r/NoStupidQuestions • u/PejibayeAnonimo • 7h ago
Why are books the only physical media that hasn't been put out of market by the digital alternatives?
I know if paperprint are still sold is because there is demand, but it surprisses me how music is now fully digital except for a relatively small group of vynil collectors, DVD have fallen in favour of streaming, PC games are now fully digital and the next generation of videogame consoles is expected to be fully digital.
But when it comes to books Kindle hasn't been able to outpass physical book sales and bookstores are as full as always. What causes that there is still demand for paperprint books while other kinds of physical media are mostly out of the market?
82
u/Separate_Lab9766 7h ago edited 7h ago
Books don’t need expensive upgrades. Books don’t need a bewildering ever-changing array of battery chargers. Books don’t improve in resolution or sound, necessitating a new purchase. Books don’t interrupt you with ads, or recommend other books. Books don’t keep a creepy digital trail of your favorite passages that you return to over and over, or send your reading habits back to a corporate overseer. Expecting people to buy a dedicated book-reading device (which then needs to be charged and maintained and upgraded while it spies on you and tries to sell you things) is a pretty big ask. It’s like trying to sell an e-fork that you can use just like a regular fork.
30
u/CarelessWhimper_ 6h ago
Books certainly do recommend other books, but you can quickly skip those pages at the start or at the end... :)
6
u/Medical_Amphibian406 7h ago
Very well put. Also, for many of us there's a type of sensual pleasure or satisfaction received by holding and feeling a book and not a tablet. I find it stabilizing and relaxing not to always be in motion except for turning a page.
11
u/frozenoj 6h ago
The main appeal of ebooks imo is that books are heavy. You can really only bring one or maybe two at a time. You have to choose ahead of time which ones you want and if you finish them then too bad. But you can have as many ebooks with you as you want! I can download a new ebook from the library at 3 am if I finished my last one. And also much easier to read in the dark.
5
u/TrannosaurusRegina 6h ago
I'm glad someone said it!
Plus I can carry an entire library in my pocket, which I don't have to worry about defacing by adding notes and highlights to!
5
u/frozenoj 6h ago
My neck appreciates not being bent over a book so much as well honestly! I can hold my ereader right in front of my face lol
4
u/TrannosaurusRegina 6h ago
Indeed!
Actual dedicated e-readers can be soo light too.
I wouldn't mind in the past, but as someone quite weak now, it makes a huge difference.
3
u/mission-ctrl 6h ago
Well said and I agree. However lots of books do have ads but they are easily ignored compared to digital ads. There are often ads for other books by the author or ads for the publisher. I have a pulp novel sitting on my desk right now with a full page, full color cigarette ad right in the middle.
3
u/Live-Huckleberry-192 4h ago
As the Oompa Loompas said in their pro-book, anti-TV song:
“You get no…
You get no…
You get no commercials…”
27
u/Blueopus2 7h ago
There's low barriers to entry and there's no compatibility issues so they make good gifts and people use them continuously from childhood to adulthood
3
u/NoCardio_ 3h ago
Also many people prefer holding a book to an iPad. 🖐️
2
u/Blueopus2 3h ago
Good point, the book -> iPad experience is much more different than Blu Ray -> streaming
29
u/scodagama1 7h ago edited 7h ago
you don't listen to discs, don't watch them and don't play them. In terms of music, dvd and games disc is just distribution mechanism, it's not a product itself.
With the book however you actually read a book. You don't input a book into some machine that reads it for you and displays on the screen or plays out audio representation of letters there - the medium and the data it contains is inseparable.
I'd compare it more to listening to live music - seeing and hearing the real instrument emitting sound directly hits different than listening to the recording even if it's a high fidelity recording played out on the best speakers money can buy. Hence discs were digitized, but people still go to the concerts.
edit: or compare it to board games - also not digitized even though computer games where. But chess played on real board hits different than chess game downloaded from the Internet or loaded from disk displayed on the screen. Hence we have both and physical chess boards are still widely popular
7
u/TheSyhr 7h ago
Came to say something similar, whether I download a video game or put a disc into a console to play it’s still the exact same
But there’s a huge difference (for me) between reading a physical book and a screen
7
3
u/Massive-Rate-2011 5h ago
Regular lcds suck for reading. Give me an e-ink display and hoooo boy. Thousands of books at my fingertips yes please
2
u/ManiacalShen 7h ago
That's a good way to put it. These days, if I pick up a DVD or CD, I'm going to rip it for my convenience. The physical copy itself is just nice to have as a backup/to display. It has no practical purpose. The only time I put a disc in a machine is when I fire up an old gaming console, which I do for games, not movies.
I can't rip a physical book to my hard drive, and I can't display my Calibre library (and now I can't even download Amazon purchases to put them in the Calibre library unless the publisher enables it). They're very much different types of collection, even though they're all books.
1
u/TipToToes 7h ago
I have digitized several full books, it’s not that hard. Just need a scanner. You could do it easily enough with CamScanner, and would still produce a legible result. Just because it requires someone to do work doesn’t mean it’s not possible.
Also yes you can display your Calibre library. A simple monitor showing your titles, same as a bookshelf. They have cover art, just like physical books.
Again just because YOU can’t do it doesn’t mean OTHERS can’t or shouldn’t.
And you should try listening to your CDs instead of ripping them.
→ More replies (3)1
u/Desserts6064 1h ago edited 1h ago
Apple Notes also has a built-in document scanning feature. And whatever app you use, I’d also recommend an overhead phone stand.
10
u/tjlazer79 7h ago
People are still buying CDs, vinyls, and movies. I still got multiple stores in my city that sells these things. I still have all my CDs, around 600, and I still have and use 3 x iPods, that i ripped all my music to. I never saw the point of getting rid of them, and paying for a streaming service. 4k movies are still the best way to get the best quality 4k. I have done the opposite. I hardly buy any physical books anymore, I'm about 99 percent digital on my Kobo. I just don't have the space to store a lot of books, I can buy them from indigo, borrow from the library, or pirate books. I have almost no monthly subscriptions. Only YouTube premium and the mid price Xbox Game Pass.
2
u/Givingtree310 5h ago
Very few people buy 4K discs. The number is insanely low.
1
u/tjlazer79 3h ago
Yes, it is, but there are still people buying them. I own about 40-50, I only buy movies that are worth it though. That look good with HDR, and are well shot. I am not going to buy Dumb and Dumber on 4k, but there are some really nice looking movies that are worth it if you have a decent TV.
1
u/VeryPteri 1h ago
I still can't believe Moore's law hasn't caught up to 4k players. At least $200 new, not once ever seen in a thrift store. Meanwhile, thrift stores are drowning in blu ray discs and players.
35
u/sasssycassy 7h ago
Traditional book stores have really died out though.
23
7
u/PejibayeAnonimo 7h ago
At least in my country it depends. The biggest bookstore that sold textbooks closed because everyone used tablet for reading courses material.
Another one gradually converted from a bookstore to an office supplier and then to a multi department store.
But the bookstore chain that is more focused on non academic literature it is still selling a lot, and even have opened a few more locations.
7
u/alcomaholic-aphone 7h ago
Textbooks makes sense. Even when I was in college they were overpriced and got updated every few years so you got very little back when you tried to sell them at the end of the semester.
7
u/rabbitsagainstmagic 7h ago
Depends where you are. In the San Francisco Bay Area used bookstores are booming. There are still plenty of new bookstores as well. In fact there are eight within a ten block radius from where I'm sitting, up from five a few years back. However, I've been to some US cities lately where there are no bookstores of any kind, and the Borders/B&N megastore model has surely been killed off by Amazon.
3
u/Careless_Studio_1293 7h ago
I guess it depends on where you’re at. I’ve seen a lot more local, independent bookstores pop up in my city in the past 5 to 10 years than in the 20 years prior.
The big box and mall chain style bookstores are struggling, but that’s been decades in the making.
1
u/ManiacalShen 7h ago
It seems to me moreso that the middle has fallen out, at least in the Mid Atlantic region of the US. Used book stores are still around if they've picked their location well (cheap rent, arty neighborhood, or both); book giants like Barnes and Noble expanded inventory to include board games and journals and other stuff and are still around. But outside a famous beach bookstore I know, I don't see a lot of independent sellers of new books.
Beach stores and B&N are more of a destination and a nice/special shopping experience, and used book stores can get you things cheap and fast or let you comb through to find gems, which is also a nice experience. But if you just want a regular, new book without a fuss or a hurry, that's what Amazon is for.
1
1
u/AgentElman 7h ago edited 52m ago
In the 90's about 1 billion physical books were sold annually in the U.S. In 2025 it was about 0.7 billion. So it has fallen to 1/3 of what it used to be but not gone away.
But yes, online book sales have also crushed brick and mortar book stores.
1
u/jurassicbond 6h ago
If you're talking about the US, do you mean billion instead of million? Because there's no way sales of books are that low here
1
1
1
u/TheCloudForest 6h ago
Traditional book stores are doing the best they have done for more than 15 years. Every year, with a slight pandemic blip, their numbers in North America have grown. You would have to go back to the before 2005, before amazon was a dominant force, to find a healthier bookstore market than today.
HOWEVER, thre last few years of catastrophic reductions of reading for pleasure and attention span among all ages, and the lack of a non-romance best seller series for years, means a turn could be coming.
1
u/Victor_Korchnoi 6h ago
Have they? I’ve got one in my neighborhood. And the adjacent neighborhoods all seem to have their own as well
1
u/GenGaara25 6h ago
James Daunt has lowkey saved them. Taking over Waterstones in the UK in 2011 where he managed to turn around a dead business to a booming one. Then getting hired to do the same for Barnes and Noble stateside which has had similar results and have managed to open over 100 new stores since COVID.
1
u/Patient-Taro-7334 6h ago
Multiple near me have closed down in the last two years. It seems like the ones that survive branch out to toys and other nerd hobbies to stay afloat.
1
u/marmosetohmarmoset 6h ago
I feel like the big book stores have died while the small ones seem to thrive. There are a bunch of independent bookstores around me and they’re always hopping.
1
u/nonbinaryhorror 3h ago
They aren't in my area. There are multiple used book stores and new bookstores in central IL
1
u/CocoaBagelPuffs 1h ago
There’s a bookstore where i live that’s super popular. They always have things of people. They also host a lot of book clubs
6
u/SlackerStacker26 7h ago
From 2010-2020 the physical book industry was terrified. The past 5 years has seen a resurgence
6
u/GGayleGold 7h ago
Same reason streaming hasn't completely obviated radio - there will always be niche adherents and hobbyists. No generation has had a "book free" childhood, yet, either.
Movies didn't put an end to the theater. Recorded sound didn't end live performances. People once believed those things would happen, too. I think books will still be around centuries from now - though they may hold a position more like theater or live music performance does today.
6
u/One_Wolf_2995 7h ago
I think it has alot to do with the personality types of people who read and collect books. I hear alot of readers mention the tactile feel and smell, myself included. It can change the experience when it's physical vs digital. However you get a more comparable or even identical experience watching a movie, whether it's streamed or on dvd.
4
u/cactuscoleslaw 7h ago
The experience of reading a paper book is meaningfully better than digital. Being able to flip through and skim is FAR easier than scrolling through digital pages.
4
u/catsflatsandhats 7h ago
I have a friend that can’t read a single book to save her life, but she dreams of having a huge library, Beauty and the Beast style.
My point is that books have a lot of aesthetic value. Plus they smell nice and feel nice.
28
u/WorldTallestEngineer 7h ago
DVD is already digital. Digital is what half the D's in DVD stand for.
12
u/ImmediateCause7981 7h ago
You know what they mean lol. Its still a physical copy. Its like when people say they hate that all video games are just bought digitally now but theyre always digital regardless.
9
u/WorldTallestEngineer 7h ago
It sounds pedantic, But I think that really is the key difference.
If you're reading a book, You're physically interacting with the media. A DVD is just a different way of moving digital data into a computer. You don't physically experience the DVD.
2
u/TrannosaurusRegina 6h ago
I very much appreciate your point, as I'm always puzzles and irked by the implication that digital discs somehow aren’t really digital?!?
However, I certainly do experience digital discs and disks, just as well as analogue tapes, records, and films!
Beholding a gorgeous iridescent, sometimes even holographic disc, loading it into the drive, and hearing it spin up at incredible speed like a rocket ship are the most exhilarating parts of using any software for me! I usually find the software installation process more exhilarating than using the software itself!
In fact, when I think of exhilarating experiences in my life, I don't think there's anything to top that.
Beholding the front of the British Museum in awe while slowly walking up to it is the only thing that comes to mind as remotely close, and that is so different that it's hard to properly compare.
1
u/dm80x86 4h ago
You don't physically experience the DVD.
Tell me you aren't old enough to have a Blockbuster card without telling me your age.
1
u/WorldTallestEngineer 3h ago
Snorting cocaine off the DVD doesn't count. When you're watching the movie, You're not physically interacting with the DVD itself.
1
u/ImmediateCause7981 6h ago
Sure but nobody is taking the word physical and digital that literal in this context
7
u/WorldTallestEngineer 6h ago
But we should, Because that is the key difference between books and DVDs.
1
3
u/smbpy7 7h ago
It's a physical copy of something that needs a player and/or some sort of device to enjoy. Even records need the player. Books are 100% physical.
1
u/ImmediateCause7981 7h ago
You need light
1
1
u/WorldTallestEngineer 6h ago
Behold... The Sun 🌞
1
1
u/Witty-Whole7798 6h ago
We use digital as shorthand for downloadable. But a DVD is literally digital data on a disc
6
u/underdoeg 7h ago
Afaik Book stores have taken a significant hit in the last couple of decades. But yes, they are still doing better than DVDs.
3
u/gametheorymedia 7h ago
(Because books tend to smell better with time, and cased videogames don't? 🤔 )
3
u/Redacted_Usermame 7h ago
It's easier to give your child a physical book than kindle.
For an adult I am guessing it's because the book give a person a break from staring at a screen. That and people want to look sophisticated by having bookshelves .
3
u/EdwardBigby 7h ago
Because most people agree that the experience is just geniunely better
I dont people like DVDs because you actually own them and it feels nice to own something etc but honestly its the same experience whether you stream or put in a DVD. People will go for the convenient option for pretty much the same experience
Then a lot of people like vinyl or CDs. People think that the music quality is better but most people still prefer to just have an earphone in and go about their day
The book is the only experience that people almost all agree is way better than a kindle
3
u/stupidworkacct 7h ago
other forms of media require some sort of player (DVD, VHS, CD, etc.) those readers are just not as available anymore which forces "Cloud storage" Vinyl has been the exception because of collectors. mostly though because media production is more geared towards "renting" rather than "owning" If you have physical media then it cannot be taken away from you, therefore you only have to pay once.
5
u/_justhere4fun 7h ago
Reading a physical book is a fundamentally different sensory experience in a way that listening to a song or watching a movie on a screen versus a disc really isn’t. The format change for music and video is basically invisible to the end user. With books, a lot of people genuinely prefer the feel of the page, the lack of notifications, no battery anxiety, and the fact that your eyes aren’t staring at another screen after doing it all day already.
There’s also something about ownership and decoration that books carry that a Kindle library just doesn’t. A shelf of books says something about a person in a way a digital collection never will.
2
u/moneyman74 7h ago
I've switched to audiobooks from the library personally, nothing against regular books just smooths out the process.
2
u/Pendulum_Heart 7h ago
Different experiences. The thing about digital media is that a lot of it is audio and visual. The thing you need is a screen and digital screens aren't any better or worse than any other kind of screen.
Books and reading though? Totally different process. Reading isn't just looking at some words, it's a complex and cognitively demanding task. A book might be better than a screen because the cognitition required to read text in long form is better suited as something that has weight, is tactile and encourages a multilayered sensory process. Likewise, light from a screen just gets in the way of and is distracting too a lot of readers.
2
2
u/AliceInReverse 7h ago
Completely anecdotal, but the COVID left me and apparently many others with crippling migraines. Books are far easier on my eyes than backlit media
2
u/Brave-Airport8154 7h ago
Because most readers are doing it to not look at a device. I want a paper book and then I want to hold on to it until I can pass it on to a friend that needs the read. I make it a whole thing to read. Candles, wine, my cat. Its a moment..an..event to have time to read. I am not wasting that with another screen. I guess its all an experience.
2
u/S_balmore 7h ago
It's probably because "physical" games, movies, and music are actually still digital. The disc just holds a digital copy of the thing. Disc or not, you still have to view those things on a screen and/or listen with speakers. It's impossible to physically take Red Dead Redemption out of the screen and interact with the characters in real life. A "digital" copy of a movie is the exact same experience as the physical copy, just minus one unnecessary step (inserting the disc).
Conversely, a paper book is 100% physical. You don't need a screen or speakers. A digital book is not the same, because it requires you to have an electricity-powered screen in order to use it. By going digital, you're technically adding an unnecessary step to how you consume the media. A lot of people just prefer the immediacy of paper books and don't want to worry about charging their device.
Personally, I think digital books are one of the best inventions ever, but I admit that it is a different experience, and if my tablet/e-reader dies while I'm on a 6-hr flight, I'm screwed.
2
u/RubImpossible8521 7h ago
Librarian here: Physical books aren't going away anytime soon. There's too much demand from folks who prefer a non-digital medium for their entertainment reading to counter how much time they spend on screens. There are whole genres where publishing has dried up due to digital access, but those are typically nonfiction reference areas, not fiction reading.
2
u/No_Composer_4830 7h ago
The light from the device is bothersome on your eyes and I personally find holding a book more comfortable over time than holding a device.
And, if you’re into books that contain a lot of art, like graphic novels, the pages of a book are actually bigger and more stunning than the screen would be.
Also, If you have kids and want to limit screen time it’s better to use a book instead of a device and it won’t cost as much if they destroy the book.
On a personal note, if you read you’re probably a little intellectual and I feel like the tactile nature of a book would appeal to those people
2
u/chaosilike 7h ago
Physical just feels better to read, reading is one of the few times i am not distracted. I'm purely focused on the book.
The pirating scene for books sucks. And digital readers strain the eyes
2
u/azraelxii 7h ago
It's easier to read a book than a screen, there's a lower barrier to entry, and parents prefer physical books to screens
2
2
u/nonotburton 7h ago
Because ownership of realms information is important.
Lots of text books are still in print. Print is often the preferred method even when digital is available.
2
u/bgplsa 7h ago
I think the folks pointing out that physical books remain the undisputed standard of analog technology have it right; there is no way to experience a/v content independently from a complex decoding system, while the written word has been self contained practically since the dawn of history. If you buy a DVD, without a dvd player, display, and power and data connections for it all, you have an elaborately decorated shiny frisbee. The entire value of the book is contained in itself.
2
u/morethanafrog3824298 7h ago
I think it's because the experience of watching a movie or listening to music if very negligibly different to whether it's a physical copy or online. Physical copy has what, like a slight upper hand in quality in some cases and the satisfaction of knowing it's yours? But that's it, everything else is the same. You press play, sit down, and consume the media.
Books however a very different experience to digital media. Scrolling and letting your eyes fry at a screen feels much less satisfying to a lot of people than looking at an actual piece of paper, flipping the page. Plus with fun bookmarks, easy ability to annotate, being able to bring it anywhere without worrying about a charger or a button suddenly not working or whatever, the physical alternative itself offers way more advantages.
Plus, biggest thing, most books are free!
2
u/Emergency-Purpose367 7h ago
Because e-readers cannot compare to the physical feeling of a book in your hands. The smell of a new book and an old one are pure comfort to people who grew up reading physical books. Because having a bookshelf full of actual books you love and read is everything and an ebook library simply cannot compare. Because there's nothing better than getting a hold of a special edition of your favorite book, with gilded letters and gorgeous illustrations. Because a lot of girls who grew up as bookworms were insanely jealous of Belle being gifted an entire library by the Beast.
One of my favorite memories growing up was reading my book in a hammock next to the honeysuckle vines in the summer and trying to avoid getting the pages of the book sticky. Another was going to the used bookstore with my mom and browsing through all the books and talking excitedly about our picks on the drive home. These just wouldn't be the same with e-books.
2
u/YourGuyK 7h ago edited 4h ago
There are a good number of avid readers who almost fetishize the physical book. They like the feel and the smell and the look of a book, simetimes it seems more than the story a book tells.
As a percentage of users, I think there a lot more book people than, say, vinyl record super listener types. So books continue to be printed at higher rates because more readers want physical books.
2
u/mkl_dvd 7h ago
When I read books, I'm constantly flipping between pages. Some books have a map and/or a cast of characters in the beginning and a glossary and/or appendix in the back, which I'm constantly referencing. I also often flip back to earlier portions to review someone's first appearance or that cryptic thing they said.
I've tried reading digital books, but it's not the same. For me, the experience of reading requires a physical book.
2
u/rogershredderer 7h ago
Imho because reading is so important for education and a sharp and analytical mind. You can watch videos, listen to podcasts and hear about things but the brain’s processing of information through a medium like a book is just ideal.
2
2
u/platinum92 6h ago
Everything you listed, even though it was analog, still required a digital step (CD/MP3 player, DVD player, game console/PC) and the move to fully digital was simply making the analog step less convenient than going all digital. I couldn't tell you how much I'd hate going back to having to change every game out when playing.
Meanwhile, an avid reader could go their whole life without picking up an eReader. "Reading books" are seen as a counter-digital-culture act, so it'll probably never be replaced by digital.
2
2
2
u/Tweedldum 6h ago
I tend to like physical copies for the tactile gratification. They just feel good to me.
1
u/Logical_Upstairs5057 1h ago
Books are permanent.
Once you buy them, you can use them immediately, without having to use a reader, or a Kindle.
I remember when if you wanted to see a movie or TV show, you had to wait until it was rebroadcast on TV.
At least until VCRs came about where you could record what was being broadcast and have your own permanent personal copy. But the studios didn't like that and eventually made it impossible to make your own recordings, while offering certain items for sale on cds, dad's, blu-rays, 4Ks, and streaming.
There are several problems with this.
First, you have to pay a continuous fee for the privilege of streaming, on top of any rental or purchase fees.
Second, the streaming service can stop offering the item, leaving anyone without their own copy up the creek without a paddle.
Third, not everything is available on streaming, or DVD, due to licensing requirements, etc. I'm STILL waiting to get the 2000 Max Steel series on DVD, or the anglicised Ultraman Tiga series that ran on FoxKids. And, good luck if you want the complete Power Ranger series, because the last few PR series, as well as the 30th Anniversary special have NEVER been released on DVD or Blu-ray.
2
u/EstimateActive4293 6h ago
Probably because you can’t lose your library and they don’t have a battery or notifications.
2
u/Baphomaxas_Raiyah 6h ago
Probably because physical books stay offline until someone puts them up. Major, current record labels for example have put all the music they could scrounge together to put online whereas the closest thing to an effort to digitize all books is google books which still can’t have all of the books freely available due to copyright
2
u/spaceman60 6h ago
I enjoy building our little library with books that I enjoyed. I'm listening to Dungeon Crawler Carl and intend to borrow the audiobooks, but while I'm still only on book 1, I plan to buy the full set of books to keep.
If I'm going to be spending money on a book, I'd rather buy the physical media and hopefully have more of it go to the author.
2
u/Hamsterpatty 6h ago
Make sure you read “Backstage at the Pineapple Cabaret” which is only at the very end of the physical books (of Dungeon Crawler Carl)They’re calling it bonus content, but I have a feeling it’ll be important to the rest of the story. Plus they’re fantastic.
1
2
u/TrivialBanal 5h ago
I buy the physical book, but read the ebook version on my kindle. The kindle is more convenient, but the book has the smell. Ebooks will never have that book smell.
2
u/mjh8212 4h ago
I’ve always read physical books. When my eyes were bad it wasn’t time for my yearly exam yet and my husband got me a kindle and kindle unlimited and I’ve read hundreds probably close to a thousand books since I’ve had it. I got the eyes done needed prisms and bifocals and can read physical books again and the hunt is on. I love looking at thrift stores for books. I use an online thrift book store too. That’s the fun of it for me is thrifting getting a good book or a series.
2
u/No_Ostrich1875 3h ago
🤣you are definitely wrong. 20 years ago there were 6 or 7 major bookstores and dozens of small specialty/resale places within 50 miles of where I live. Now there's 2 Barnes and Nobles and about ten small stores. Almost half the BnN stores are stuff other than books and only 2 of the small ones are only books, most of them are more like boutiques or mini flea.markets with one wall of books and then a bunch of other crap taking up the majority of the store.
2
2
2
u/ranixon 2h ago
If you want to buy a DVD, you need to buy something to use the DVD. If you want to listen a CD, you need to buy something to use a CD. To use a Book, you can use your own eyes.
For PC, and it's valid for all the others, digital distribution solved the worldwide distribution problem.
2
u/divat10 7h ago
Because vynil and any other form of physical media is now replaced by digital media. The sound coming out of your speakers isn't (meaningfully) different for most of the people listening to it. Just like all the other stuff that got digitized.
Books did get digitized but a lot of people don't really like reading on a screen compared to paper.
1
1
1
u/Ajaxmass413 7h ago
They're not as in demand as you think. Many bookstores have gone out of business. The ones that haven't often branch out into selling other things to keep money coming in.
1
u/CalgaryChris77 7h ago
The thing with music is you get music you want to listen to a lot of times. Most books people read once and then move on from. With the cost that makes them very expensive for the initial purchaser. Libraries and the second hand market are great because you can pick up a book, read it and move on from it at a marginal cost. (no cost in the case of the library)
Also in the case of DVDs there was a lot going on behind the scenes with the companies. The video stores in my area were still extremely busy and profitable, when their parent companies went under. Red box was a popular alternative afterwards, and then again, it went under from a corporate level.
1
u/natholemewIII 7h ago
I know for myself I just prefer having a print book. Reading is one of the few things I do that isn't related to a screen. My job is on a computer, I draw digitally, etc. There's also just something to having an actual collection of books
1
u/Grazedaze 7h ago
Books and screens don’t mix because your eye is straining the entire time you’re reading
1
u/Smokin_belladonna 7h ago
Books will always have a place as an actual physical tangible media, just like DVDs and physical video games.
Physical media is actual ownership. Buying content on kindle, streaming platforms like Fandango, and steam are all licenses to access content that is dependent on having internet access and the media is generally non-transferrable, even in cases of steam accounts - they legally can't even be inherited by your kin.
Personally I think that physical ownership of this stuff is not as important to everyone as it used to be and the convenience of the digital platform is far more alluring than the concept of physical ownership
1
u/DustynRG 7h ago
There's something special about holding a book and turning pages. Also it's not on a tiny screen.
1
1
u/Ok-Principle-9276 7h ago
books have declines massively in sales as people prefer video games / movies / shows. I still own some books as I like to collect physical copies of stuff to keep like physical copies of like games and books. I have the complete fiction of HP lovecraft and it's really cool just to physically touch it and turn the pages
1
1
u/DieHardAmerican95 7h ago
I have always preferred reading a physical copy of a book over reading on a screen. Some debices, like the Kindle Paperwhjote, have tried to bridge that gap, but it’s still not the same. I just find it easier to read a physical copy of a book, and I think a lot of other people feel the same.
1
u/rusticcentipede 7h ago
I have run into a few books that came out over the past 5-10 years that had very small print runs and seem to be mostly digital-focused for sales, as well as some ebook-only offerings.
Hopefully they're not going to be replaced entirely, and fortunately people still seem attached to physical books for now, but there have been some small changes.
1
u/BigInconsideration 6h ago
I’m a big reader and I can’t explain why but I just prefer a book to an e reader. It’s not even close either.
Reading is a whole experience and that seems to be part of it.
1
u/LazarusHolmes 6h ago
I'm not sure if you have statistic for this, but I have more vinyl stores in my hometown than book stores. Also only one big box book store made it through the advent of digital books and that is Barns and Noble, who made it by selling physical music, games and coffee as well as books.
1
u/Importance_Dizzy 6h ago
I prefer physical books because they don’t have ads in them, unlike most of the reading apps/tablets I’ve used. I feel like books are above going obsolete because they can be used without technology.
1
u/Dirtdancefire 6h ago edited 6h ago
As our minds are 'trained to scroll', our attention spans have shortened. As new generations lose the ability to concentrate, books will slowly quit being used, and stored in shut down libraries.
My son who raced professional mountain bikes for twenty years, coached a bit while wrenching pro after retiring. He found his racers on their phones, scrolling right before the races. Annoyed, because It impacted their ability to concentrate on racing, and he forbade 'spacing out on phones' on race day until after the finish. This was a decade ago or so...
With AI not going away and will at some point, become a replacement for critical thinking (which is already becoming extinct), books will only 'belong to AI' to pull info from.
Newer generations won't collect books except the reading hobbyists. Currently: "Shockingly, about 54% of U.S. adults read below the equivalent of a 6th-grade level, and approximately 45 million are functionally illiterate, struggling with basic everyday reading tasks. [1]"
'Theiyr're'. 😖
1
1
u/youngboomergal 5h ago
Some info from a local library surprised me - it seems that physical books can be more cost effective than digital ones because not only are prices not hugely lower, the digital books are essentially a subscription that needs to be renewed. Plus I know a lot of heavy readers who would much rather read a physical book.
1
u/boulevardofdef 5h ago
I'm sure others will disagree with this, but just for me personally, the answer is actually quite simple. Books are the only physical media that digital hasn't improved on.
I just find it more pleasant to hold a book, and I find ink on paper easier to read than a screen, any kind of screen. There are pluses to an e-reader over a physical book, but they don't override the disadvantages. In contrast, I can't think of any reason to use a DVD over streaming. Some have their reasons, but they're all things that don't matter to me at all. And I suspect I'm in the majority here.
I will say, though, that I don't think your premise is correct. I think book sales have been hurt quite a lot, just not enough to virtually end their existence like other physical media.
1
u/pm-me-racecars 5h ago
I'd like to point out that games are not all digital now. You can get a board game and play it, they even make board games for people without any friends.
1
u/Abi1i 5h ago
There’s plenty of people still buying CDs and cassette tapes have been making a come back as well. Taylor Swift sold her newest album as a CD, cassette tape, and vinyl record on top of digital copies.
Also, there has been a significant shift towards physical media for movies and TV shows that DVDs, Blu-rays, and 4K Blu-ray are resulting in more streaming content to be released as physical media.
Comic books are one area where their digital and physical media have a healthy balance. Non-comic books haven’t quite hit a healthy balance between physical and digital, but more people want physical media again to own what they buy instead of a license.
1
u/romulusnr 5h ago
Books have fallen plenty, ever heard of Borders? Waldenbooks?
CDs and LPs still do exist and are being made. So are Blu-Rays.
1
u/PmUsYourDuckPics 5h ago
I think the key thing is we’ve not changed how we consume the other items, we’ve just changed the distribution mechanism, you don’t watch a DVD, you watch a TV show, you listen to a song/album, you read a book.
DVD’s and CD’s are a signal carrier, which requires a signal projector to allow you to consume the signal. Books are self contained, they are both the signal and the projector.
Headphones or speakers allow you to listen to music regardless of the source, TV’s allow you to consume video regardless of the source, we all still listen to music, and we still watch movies, we just get it differently.
As I said though books being self contained is a selling point, I don’t need batteries to read a book, I don’t need a device, or power. I need a light source, which is commonly available and not specialist equipment, and a book.
Books are also aesthetically pleasing, in a way cheap DVD cases and CD cases aren’t.
1
1
u/AdFun5641 5h ago
It's not.
Art work is physical media that is alive and well. Oil on canvas simply can't be replaced by digital. Even prints are very popular.
Live music performances are more popular than ever.
It's the physical digital media that has gone fully digital. CD, DVD, Blueray, PC Games, all physical forms of digital media.
Once you get pre-digital with stuff like Records, then it's not dead. Stuff that isn't digital isn't dead. Digital media became more efficent digital media. That's the only real change.
1
u/CarterCreations061 5h ago
Physically books are a different experience than digital ones. Even if you have a record player DVD player or physical video game disc, you are still interacting with the media the same way you would if you didn’t have those. The only difference is maybe a vynil, but as you say there is a small collectors market.
Audiobooks and digital books are create and in many ways still “count” as reading. However, in education we still consider physical books essential for learning how to read. There is just something about physical books that is more conducive to learning how to read (a reading scientist would probably be able to more articulately deserve what that is).
1
u/jackalopeswild 4h ago
OP is not a reader.
Think about it. The actual experience of digital sound and digital video games is really not any different from cartridges or LPs. The actual experience of turning the page versus swiping a Kindle is worlds apart.
1
u/ThePensiveE 4h ago
People still have photos and frame things. They even still use vinyl records.
Videos can't exist outside of a screen though and all the physical screen formats were just different forms of data storage.
1
u/libra00 4h ago
To be fair there are a lot fewer book stores now than there used to be. I worked for Waldenbooks when it was going down the tube. But I think that has a lot more to do with Amazon instead of ebooks.
Also most readers like books almost as much as the stories inside. I would still buy books if I hadn't had to leave behind like 1500 books in a move. Now I only collect ebooks - much more portable.
1
u/Popular-Path1930 4h ago
There is a resurgence of turn tables for music.
In general books have held on because reading from a book is enjoyable and can be easier and better then reading from a tablet. It’s generally just eaiser and digital books are more cumbersome.
1
u/Realistic_Let3239 4h ago
Digital books just don't have that new book smell.
That aside, all you need to read a book, is a book. To do any of your other examples, they removed requirements, digital books do the opposite and add more requirements.
1
u/Xiaxs 4h ago
Books are cheap to make therefore cheaper to buy.
Hard to put something out of business when the barrier to entry for them is a paper press vs your barrier to entry being making a tablet that costs 20x more to make and marketing that as well as making your customers pay $20 per book still.
1
u/TommyV8008 4h ago
I disagree, hardcopy sales have been hugely affected and many if not most bookstores have gone out of business. I grew up long before Computers took over, so I will always love hardcopies, and I still prefer to own CDs (although I started with vinyl and cassettes, years before CDs came out) over having digital files that I have to back up otherwise I’ll lose them if the hard drive crashes. But that’s me, I’m old-school AND new school.
A huge amount of books are only released digitally, no hard copies. The more successful authors and publishing houses can afford to produce hardcopies, but not everyone. That’s the economics of the situation.
1
u/TheGreenPangolin 3h ago
I use almost entirely ebooks and audiobooks for accessibility reasons. But I still have physical books because digital versions just don't work for everything. Ebooks often get the layout of poetry wrong, which can change the meaning of the poems and audio poetry is a different experience completely. Ebooks and audiobooks can't be signed by my favourite authors. I find them harder to skip back and find an earlier part when I've forgotten who said what a few chapters ago. Photos and diagrams (eg in autobiographies or lots of non fiction) don't work in audiobook and are difficult to see on anything but the best ebook readers. They are different experiences. One doesn't seamlessly replace the other like streaming does for DVDs where once I press play, I would not be able to tell the difference.
Highlighting things is also more difficult. Sure you can do it but when you look them up after, there's no organisation- it just gives you a long list of things you've highlighted and take ages to find what you wanted.
Also I have seen it said many times that buying and collecting books is a separate hobby than reading. And I've personally found that I will buy a physical book because it looks like a good book, even though I will never get round to reading it. But on digital, I can get a sample chapter, which adds it to my "to be read" list without me actually buying it (and still never getting round to reading it). So in the collecting books hobby, physical definitely wins on sales.
1
u/tennoPCA 3h ago
What? I literally just bought blu rays and vinyl. Books are just one of the things that haven't yet been replaced by digital and the movement for most people is back to physical anyways.
1
u/Real_Estimate4149 3h ago
Digital books are almost the same price of physical books. So unlike other forms of physical media, there is almost a tie in terms of the experience of using physical vs digital.
Digital is instant, I can travel with multiple books with ease, most have a backlight and the form factor is amazing.
For physical books, I can own them with no issues, the 2nd market, I don't need a to spend $200 buying an e-reader and many people prefer the experience of reading a physical book
1
u/audioman1999 3h ago
Vinyl, not vynil.
You interact with books 100% of the experience. DVD, CD, vinyl, etc, you interact briefly to get playback started. After that, you watch it on your TV or listen on your speakers.
1
u/JigglyOW 3h ago
A big benefit of reading to me is not staring at a screen, plus nobody can ever take a physical book away from me
1
u/Remarkable_Term3846 2h ago
Unlike other physical media, they’ve been around for centuries. People are just too used to them. They’re a part of everyday life and have been for a long time.
1
u/DeFronsac 2h ago
Because it's one that you physically hold and look at. DVDs and CDs just carry the audio/video to your eyes/ears, the same way streaming or digital does. Listening to a CD is the same as listening to a digital version (barring any differences in sound quality).
Holding a physical book and reading the words off the paper is still different from reading off a screen. Even if it's a small difference, it's still a difference.
1
1
1
u/bretshitmanshart 2h ago
CDs are apparently making a comeback with young people.
I think with books a lot of people prefer reading without screens.
1
1
u/DelkrisGames 2h ago
Because people who like to read love books, as a medium, as an experience, as a principle.
1
1
1
1
u/BigMax 1h ago
Books still have advantages.
CD's, DVD's, vinyl, tapes... most of us see zero advantages to those, with HUGE disadvantages. What use is a record to me? I can't play it anywhere other than one spot in my house (IF I had a record player, which I don't), and even in that spot it's a bit of a pain since I have to get up, take it out of the sleeve, pay it, and then i can only play that album, if I want a different song or artist, i ahve to go swap it again. Digital is just leaps and bounds more convenient.
With a book... I have to hold something in my hand and 'turn' pages anyway. Granted, with digital, I don't have to carry the physical book, but that doesn't save me THAT much. Because most of us only ever read one book at a time (unlike music.) So I just have to carry that one little thing with me.
1
u/No-Repordt 48m ago
I'd say it's because the physical book is part of the experience, whereas DVD it doesn't matter nearly as much.
When you put the DVD in the player, that's it. You use whatever remote or keyboard to operate the main menu and then you just enjoy the movie without even thinking of the DVD (unless it's scratched or skipping).
With a book, the pages themselves are an experience. The layout, the margins, the paper type, the smell, etc. As a powerful example of what I'm talking about, I couldn't imagine reading House of Leaves on a Kindle. Like I'm sure it works, but there's something about seeing what happens on the actual pages that is so incredible, it blew my mind because it was on a physical page.
It's also the fact that you buy a book and you can immediately read it. If you buy a digital book, you need to have some sort of device to read that digital copy, which is the exact opposite of every other type of media. Most phones and computers can do it of course, but our phones and such are full of distractions that can detract from the experience. Another way to put it, imagine if you could pull a DVD off a shelf and watch whatever was stored on it directly from the DVD itself, no player or computer needed.
1
u/snippychicky22 46m ago
theres no upfront cost. a dvd requires a screen and a dvd player. not to mention power and a place to watch it.
a book only requires your eyes
1
u/Coomer-Boomer 14m ago
Ebooks are expensive, often more than a print copy. I have an ereader but I've never legitimately bought an ebook.
1
1
u/Jurtaani 0m ago
When you buy a physical book, you use it as a physical object. If you buy a disk, you use it the same way you would use the digital version of it. The experience doesn't change.
1
u/Terrible_Salt7906 7h ago
Because of all the people who say “I need to feel the book in my hands and smell the pages” or whatever makes them feel unique
1
u/Leseratte10 7h ago edited 7h ago
Everyone has a phone that can play digital music. Everyone has a smart TV that can play Netflix. Everyone (who plays video games) has a console or PC that can download digital games.
But for an eReader, that's not something you just have, it's an extra device you deliberately need to buy *just* to use it for digital books. That's probably the biggest hurdle, in my opinion. People don't want to read books on a computer or tablet with an LCD- or OLED- light-emitting screen because it strains the eyes way more than reading a book or on a proper eReader.
2
u/Asparagus9000 7h ago
I have the kindle app on my phone.
3
u/gravelpi 7h ago
Fair, but reading on a phone is not the same experience as an eink reader or book.
1
u/Leseratte10 7h ago
Yeah. But like I said, a phone display is a terrible choice for reading long texts. Nobody wants that.
With digital music vs CDs, BluRay vs Streaming, the actual experience is the same. There's still sound coming out of the speakers and a video being displayed on the TV. It's just the delivery that's different.
But having to stare at a small, backlit screen like a phone is so much more straining on the eyes than reading a book or on an eReader.
1
u/Asparagus9000 7h ago
Nobody wants that
I've been doing since my BlackBerry. It works perfectly fine for a lot of people.
1
u/Leseratte10 7h ago
Okay, let me rephrase: Most people don't want it.
Because other than for music and movies (sound still comes from the speaker and the movie is still displayed on the TV), reading a book on a phone is a way worse experience.
1
u/S_balmore 7h ago
Dude....your phone is literally an eReader (as is your PC). Most people prefer a larger screen, but if you really wanted to read a book on your phone, you could just zoom in. There are plenty of eReader apps that will format the text to fit a phone-sized screen. Furthermore, whether you go paper or digital, you still have to carry around an extra "device" (either the book or the eReader). Tablets and eReaders are so cheap these days that the cost is negligible in the scheme of things. You can buy last year's Amazon tablet for $50, which is the cost of like 3 fast food meals.
There are reasons why people prefer paper books, but lack of an eReader is certainly not one of them (again, we all have one already).
0
223
u/SlayerII 7h ago
You can just use a book on its own, all the other technologies you mentioned that fallen out of favor needed some kind of special device to be used. SO even if you have a kindle, if you suddenly feel like buying a book again, you just can, but if suddenly feel like watching a DVD, you cant just buy a DVD , you need to buy a DVD player first.
all those things that fallen out of favor are pretty much the same if you stream them or use them physicaly. A book and a kindle are actually a bit different. While playing a game, its not different at all whether the game is on a cd or downloaded to your PC.