Comments on: Linked: Publishers publish Vooks http://www.novelr.com/2009/10/02/linked-publishers-publish-vooks Writing, Publishing and The Internet Wed, 28 Jul 2010 14:22:26 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Eli James http://www.novelr.com/2009/10/02/linked-publishers-publish-vooks/comment-page-1#comment-3830 Eli James Thu, 01 Oct 2009 17:32:18 +0000 http://www.novelr.com/?p=1040#comment-3830 Oh, don't apologize for comments, Michael, that was a valid point you brought up. I do have to point out here that the founder of Vook is an entrepreneur at heart. In my <a href="http://www.novelr.com/2009/04/29/my-problem-with-vook" rel="nofollow">last criticism of the format</a>, I talked about how publishers might not want in on the project, and how they would require a distribution channel. Vook has found both: Simon and Schuster for the former, and the App store for the latter. Oh, don’t apologize for comments, Michael, that was a valid point you brought up. I do have to point out here that the founder of Vook is an entrepreneur at heart. In my last criticism of the format, I talked about how publishers might not want in on the project, and how they would require a distribution channel.

Vook has found both: Simon and Schuster for the former, and the App store for the latter.

]]> By: Eli James http://www.novelr.com/2009/10/02/linked-publishers-publish-vooks/comment-page-1#comment-3829 Eli James Thu, 01 Oct 2009 17:29:29 +0000 http://www.novelr.com/?p=1040#comment-3829 You might like to <a href="http://aworkinglibrary.com/library/archives/by_any_other_name/" rel="nofollow">read this</a>. You might like to read this.

]]> By: Michael Rogus http://www.novelr.com/2009/10/02/linked-publishers-publish-vooks/comment-page-1#comment-3828 Michael Rogus Thu, 01 Oct 2009 17:29:25 +0000 http://www.novelr.com/?p=1040#comment-3828 Sorry for throwing this post off topic ;) On the actual topic: I think publishers are desperate because they can sense their forthcoming obsolescence and are grasping for something, anything that they see as "the future". This experiment will fail and fade away with little notice in a short period of time and they will try something else which will also fail. rinse repeat. Once they are gone the new business model that we will all rely on will emerge but until that day expect to see lots more poorly thought out multimedia gimmicks like this video thing and ARGs like Personal Effects: Dark Art. Sorry for throwing this post off topic ;)

On the actual topic: I think publishers are desperate because they can sense their forthcoming obsolescence and are grasping for something, anything that they see as “the future”.

This experiment will fail and fade away with little notice in a short period of time and they will try something else which will also fail. rinse repeat. Once they are gone the new business model that we will all rely on will emerge but until that day expect to see lots more poorly thought out multimedia gimmicks like this video thing and ARGs like Personal Effects: Dark Art.

]]> By: Michael Rogus http://www.novelr.com/2009/10/02/linked-publishers-publish-vooks/comment-page-1#comment-3827 Michael Rogus Thu, 01 Oct 2009 17:15:38 +0000 http://www.novelr.com/?p=1040#comment-3827 That's good to hear. That word has always bugged me because I don't think we need a special title for writing on the web. A novel is a novel whether it is printed and bound, or if it is digital on the internet. There is no need to marginalize writing on the web by segregating it from the rest of the writing world with silly sounding names. "web fiction" is better than "blook" because it doesn't sound silly at least, but I prefer just plain ol' "fiction". That’s good to hear. That word has always bugged me because I don’t think we need a special title for writing on the web. A novel is a novel whether it is printed and bound, or if it is digital on the internet. There is no need to marginalize writing on the web by segregating it from the rest of the writing world with silly sounding names. “web fiction” is better than “blook” because it doesn’t sound silly at least, but I prefer just plain ol’ “fiction”.

]]> By: Eli James http://www.novelr.com/2009/10/02/linked-publishers-publish-vooks/comment-page-1#comment-3826 Eli James Thu, 01 Oct 2009 17:07:12 +0000 http://www.novelr.com/?p=1040#comment-3826 On second thought, adding that caveat is petty and irrelevant to commentary of the model. I'm removing it, and am considering writing an analysis of multimedia in ebooks. Thanks, Michael. On second thought, adding that caveat is petty and irrelevant to commentary of the model. I’m removing it, and am considering writing an analysis of multimedia in ebooks. Thanks, Michael.

]]> By: Eli James http://www.novelr.com/2009/10/02/linked-publishers-publish-vooks/comment-page-1#comment-3825 Eli James Thu, 01 Oct 2009 16:54:25 +0000 http://www.novelr.com/?p=1040#comment-3825 Not exactly, Michael. When Novelr first began there <em>was</em> no other alternative to describe what we were doing. Lately I've been making it a conscious decision to move away from that word. The community, part of it centered around Novelr, and largely influenced by Chris's work at WFG, have been moving away from 'blook' and towards 'web fiction'. I'll be renaming the categories soon. Been putting it off, along with the about page, for far too long. Not exactly, Michael. When Novelr first began there was no other alternative to describe what we were doing. Lately I’ve been making it a conscious decision to move away from that word. The community, part of it centered around Novelr, and largely influenced by Chris’s work at WFG, have been moving away from ‘blook’ and towards ‘web fiction’.

I’ll be renaming the categories soon. Been putting it off, along with the about page, for far too long.

]]> By: Michael Rogus http://www.novelr.com/2009/10/02/linked-publishers-publish-vooks/comment-page-1#comment-3823 Michael Rogus Thu, 01 Oct 2009 15:58:26 +0000 http://www.novelr.com/?p=1040#comment-3823 I like how you hate the word "vlook" (I do as well) but endorse the equally horrible "blook". I like how you hate the word “vlook” (I do as well) but endorse the equally horrible “blook”.

]]>