Foo - e-Textbooks

Trolling here... with a new semester starting, I wanted to start a discussion about e-textbooks, or online textbooks. I work for a university that is piloting these in a few online classes.

How it works:
Flash paper format (you can read, highlight, copy-paste, a screen reader can read it for accessibility purposes.)

Options:
1) Your textbook is provided to you online
- typically costs 50% less than a standard textbook.
- you can save to your computer for future use, and/or print it.

2) A textbook is prepared for you consisting of chapters/excerpts defined by the professor from multiple book sources
- cost is pro-rated accord to how much of each book is used, and costs MUCH less than purchasing multiple books individually
- again, you can save to your computer and/or print

Pros/Cons:
+ They're very inexpensive compared to textbooks
+ Allows you to work literally from anywhere you have internet- which is great for online courses.

- Printing may be an expense/hassle if you want a tangible copy you can mark-up
- Some people may not like having to read everything on a computer screen.

Just curious... what you guys think about it?

computer access is useful for specific look-ups, but I find it difficult to read for extended periods.

My opinion.

- you can save to your computer for future use, and/or print it.



Does this make it possible to get multiple uses by multiple users from one license? (This is something publishers would be very interested in, I think.)

If it's just replicating the printed version of a book, I'll take the printed version. If the use of electronic media allows other features (like related animation/video), then I'd reconsider.

That said, scientific journal articles online are basically PDF versions of the printed journals, yet I browse almost exclusively online to save myself a daily library trip (and to be ahead of the curve since they usually show up online first). However, for anything I intend to read carefully, I do print it out.

Interesting idea... I'm not sure how I'd feel about it, though. As trsidn said, I have difficulty reading a book format on my computer for extended lengths of time and it would cost more money to print pages off...

Does this make it possible to get multiple uses by multiple users from one license? (This is something publishers would be very interested in, I think.)I'm not sure. We're currently working with one of the worlds top publishers and it's a green light. We are embedding it in Blackboard, but its accessible via a web-link, that doesn't require a login or anything. I'm not sure how (if) they are anticipating handling/monitoring this.


If it's just replicating the printed version of a book, I'll take the printed version. If the use of electronic media allows other features (like related animation/video), then I'd reconsider.

That said, scientific journal articles online are basically PDF versions of the printed journals, yet I browse almost exclusively online to save myself a daily library trip (and to be ahead of the curve since they usually show up online first). However, for anything I intend to read carefully, I do print it out.
Yup, just a digital version of a print book. The advantage is basically cost, and the ability to combine useful sections of many books instead of having to purchase them all, for just a few excerpts.


Interesting idea... I'm not sure how I'd feel about it, though. As trsidn said, I have difficulty reading a book format on my computer for extended lengths of time and it would cost more money to print pages off...Yeah, I'm not really sure how I'd feel about it either. We'll be surveying our students to see if we should expand/abolish it at the end of term- it will be interesting to see how that compares to fooster's opinions.

I'm not sure. We're currently working with one of the worlds top publishers and it's a green light. We are embedding it in Blackboard, but its accessible via a web-link, that doesn't require a login or anything. I'm not sure how (if) they are anticipating handling/monitoring this.


Yup, just a digital version of a print book. The advantage is basically cost, and the ability to combine useful sections of many books instead of having to purchase them all, for just a few excerpts.

Yeah, I'm not really sure how I'd feel about it either. We'll be surveying our students to see if we should expand/abolish it at the end of term- it will be interesting to see how that compares to fooster's opinions.

I like the cost idea. Having spent $200 on a textbook that we only used about 1/3 of, cost is a big factor.

Maybe I'm just a HUUUGE slacker, but I haven't needed any of my textbooks since college (nor have I wanted them).

My undergrad college actually had a library for textbooks where you would check in/out your books at no additional cost...

Why bother if the advantage is mainly cost? [edit: And in particular, cost of printing.] The cost of physically printing a textbook can't be all that expensive compared with all the other costs involved. After all, if a textbook with 385 pages, in full color (not just solid Pantone colors, but pictures and what not) from edge to edge on every page, can be sold for $44 at a profit (proof (http://www.amazon.com/Molecules-That-Changed-World-Nicolaou/dp/3527309837/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1230748312&sr=8-1)), then printing costs really can't be all that high for a typical textbook. [edit: I know for a fact that the royalties for the authors on that book are non-zero. So there's room for some royalties, too, though probably not very much.]

With a digital version, even if one prefers the format, one has to worry about whether that digital version will still be useful decades from now. If it's tied to a specific piece of software (almost has to be if you're going to avoid wholesale copying), then what happens when the day comes where that software is no longer usable on your primary computer? (Sure... virtualization of older systems may offer a solution, but it's a rather clumsy solution, and it's not free.) If the company's no longer supporting that software (for example, if it's gone bankrupt), then what? How many file formats from 20 years ago (never mind 40 years ago) are readily handled on a typical PC today? How many have fallen by the wayside?

have used e-Textbooks for years when teaching - students especially seemed to appreciate that i insisted on coursework not having to depend on expensive books (in fact, i insisted on public-domain or open-source license works, such as those under Creative Commons, etc.)

Why bother if the advantage is mainly cost? The cost of physically printing a textbook can't be all that expensive compared with all the other costs involved. After all, if a textbook with 385 pages, in full color (not just solid Pantone colors, but pictures and what not) from edge to edge on every page, can be sold for $44 at a profit (proof (http://www.amazon.com/Molecules-That-Changed-World-Nicolaou/dp/3527309837/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1230748312&sr=8-1)), then printing costs really can't be all that high for a typical textbook.

With a digital version, even if one prefers the format, one has to worry about whether that digital version will still be useful decades from now. If it's tied to a specific piece of software (almost has to be if you're going to avoid wholesale copying), then what happens when the day comes where that software is no longer usable on your primary computer? (Sure... virtualization of older systems may offer a solution, but it's a rather clumsy solution, and it's not free.) If the company's no longer supporting that software (for example, if it's gone bankrupt), then what? How many file formats from 20 years ago (never mind 40 years ago) are readily handled on a typical PC today? How many have fallen by the wayside?
Good thoughts. Yeah, the advantage is basically cost to students. We'll have to see if the format adds or subtracts value, which is/isn't compensated by the lower cost.

With regard to formats- I'm doubtful someone would save/use it for decades (textbook content would typically change by then anyway). Currently they are in Flash (Adobe), which will continue to be widely supported for many years to come. I'm pushing for PDF so students can digitally mark up (highlight, comment, note, etc) on the pieces.

Why bother if the advantage is mainly cost? [edit: And in particular, cost of printing.] The cost of physically printing a textbook can't be all that expensive compared with all the other costs involved. After all, if a textbook with 385 pages, in full color (not just solid Pantone colors, but pictures and what not) from edge to edge on every page, can be sold for $44 at a profit (proof (http://www.amazon.com/Molecules-That-Changed-World-Nicolaou/dp/3527309837/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1230748312&sr=8-1)), then printing costs really can't be all that high for a typical textbook. [edit: I know for a fact that the royalties for the authors on that book are non-zero. So there's room for some royalties, too, though probably not very much.]

With a digital version, even if one prefers the format, one has to worry about whether that digital version will still be useful decades from now. If it's tied to a specific piece of software (almost has to be if you're going to avoid wholesale copying), then what happens when the day comes where that software is no longer usable on your primary computer? (Sure... virtualization of older systems may offer a solution, but it's a rather clumsy solution, and it's not free.) If the company's no longer supporting that software (for example, if it's gone bankrupt), then what? How many file formats from 20 years ago (never mind 40 years ago) are readily handled on a typical PC today? How many have fallen by the wayside?

You do bring up a good point, but I sold back both my bio book and algebra book at the end of the semester. I don't need them, they aren't my focus, and they were 100 level courses anyway. I spent about $300 for both of those books. I could see where the e-books could be a help in that regard. For my major classes, I'd probably still pick up the paper version.

You do bring up a good point, but I sold back both my bio book and algebra book at the end of the semester. I don't need them, they aren't my focus, and they were 100 level courses anyway. I spent about $300 for both of those books. I could see where the e-books could be a help in that regard. For my major classes, I'd probably still pick up the paper version.

But how much of that $300 is really printing costs? Wholesale printing of textbooks on huge machines really isn't all that expensive. The aforementioned book is just about the most expensive book to print that there is, using high quality paper and covered from corner to corner in ink/toner/whatever, yet it's only $44. How much of that is printing costs? $20? (I don't know. Just taking a wild guess. But we have to leave room for the royalties for the hundreds of images inside, royalties to the authors, and profit for the reseller and the publisher.) How much does a typical textbook really cost to print then? $5? $10? For a $5 or $10 price differential, would you still pick the electronic version? Can you resell the electronic version? (If not, its value would be even lower.)

But how much of that $300 is really printing costs? Wholesale printing of textbooks on huge machines really isn't all that expensive. The aforementioned book is just about the most expensive book to print that there is, using high quality paper and covered from corner to corner in ink/toner/whatever, yet it's only $44. How much of that is printing costs? $20? (I don't know. Just taking a wild guess. But we have to leave room for the royalties for the hundreds of images inside, royalties to the authors, and profit for the reseller and the publisher.) How much does a typical textbook really cost to print then? $5? $10? For a $5 or $10 price differential, would you still pick the electronic version? Can you resell the electronic version? (If not, its value would be even lower.)

Ah..yeah, I'm pickin' up whatcher puttin' down...

If the books, like arti says, are half the price, I'd be down, but if not, I'd have a much tougher time deciding.

2) A textbook is prepared for you consisting of chapters/excerpts defined by the professor from multiple book sources
- cost is pro-rated accord to how much of each book is used, and costs MUCH less than purchasing multiple books individually
- again, you can save to your computer and/or print

When I was an undergrad (1997-2001), this (in printed form) was a very popular option with profs in elective courses, and the Harvard printing department dealt with the process. However, in general, profs picked out the highest quality excerpts (rightfully so), which generally had the highest royalties. While still cheaper than buying all the books, it wasn't unusual for a packet of 400 pages or so to cost over $100. Some profs did make an effort to replace high cost chapters with cheaper alternatives... in one class, my prof's personal translation of the Greek classics was used, royalty-free. That packet was cheap.

f the books, like arti says, are half the price, I'd be down, but if not, I'd have a much tougher time deciding.

Agreed, at least for books I don't intend to reference regularly. I'm just not so sure about the half price target.

I'm not a big fan of online courses in general. I find that I do much better in an actual class setting with an actual textbook. I don't like to read too much online, I prefer printed words.

When I was an undergrad (1997-2001), this (in printed form) was a very popular option with profs in elective courses, and the Harvard printing department dealt with the process. However, in general, profs picked out the highest quality excerpts (rightfully so), which generally had the highest royalties. While still cheaper than buying all the books, it wasn't unusual for a packet of 400 pages or so to cost over $100. Some profs did make an effort to replace high cost chapters with cheaper alternatives... in one class, my prof's personal translation of the Greek classics was used, royalty-free. That packet was cheap.

I was an undergrad same years as you. There was this packet sold for a poly sci class, maybe 100 to 150 pages, that cost $270. Not one person bought it (surprise, huh?).

I'm not a big fan of online courses in general. I find that I do much better in an actual class setting with an actual textbook. I don't like to read too much online, I prefer printed words.

My understanding is that these e-textbooks would be used in regular classes too.

Maybe I'm just a HUUUGE slacker, but I haven't needed any of my textbooks since college (nor have I wanted them).

My undergrad college actually had a library for textbooks where you would check in/out your books at no additional cost...

Yeah, that's another thing. I was HORRIBLE at doing reading assignments. With books, even.
All I ever did was look at the examples (Usually quite useless) and get the problems assigned. (engineering)

And since they constantly changed editions, I have thousands of dollars in books that I barely looked at, and still don't use.

So far, it is not been mentioned that e-textbooks would seem to be a more ecologically sound option to printing, binding and shipping conventional bound textbooks. When I was doing my MBA via distance learning in the 90's, that program still used bound textbooks. I actually scanned portions of my textbooks and saved them as files so I could study them on my laptop while on business trips. They now offer the textbooks online as PDF files.

Interestingly enough, I still have almost all of my old chemistry, law and MBA textbooks. Sentimental value, I guess.

My understanding is that these e-textbooks would be used in regular classes too.

Yes, I've had classes like that as well. Still, I focus much better when I have an actual book in my hands.

I dislike e-books very much. For intro courses where students don't care, they will probably work well enough and save money.

For courses in your major, where you are actually interested in reading, and you need to read closely and often, a real book is preferred. I can read short technical documents on-screen, but for a 300+ page book, paper please. Plus, I am going to need them all the time post-graduation.

I was an undergrad same years as you. There was this packet sold for a poly sci class, maybe 100 to 150 pages, that cost $270. Not one person bought it (surprise, huh?).

:roflmao:

I generally bought books without regard to cost (something about one prof drilling in our heads that it takes only one good idea from a book to justify all the books one buys), but I would have avoided that packet, too.

I HATE electronic books. I like the paper, came from the printer, hard cover versions. They're a lot easier to read and deal with. I am happy to pay more for these too.

There is one HUGE advantage to E-textbooks and manuals. The ability to text search exactly what you are looking for without having to go through the index/mark your book up etc. If I want to look up anything on any datasheet/ieeexplore, I text search the pdf first and then if the material is good, make a printout. This saves me so much aggravation and makes me more efficient.

On the other hand for reading materials, I find paper copies easier to read than material on screen.

Edit:- I also voted wrong :o. If there is a poll options that says "yes but they need improvement" I would cast my vote there.

I am really starting to hate printed books. What a complete waste of resources.

An electronic version can be so much more useful. Animations, instructor added content, better search capability, interactive chapter quizzes, hyperlink to more detailed information (within and outside the ebook), better bookmarking, automatic updates to new editions, and on and on and on. Books are an archaic medium.

I remember 25 years ago when we started an email system (IBM PROFS). A lot of users would print each email and then read it. A printed text book to me makes about as much sense.

I hate printed 'anything'. There is no need.

I am really starting to hate printed books. What a complete waste of resources.

An electronic version can be so much more useful. Animations, instructor added content, better search capability, interactive chapter quizzes, hyperlink to more detailed information (within and outside the ebook), better bookmarking, automatic updates to new editions, and on and on and on. Books are an archaic media.

I remember 25 years ago when we started an email system (IBM PROFS). A lot of users would print each email and then read it. A printed text book to me makes about as much sense.

I hate printed 'anything'. There is no need.

There is a need. For most people it's just impossible to read lots and lots of text on screen at once -- say, 30 to 100 pages.

My knee-jerk reaction, being something of a neo-luddite, is "no ****ing way!"

Of course, in thinking about it more, I do concede that there are some advantages. The ability to do searches is the first thing to come to mind. If e-paper/e-ink kinds of technologies come into play (is the Amazon Kindle using such a display? I honestly haven't looked), the poor readability issue goes way down, and the portability of carrying multiple tomes goes way up. As others have mentioned, reading things on a computer screen is awful, at least to me.

Now, if the user is given a choice of a printed book (with the digital version included for free) or the digital version alone, I see no issue whatsoever. Different people work different ways. Some may be able to read everything on the screen as comfortably as someone else reads a real book. Also, the thought of a digital book including animations, movies, and things like that is pretty interesting.

Also, as was mentioned, if it's being done solely for cost reasons, it's a bit ridiculous. It isn't like textbooks need to cost $200 a pop. Printing is cheap. Most of the price comes from greed and lack of competition. It isn't like a publisher is going to necessarily sell ebook versions for $10 because "whew, we don't have to print it anymore!"



Longevity is a big issue to me, and not just regarding books, but all things digital. There's another thread here about books that are almost three hundred years old. Daguerreotypes from a hundred and twenty years or more ago are common, and there are a handful of examples of photography from even longer ago than that. PDF and JPG have been around for quite a while (in computer terms, at least), but who knows how much longer they'll last. Will anyone have any idea what those formats are in fifty or a hundred years? Even if they do, will the storage medium that contains them even work? Magnetic mediums seem to lose their integrity in a decade or two. Well-kept, pressed compact discs seem to have held up pretty well, but they are plastic, so they'll eventually fail, and who knows how long burned CDs and DVDs will remain usable.

While the longevity and permanence of things digital is a bit of a pet issue with me, I understand we're talking about something as relatively throwaway as college texts, here. A C++ textbook from 2003 will have little use other than entertainment value for nerds in 2053, but I still think it's nice for such things to hang around. It just seems kind of sad to me that entire swaths of day-to-day life are all but lost for periods more than fifty or a hundred years ago, and we know even less as the timeline reaches further into the past.



Anyway, rantiness aside, I'd be pretty upset if a school I was attending moved exclusively to electronic books. I can't say for sure whether or not I could adapt or live with it if I needed to. It would depend on how well the transition was handled, I guess.

Longevity is a big issue to me, and not just regarding books, but all things digital. There's another thread here about books that are almost three hundred years old. Daguerreotypes from a hundred and twenty years or more ago are common, and there are a handful of examples of photography from even longer ago than that. PDF and JPG have been around for quite a while (in computer terms, at least), but who knows how much longer they'll last. Will anyone have any idea what those formats are in fifty or a hundred years? Even if they do, will the storage medium that contains them even work? Magnetic mediums seem to lose their integrity in a decade or two. Well-kept, pressed compact discs seem to have held up pretty well, but they are plastic, so they'll eventually fail, and who knows how long burned CDs and DVDs will remain usable.

While the longevity and permanence of things digital is a bit of a pet issue with me, I understand we're talking about something as relatively throwaway as college texts, here. A C++ textbook from 2003 will have little use other than entertainment value for nerds in 2053, but I still think it's nice for such things to hang around. It just seems kind of sad to me that entire swaths of day-to-day life are all but lost for periods more than fifty or a hundred years ago, and we know even less as the timeline reaches further into the past.



X, one could argue that the cost and effort involved in maintaining a digital archive is way lesser than any bio-degradable archive. Besides redundant backups are easily accomplished with data. With a new format all one has to do is convert the format that is in vouge. This could be done at a keypress, automated. Arguably one could see that compression and subsequent recompression could end up being very lossy but I would bet that this is a tractable problem.


EDIT :- I am not advocating abolishing books, I am just saying the digital and storage challenges might not be as bad as you think. ;)

X, one could argue that the cost and effort involved in maintaining a digital archive is way lesser than any bio-degradable archive. Besides redundant backups are easily accomplished with data. With a new format all one has to do is convert the format that is in vouge. This could be done at a keypress, automated. Arguably one could see that compression and subsequent recompression could end up being very lossy but I would bet that this is a tractable problem.If the data is cared about, and it's worthwhile to someone to maintain it, sure, it can quite easily be backed up, translated, and converted. But something deemed "unimportant" at the time can be lost well within a year of neglect. Even backed-up data is pretty fragile. Not that physical books are indestructible, of course, but data can be destroyed with a keystroke. As the medium storing the data degrades, thus corrupting the files, it becomes more and more difficult (and eventually, less worthwhile) to recover it.

Think of something that seems simple and pointless today, something that you wouldn't really think would be important to maintain for the ages. Then think of how interesting it would be to read such a thing that occurred a hundred years ago. While there's no guarantee that a particular book will last that period, it would be almost unfathomable for a forgotten floppy disk or CD to survive uncared-for. Look at how easy it is to come across weird fifty or hundred year old books, versus a floppy disk even ten or fifteen years old. Do you even have access to a 5.25" floppy disk drive?



EDIT :- I am not advocating abolishing books, I am just saying the digital and storage challenges might not be as bad as you think. ;)Nor am I for the complete ignoring of digital and electronic advances in bookery. Like I said, I understand and can recognize the advances and advantages. I just hope a compromise can be reached, without knee-jerking completely into the shiny, technologically advanced end of things. Of course, I'm almost certainly over-reacting at least a bit.

I did not vote because none of the categories really worked for me.

I have used them for my classes. Generally, I have used them when the expense or bother of getting peoples' hands on hard copies was too much. As such, they are invaluable.

But, I prefer having hard copies in student' paws. Bitter experience has shown most professors that the each action you put between a text and students reading that text dramatically reduces the number who actually read it. Even when those steps are simply and easy. If the book is in their backpack, there is a fighting chance they will read it. If they have to do something, a large portion of students will manage to not do it.

And, speaking for myself, everything else equal, I prefer to read off paper and not a screen. Since I teach philosophy there tends to be large chunks of reading. It is my preference to do that kind of reading off paper. From what I can tell many others have this same preference, so I try to make that available when it is appropriate.

I love my only e-text that I have - for my Finance class. Still have it on here and still use it time to time. Rather not have to overload my bookshelves. However, this may be due to the fact that it was a really well written book and I have had plenty of crap paper books. Freaking idiots that mention charts and graphs that are 4 or 5 pages away.... you think some posts on here are bad....

Speaking of which ^, Intro to Philosophy was the hardest class I've ever had, infuriatingly so. I literally worked the hardest in there of all my classes and eventually had to drop it. As for paper, we get free paper (limited) here at UoF so we can print out pertinent readings are needed

Interesting.

For a group spending all this time chatting on an internet board and complaining about not liking to read on a computer.

I have an ebookwise (http://www.ebookwise.com/) e-book. I read 1000 page books on it. I have a bad habit of starting a book and reading it through - even if I have to get up in an hour or two for work.

For textbooks, having it in a weird format would not be good - the reader takes text or the ebookwise format and I think pdf's have to be non-encrypted. pdf's aren't too bad though, tools are available to free them.

I never took notes in my textbooks and the size of them makes the e-book more to my taste.

Interesting.

For a group spending all this time chatting on an internet board and complaining about not liking to read on a computer.


There's a huge, unexplainable difference between browsing a web site with information you probably won't remember and trying to learn something important from a very long book.

There's a huge, unexplainable difference between browsing a web site with information you probably won't remember and trying to learn something important from a very long book.

True. Try reading an article on the physics of a PN juntion online. I gave and failed miserably especially when eqn 15 refers to eqn 5 on a different page and it's associated premises.