> I thought the comparison was between paper books vs ebooks, not ebooks vs the web. That's the thing, though -- it's as if we're pretending that the Web and e

> I thought the comparison was between paper books vs ebooks, not ebooks vs the web. That's the thing, though -- it's as if we're pretending that the Web and eBooks are as different as radio and TV, when in reality, they're about as different as FM and AM radio. I think that one of them offers enough marginal benefit to trounce the other -- and in the case of the Kindle, the ''other'' is more expensive while offering less! I don't see a divide between the Web and eBooks. I see a divide between digital content and print content. And I think that, just like the Web is reducing the market for newspapers, it's going to reduce the market for print books. It won't eliminate it. But god knows any eBook has all the drawbacks of the web (the transient nature of its contents) and few if any advantages beyond the low power draw and sharp screen. The former can be made irrelevant by better batteries; the latter is being made irrelevant by better screens. So what's the advantage of Kindle? It's quite mad. Mark Pilgrim does a great job of documenting the misfeatures in his 'Future of Reading' bit.