle format, is what the e-book world need to avoid a classic Standard Oil scenario. Check out O’Reilly Media exec Andrew Savikas’s warnings about the various kinds of lock-ins that Amazon is trying out in E and P. Also see Tim O’Reilly: ‘Publishers beware: Amazon has you in their sights.’ 

While you’re at it, Ezra, you may want to address the DRM issue, too, which really ties in with the Tower of eBabel issue. Just why is Jeff so gungho about DRMless music but–via the Kindle and Mobipocket stores—continuing to inflict his proprietary DRM even on publishers who don’t want it? Meanwhile, for some insight on the risk of Amazon as a business partner, read up on the Toys ‘R’ Us suit. As an e-book booster I want the Kindle to success, and if Jeff can make his shareholders richer, then great. But let’s not glaze over the issue of who will control American publishing, or, as far as DRM, whether people in the future will be able to own their books for real. Hey, Ezra, the best of luck in delving further into E, Amazon and related matters!

An aside: Maybe CJR can solve the mystery of why PW ripped out the E-Book Report archives, at least in terms of public access—along with those of the former publisher and the woman who hired me to do EBR. All of the tens of thousands of words I wrote for PW are gone. The massive link kills are not exactly the best way to maintain PW’s credibility on the Web, especially when EBR and other blogs appeared with “Link this” invitations. Any connections with my comments about Amazon or DRM, or my other uppity writings? Or just corporate politics? Or a mix? And exactly who ordered the link kills? Editor Sara Nelson (who’s taught at Columbia and, I’d hope, wasn’t responsible) or someone on the business side of PW or the parent company Reed Business Information?

Related: Rekindling our love of the written word, in the Herald Sun, from Down Under.

Why? I’m pretty sure I’m tracking all the Kindle-related blogs and message boards, and I’m just not seeing any significant up-tick in postings, traffic or buzz. Although the Kindle has been back in stock and shipping for at least a couple of weeks now, I’m seeing roughly the same number of weekly posts/comments on the Kindle Forum and Kindle Korner as there were when it was out of stock.

You’d think the pent-up demand for the device would have caused a surge on these forums but that doesn’t appear to be the case. New Kindle-related blogs aren’t exactly crawling out of the woodwork either. There was a flurry of new ones back in December and January but I couldn’t tell you the last time I discovered a new one, and I tend to search for them every week!

Finally, there’s my old pal, Google Trends. According to this chart, Sony’s Reader is still getting more Google searches than Amazon’s Kindle, but the latter has closed the gap a bit on the former, perhaps attributable to the Kindle being back in stock.

And the same’s true with Wikipedia. Generally, not always, entries on popular topics are more reliable than those on more arcane ones. Just be careful about entries which could draw a steady stream of partisan edits.

Such thoughts came to me while I was reading a Wikipedia-related column from Paul Gilster, an author, blogger and contributor to the Raleigh News  & Observer, who pointed out the popularity-reliability correlation. Originally he was a Wikipedia skeptic, but he has since come around around—while, appropriately, warning that you still need to be wary. Paul also suggests going to the source sites mentioned in citations.

At the same time, as the author of Centauri Dreams, a blog on deep space, Paul points to the value of Wikipedia for keeping up to date on arcane scientific subject—on which it can be more timely than, say, the Britannica.

Related: Free subscriptions and widgets for bloggers—from Encyclopedia Britannica.