NationStates Jolt Archive

It’s a printing device that will print any book in less than 7 minutes. Including the 4 coloured hardcover and in high quality.

It’s first appearance in the public library of New York wasn’t a high success, but after 2 years of beta testing it seems it’s starting its conquer around the world.

Last week an Espresso Book machine was adored by thousands of people at the London Book Fair.

The machine is holding 500,000 titles and will be enlarged soon, next summer it will be 1,000,000 titles.

Beside existing books, you can print your own book. Just bring an USB or DVD and in a matter of minutes your story looks like a real book.

For only 133,000 Euro you can have your own Espresso Book Machine.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OIq0VqF0MnA&feature=player_embedded

Hmm, I wonder how fast it can print War & Peace.

Not at that price.

Here I was hoping for some coffee to go with my book.

Damn misleading advertising.

pshhhh.... paper is for suckers. ebooks are the future.

Not at that price.

A single book will cost no more than usual.

Buying 500,000 titles and renting space to store them, will cost you much more as 133,000 Euro.

Hmm, I wonder how fast it can print War & Peace.

Seeing as no human has finished that book, I'm not sure this could either, it would commit electronic suicide from boredom.

A single book will cost no more than usual.

Buying 500,000 titles and renting space to store them, will cost you much more as 133,000 Euro.

Well, self-publishing is already a huge booming business so I guess it's worth the investment in terms of charging people $10 to make their own book.

Yet you can send off and have it done for as cheap.

What would be interesting would be to set up a site, like www.amateurauthors.com, broken down by category and then rated similar to Amazon and etc., blow apart the publishers stranglehold on publishing crappy beach/airport books and possibly reveal some great books.

I'd be surprised if Amazon isn't onto that already.

EDIT: don't bother going to that site, it's one of those crap PPC sites.

pshhhh.... paper is for suckers. ebooks are the future.

I very much doubt it. The tactile quality of paper will always be with us. It'll be supplemented by ebooks, and to a lesser extent, audiobooks - specifically in podcast form.

Seeing as no human has finished that book, I'm not sure this could either, it would commit electronic suicide from boredom.

Hmmm, I never seen a machine commit suicide before....I'd pay to see this.

Hmmm, I never seen a machine commit suicide before....I'd pay to see this.

I'd like to see it print http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artam%C3%A8ne :)

I very much doubt it. The tactile quality of paper will always be with us. It'll be supplemented by ebooks, and to a lesser extent, audiobooks - specifically in podcast form.

I don't think so. You feel that way about paper because you grew up reading on paper. If you were to raise a whole generation of kids on Kindles, they would probably hate using paper. Once the ebook readers become cheap enough that everyone can own one, paper will go the way of the typewriter.

I don't think so. You feel that way about paper because you grew up reading on paper. If you were to raise a whole generation of kids on Kindles, they would probably hate using paper. Once the ebook readers become cheap enough that everyone can own one, paper will go the way of the typewriter.

No, I feel that way because I work in the publishing industry. Paper has a very special quality - it's tactile. We can feel it. You don't get that with any other medium.

Also, it's worth noting that Atlas Shrugged is longer than War and Peace. I think this machine would do well to familiarise itself with the work of eminent Russian-American philosopher, Ayn Rand.

No, I feel that way because I work in the publishing industry. Paper has a very special quality - it's tactile. We can feel it. You don't get that with any other medium.

Also, it's worth noting that Atlas Shrugged is longer than War and Peace. I think this machine would do well to familiarise itself with the work of eminent Russian-American philosopher, Ayn Rand.

Grrr. *knocks you out and locks you in a room with a tape player*

No, I feel that way because I work in the publishing industry. Paper has a very special quality - it's tactile. We can feel it. You don't get that with any other medium.
Actually, pressing buttons on a keyboard is quite tactile. I sometimes find myself playing a rhythm on it when reading from the screen.

I don't think so. You feel that way about paper because you grew up reading on paper. If you were to raise a whole generation of kids on Kindles, they would probably hate using paper. Once the ebook readers become cheap enough that everyone can own one, paper will go the way of the typewriter.

They already said 30 years ago that computers would replace all paper work, present times we have more paper as ever before.

eBooks aren't expensive today. But they don't come close to the real thing. A book, a real one, has several advantages.

* Some people don't buy books to read but to show off how intellectual they are by presenting them in their living room.

* You don't need any batteries to read a book, and reading it on a beach is much easier, even with the sun burning in your back.

* Few people would kill or molest you for a book, but they would do for an eBook device (by assuming it's the newest Nintendo tool).

I would almost bet that if you took a sample of people in two groups, had one read a paper book and another read it on screen, that those who read the paper-based book would have a far better memory of the content.

Not that this won't change, probably, over time but I suspect the brain alters its receptiveness given association with a book compared to a computer screen.

I would almost bet that if you took a sample of people in two groups, had one read a paper book and another read it on screen, that those who read the paper-based book would have a far better memory of the content.

Not that this won't change, probably, over time but I suspect the brain alters its receptiveness given association with a book compared to a computer screen.

Probably it is. What's for sure is the reading speed, which is higher for paper books as for screens.

If you would use the same amount of time, you could read it with more care and thus putting it easier in your memory.

Probably it is. What's for sure is the reading speed, which is higher for paper books as for screens.

Really? Honestly out of curiosity why do you say for sure because I would actually assume the opposite, that you read a book slower than the screen.

If you would use the same amount of time, you could read it with more care and thus putting it easier in your memory.

It's more to do with the brain's receptiveness to the information, I'd suspect that, to some extent, we relax even thinking about reading a book whereas the screen is more fleeting.

Having said that, the screen offers far more potential for truly involved information-processing and, beyond that, there's augmented reality for books, which could be really interesting.

Really? Honestly out of curiosity why do you say for sure because I would actually assume the opposite, that you read a book slower than the screen.

Deborah J. Mayhew wrote in her book 'Principles and Guidelines in Software User Interface Design' some words about it.



It's more to do with the brain's receptiveness to the information, I'd suspect that, to some extent, we relax even thinking about reading a book whereas the screen is more fleeting.

Having said that, the screen offers far more potential for truly involved information-processing and, beyond that, there's augmented reality for books, which could be really interesting.

There are several reasons for it. The screen resolution still can't beat any paper book. A screen is also flickering. You will not notice this conscientious, but it's slowing down your reading speed.

The screen size is also having some influence. Most eBooks are smaller than a book page. While this is not that hard for men, it is for women.

Deborah J. Mayhew wrote in her book 'Principles and Guidelines in Software User Interface Design' some words about it.

There are several reasons for it. The screen resolution still can't beat any paper book. A screen is also flickering. You will not notice this conscientious, but it's slowing down your reading speed.

The screen size is also having some influence. Most eBooks are smaller than a book page. While this is not that hard for men, it is for women.

Hmm, the physical speed at which you can read, interesting but I don't know if people max out on reading speed anyway, I'd say we tend to read between 50~70% of our maximum ability. I'd still say people 'actually' tend to read quicker on screen, despite any physical limitations.

I'm intrigued, I might research this later on.

The screen size is also having some influence.

What are you, German, Dutch?

@Barringtonia,

And there's even more:

Symbol brightness, symbol-background contrast and image polarity, screen glare...

Screens are more fatiguing than paperwork, especial when used over long periods of viewing.

Hmm, the physical speed at which you can read, interesting but I don't know if people max out on reading speed anyway, I'd say we tend to read between 50~70% of our maximum ability. I'd still say people 'actually' tend to read quicker on screen, despite any physical limitations.

I'm intrigued, I might research this later on.



What are you, German, Dutch?

Dutch, but living for centuries in Belgium.

@Barringtonia,

And there's even more:

Symbol brightness, symbol-background contrast and image polarity, screen glare...

Screens are more fatiguing than paperwork, especial when used over long periods of viewing.

More than that it seems...

As he tried to train himself to screen-read—and mastering such reading does require new skills—Bell made an important observation, one often overlooked in the debate over digital texts: the computer screen was not intended to replace the book. Screen reading allows you to read in a “strategic, targeted manner,” searching for particular pieces of information, he notes. And although this style of reading is admittedly empowering, Bell cautions, “You are the master, not some dead author. And that is precisely where the greatest dangers lie, because when reading, you should not be the master”; you should be the student. “Surrendering to the organizing logic of a book is, after all, the way one learns,” he observes.

How strategic and targeted are we when we read on the screen? In a commissioned report published by the British Library in January 2008 (the cover of which features a rather alarming picture of a young boy with a maniacal expression staring at a screen image of Darth Vader), researchers found that everyone, teachers and students alike, “exhibits a bouncing/flicking behavior, which sees them searching horizontally rather than vertically....Users are promiscuous, diverse, and volatile.” As for the kind of reading the study participants were doing online, it was qualitatively different from traditional literacy. “It is clear that users are not reading online in the traditional sense, indeed there are signs that new forms of ‛reading’ are emerging as users ‛power browse’ horizontally through titles, contents pages, and abstracts going for quick wins.” As the report’s authors concluded, with a baffling ingenuousness, “It almost seems that they go online to avoid reading in the traditional sense.”

That is precisely what Jakob Nielsen, a former software engineer and a widely respected expert on Web page usability, found in his research on screen reading. Rather than reading deliberately, when we scan the screen in search of content our eyes follow an F-shaped pattern, quickly darting across text in search of the central nugget of information we seek. “‛Reading’ is not even the right word” to describe this activity, Nielsen pointedly says.

http://www.thenewatlantis.com/publications/people-of-the-screen

Not a bad article, I don't place a value on how we read, we do what's best for the society we live in and it may be that computers do most of the 'thinking' and we make decisions based off that, meaning we will need to have exactly the sort of brains electronic entertainment is giving us, quick decisions off limited visible data, with most of the actual crunching done by machines.

More than that it seems...



http://www.thenewatlantis.com/publications/people-of-the-screen

Not a bad article, I don't place a value on how we read, we do what's best for the society we live in and it may be that computers do most of the 'thinking' and we make decisions based off that, meaning we will need to have exactly the sort of brains electronic entertainment is giving us, quick decisions off limited visible data, with most of the actual crunching done by machines.

Uhu, yes we don't read webpages as a book. We indeed rather seem to 'scan' them. But that's not the case for webpaged books, at least when they are not formatted as an ordinary webpage.

Hmm, I wonder how fast it can print War & Peace.

Seeing as no human has finished that book, I'm not sure this could either, it would commit electronic suicide from boredom...

I've finished it twice, including the epilogue that does, I admit, seem to go on forever. It's one of my favourite books and I intend to read it again some day.

Uhu, yes we don't read webpages as a book. We indeed rather seem to 'scan' them. But that's not the case for webpaged books, at least when they are not formatted as an ordinary webpage.

Sure, but in thinking about screens, we have a scan relationship with them from very early on - points at television - so I wonder as to the state the brain is in when it picks up an eBook, whether it's framed to be accessing information from a screen or whether it settles into book mode.

I quite liked the point about control, with screens we can manipulate, it's a different relationship.

A single book will cost no more than usual.

Buying 500,000 titles and renting space to store them, will cost you much more as 133,000 Euro.I'd heard that the books would cost £30 each on the news the other day. Most books I buy are in the £10-15 range.

At least it will wow my college if I started binding my coursework in that way.

Bah. EBook for the win!

Bah. EBook for the win!

My qualifications authority only accepts printed medium, not memory sticks.

My qualifications authority only accepts printed medium, not memory sticks.

What a luddite.:p

What a luddite.:p
Absolutely. I've been pondering about presenting my coursework with Bluetooth. Gosh.

Sure, but in thinking about screens, we have a scan relationship with them from very early on - points at television - so I wonder as to the state the brain is in when it picks up an eBook, whether it's framed to be accessing information from a screen or whether it settles into book mode.

I quite liked the point about control, with screens we can manipulate, it's a different relationship.

There's not much control involved in using an eBook.

I'd heard that the books would cost £30 each on the news the other day. Most books I buy are in the £10-15 range.

I don't know about price setting. But many books cost more than £30.

I assume that in the beginning the early adopters will have to pay too much.

Also, it still could be useful for getting rare books.

There's not much control involved in using an eBook.

...but there is, you can link through to Wikipedia alone, which means you might burrow into a particular point for ages.

I'm not saying that's a bad thing, I'm just saying that even simple things, adjusting the font, lighting, flicking to the news (which can download everyday) and more..

Instead of subsuming (could be wrong word) yourself to an author (author-itative - if only on the book they're writing), you're not 'learning' in the same way.

Point is, the brain is wired - not inherently, just through usage - for distractions when viewing a screen, and an e-Book provides those distractions in abundance and, lord knows, they'll try and add all sorts of functionality down to a probable game or something.

I'm simply saying that the brain enters a certain state in reading a book, most likely a different state to reading an eBook.

I guess someone made a similar point about scrolls, maybe, I just think that the medium through which we intake information has an effect.

Actually, pressing buttons on a keyboard is quite tactile. I sometimes find myself playing a rhythm on it when reading from the screen.

You're not really reading. You're micro-multitasking, which means you're not really paying attention even to such tiny little things.

As much as it pains me to say this, Getbrett is right. (:p) For decades we have heard the predicted demise of print and it hasn't happened yet. This is because digital simply is not more durable for long term data storage than paper. They can both be destroyed, but there are more things than can destroy/corrupt digital files than printed ones.

As for reading, about 10 years ago or so, some neurologists decided to see if tv and computers really do make kids dumb, and apparently, they do -- in a way. Leaving aside the effect of looking at pictures versus deciphering letters -- Even when reading text, reading it on a screen generates less brain activity and results in less memory retention than reading printed sheets. The scientists are not sure why this is. It may have something to do with the light emissions from the screen creating a kind of visual "white noise" distraction. Those who read on screens gain less information, experience less reading skill development, and show less stress reduction during the activity than those who read print on paper.

Further, I believe there is an emerging fashion trend away from purely digital/virtual things and more towards "real" stuff -- hard goods. I think this is a slowly rising loss of interest in impermanent things, now the novelty of instant gratification with the internet is starting to wear off. It just doesn't feel like anything real, after a while. In the arts and design, I am seeing more combinations of real and virtual things, and more use of computer programs to enhance real objects than to generate substitutes for them.

I do not believe books will disappear, but I do think the publishing industry is going to change dramatically.

This is because digital simply is not more durable for long term data storage than paper. They can both be destroyed, but there are more things than can destroy/corrupt digital files than printed ones.

Hmm, simply due to being replicated far easier makes digital more 'durable', perhaps not in individual files but in terms of dissemination, digital is more 'durable'.

It may have something to do with the light emissions from the screen creating a kind of visual "white noise" distraction.

Indeed, in fact it's thought that ADD, and probably many other forms of brain disorder - as opposed to physical malfunctions - is very much due to white noise at a critical time of brain formation, when it starts to distinguish clearly between sights and sounds - plonking a child in front of the television at 1~2 years old is probably very harmful, let alone living in a city anyway.

...but there is, you can link through to Wikipedia alone, which means you might burrow into a particular point for ages.

I'm not saying that's a bad thing, I'm just saying that even simple things, adjusting the font, lighting, flicking to the news (which can download everyday) and more..

Instead of subsuming (could be wrong word) yourself to an author (author-itative - if only on the book they're writing), you're not 'learning' in the same way.

Point is, the brain is wired - not inherently, just through usage - for distractions when viewing a screen, and an e-Book provides those distractions in abundance and, lord knows, they'll try and add all sorts of functionality down to a probable game or something.

I'm simply saying that the brain enters a certain state in reading a book, most likely a different state to reading an eBook.

I guess someone made a similar point about scrolls, maybe, I just think that the medium through which we intake information has an effect.
In other words, you like being able to do things other than read the book. Why not just take up handball?

Hmm, simply due to being replicated far easier makes digital more 'durable', perhaps not in individual files but in terms of dissemination, digital is more 'durable'.



Indeed, in fact it's thought that ADD, and probably many other forms of brain disorder - as opposed to physical malfunctions - is very much due to white noise at a critical time of brain formation, when it starts to distinguish clearly between sights and sounds - plonking a child in front of the television at 1~2 years old is probably very harmful, let alone living in a city anyway.
No, replication does not make the information durable for long term storage. Maybe you missed those words because they were flickering on a screen. Long term storage implies that the data is archived, i.e. no one is using it at the moment but it needs to be preserved, perhaps forever. Paper is better for that.

I completely agree with your second point.

500,000 books? It would take you almost 1370 years to read them all, at one a day.

If you want free electronic books, there's Project Gutenberg (http://www.gutenberg.org/wiki/Main_Page). They have public domain stuff, so the most recent John Grisham is not going to be there, but quite a lot is.

In other words, you like being able to do things other than read the book. Why not just take up handball?

Huh?

500,000 books? It would take you almost 1370 years to read them all, at one a day.

If you want free electronic books, there's Project Gutenberg (http://www.gutenberg.org/wiki/Main_Page). They have public domain stuff, so the most recent John Grisham is not going to be there, but quite a lot is.

You don't have to read them all. But you're missing the point. The Espresso Book Machine delivers a hardcopy at almost FTL.

That's the USP of the device, not the content. 500,000 books seems a lot, but it's nothing compared to the amount of published ones.

No, replication does not make the information durable for long term storage. Maybe you missed those words because they were flickering on a screen. Long term storage implies that the data is archived, i.e. no one is using it at the moment but it needs to be preserved, perhaps forever. Paper is better for that.

Doesn't matter, if there's 50, 000 copies compared to 5 copies, the 50, 000 have an advantage, even for long-term storage, not (perhaps) as individual copies but as a whole.

You don't have to read them all. But you're missing the point. The Espresso Book Machine delivers a hardcopy at almost FTL.

That's the USP of the device, not the content. 500,000 books seems a lot, but it's nothing compared to the amount of published ones.

I personally prefer the packages done up by publishers, with nice bindings and all, rather than three or four hundred sheets of paper spewing out of my printer and having to change the damn ink cartridge (do you know what those suckers cost?).

I don't think there are 500,000 books I want to read and I don't want some marketing hack picking them out. I'll buy 'em one at a time, thanks.

I personally prefer the packages done up by publishers, with nice bindings and all, rather than three or four hundred sheets of paper spewing out of my printer and having to change the damn ink cartridge (do you know what those suckers cost?).

I don't think there are 500,000 books I want to read and I don't want some marketing hack picking them out. I'll buy 'em one at a time, thanks.

...but you could invest in one and print other people's books, you could become celebrated for your artistic designs, a real throwback to when books were created with loving care.

If nothing else, there's plenty of romantics who'd love a book of poems they wrote 'published' for their partner's birthdays.

i could see myself getting one of these and making a reasonable business out of it, it doesn't just need to be for yourself.

...but you could invest in one and print other people's books, you could become celebrated for your artistic designs, a real throwback to when books were created with loving care.

If nothing else, there's plenty of romantics who'd love a book of poems they wrote 'published' for their partner's birthdays.

i could see myself getting one of these and making a reasonable business out of it, it doesn't just need to be for yourself.

Well, alright, yes, I could. But I could probably do that far less expensively with a good printer and a souped up computer. Publishing has become much easier now.

And running off copies of other people's work - aside from the one for you to read - seems to violate copyright laws.

I personally prefer the packages done up by publishers, with nice bindings and all, rather than three or four hundred sheets of paper spewing out of my printer and having to change the damn ink cartridge (do you know what those suckers cost?).

I don't think there are 500,000 books I want to read and I don't want some marketing hack picking them out. I'll buy 'em one at a time, thanks.

The Espresso Book Machine is not holding an ordinary household printer. It is delivering a very high quality at a high speed. And the books get a hardcover.`

The Espresso Book Machine is not holding an ordinary household printer. It is delivering a very high quality at a high speed. And the books get a hardcover.`

I see that Blackwell's at Charing Cross in London bought one, for 120,000 pounds. It prints high-quality paperbacks, not hardcovers.

I can see this for a store, certainly, but for home use? Not really so much.

I see that Blackwell's at Charing Cross in London bought one, for 120,000 pounds. It prints high-quality paperbacks, not hardcovers.

I can see this for a store, certainly, but for home use? Not really so much.

The version you saw isn't capable in doing hardcovers.

It's not for your home, it's too expensive. :)

Look this machine is currently holding 500,000 titles, which will be expanded to 1 million this summer. Which is representing a lot of money.

The Espresso Book Machine could change the business plan of many bookstores.

The version you saw isn't capable in doing hardcovers.

It's not for your home, it's too expensive. :)

Look this machine is currently holding 500,000 titles, which will be expanded to 1 million this summer. Which is representing a lot of money.

The Espresso Book Machine could change the business plan of many bookstores.

But you said, in the OP, "For only 133,000 Euro you can have your own Espresso Book Machine."

I quite agree, for bookstores this could be a sea change. I can see a lot of people who currently work in the publishing industry looking for anoter job, however, so it's not completely wonderful (yeah, yeah, times change, who makes buggy whips, but for the people who lose actual jobs, it sucks).

But you said, in the OP, "For only 133,000 Euro you can have your own Espresso Book Machine."

Consider it as an easy little joke. In my country we like cynics and sarcasm. I understand this is not working in all countries.


I quite agree, for bookstores this could be a sea change. I can see a lot of people who currently work in the publishing industry looking for anoter job, however, so it's not completely wonderful (yeah, yeah, times change, who makes buggy whips, but for the people who lose actual jobs, it sucks).

I don't think it will work that way. I think the Espresso Book Machine will be used most of the time for rare or old books, which aren't available anymore in a printed version.

Future will tell if people like the concept, but I certainly would.

Doesn't matter, if there's 50, 000 copies compared to 5 copies, the 50, 000 have an advantage, even for long-term storage, not (perhaps) as individual copies but as a whole.
Well, how nice for 49,000 people who are not me, and if my digital copy becomes unreadable for some reason, their digital copies aren't going to help me much 50 years from when they were first downloaded, now are they? Ah, but my PAPER copy, which I would have printed 50 years ago, bound and put on a shelf, will likely still be there and fully accessible. Why I could even use it to make a new digital copy! Wowie!

...but you could invest in one and print other people's books, you could become celebrated for your artistic designs, a real throwback to when books were created with loving care.

If nothing else, there's plenty of romantics who'd love a book of poems they wrote 'published' for their partner's birthdays.

i could see myself getting one of these and making a reasonable business out of it, it doesn't just need to be for yourself.
That's my plan. I'm working on it right now, only my long term plans involve hard copy mechanical paste-ups of the book spreads, printed on high-res laser copiers (business machines), then bound by hand. Designed by hand, printed high-tech, bound by hand. A good pro copy/print machine is still cheaper than this book machine.

The version you saw isn't capable in doing hardcovers.

It's not for your home, it's too expensive. :)

Look this machine is currently holding 500,000 titles, which will be expanded to 1 million this summer. Which is representing a lot of money.

The Espresso Book Machine could change the business plan of many bookstores.
They'd be more like book vending machines.

In my country we like cynics and sarcasm.

I would probably be more appreciated there. :(

I would probably be more appreciated there. :(

It somehow funny, it's not the first time that people (especial Americans) misunderstood my words, while in my mother tongue almost anyone would understand the direction I'm going.

Things like...

"For only 133,000 Euro you can have your own Espresso Book Machine."

...are never taken seriously in my country. Everyone understands here that 133,000 Euro is too much money for an average household. By suggesting that such an expensive device is available for Joe Average, everyone here understands the exaggeration and thus the little joke.

It somehow funny, it's not the first time that people (especial Americans) misunderstood my words, while in my mother tongue almost anyone would understand the direction I'm going.

Things like...

"For only 133,000 Euro you can have your own Espresso Book Machine."

...are never taken seriously in my country. Everyone understands here that 133,000 Euro is too much money for an average household. By suggesting that such an expensive device is available for Joe Average, everyone here understands the exaggeration and thus the little joke.
I'm an American and I got it. I don't know what other people's problem is.

I'm an American and I got it. I don't know what other people's problem is.

I don't know either. I didn't want to suggest that all Americans couldn't get the grasp. :)

I don't know either. I didn't want to suggest that all Americans couldn't get the grasp. :)

:rolleyes: Hey, sometimes it's Monday, okay? :tongue:

:rolleyes: Hey, sometimes it's Monday, okay? :tongue:

I'm sorry I forgot, it's Tuesday already here. 3 o'clock in the morning. :)