Apple sells a negligble amount of books.

Hell more kindle books are sold on the ipad than ibooks on the ipad.

Think about it....
Why would anyone who has a brain buy ibooks over kindle version EVEN IF they have an ipad.

Have an iPad. Buy kindle version - works on ipad, android (phones and future tablets), kindle, blackberry, iphone, PC & Mac.
Have an iPad. Buy ibooks version - works on ipad.

Then take a risk.

I read first chapter and look at amazon reviews. 90% of the time if it is a bad book I know it in the first chapter. Hell sometimes I know it in the first dozen pages. If not then put your money where your mouth is and take a risk. Most new authors have books for $0.99 to $2.99. Hardly a significant investment. If 3/4ths of them don't pan out well who cares. The 1/4th is what I am interested in. Have a couple authors I wish they would release a new book because I would gladly buy it (and pay twice as much).

Aren't these mutually exclusive. If an author deserves more than 15% but doesn't because the publisher is keeping 85% then yes that is profiteering.
Nobody is saying publishers should do work for free but prior to ebooks the lack of an alternative allowed them the ability to profiteer off of others.

That is starting to change. No reason a publisher can't survive with a smaller split. If they can't then freelance editors and PR companies will kill them off.

Yup. Perfect legitimate use of bittorrent.

Hell I would keep it seeded in perpetuity.

Once you have very black blacks the only way you can improve contrast is whiter whites. The whiter the white the more light is reflects. As an experiment print something on ultra bright paper. The good stuff. Tuck it into your paper back novel and next time you are on the beach, next to the pool, or in the park try reading both side by side.

You don't want excessive contrast in a book. Digital or otherwise. Textbooks are often printed with higher contrast because rarely is someone reading by the pool with a copy of Multi-variable Calculus.

Still I imagine the tech will improve with time. future versions of kindle likely will have variable contrast. It simply requires more shades of gray.

Which illustrates perfectly why ebooks change everything.

Amazon (and other ebook sellers) is only 30% not 50%. Bookstores will need to adapt or they will lose even more business. There is no publishing risk because there is no cost per title.

I think ebooks will drive self publishing and that will drive an evolution in the book business model. You will see editing and PR shops spring up to provide services to independent authors. Some will provide services for upfront fee some for cut of royalties, some for fee + royalty. Smart authors will figure out methods to limit royalties (say royalty only on copies sold within 3 years of publication). Authors will retain ownership of their work and companies will still be able to provides services. Successful authors won't find it difficult to pay for services upfront on subsequent novels generating even higher revenue. Authors who publish multiple high (or high enough) selling ebooks won't have difficulty getting printing runs and shelf space in traditional stores. The long end of the tail can be handled by print on demand services.

It won't happen overnight but it will happen.

How exactly do you fry an ebook?

A demonstration for you:
1) Purchase Kindle
2) Purchase and download 1000 ebooks to Kindle
3) Throw kindle into incinerator
4) Purchase new Kindle and click "Sync"
5) 1000 ebooks "magically" appear on new kindle and more remarkable show no signs of fire damage.

What is pathetically is the reading comprehension fail you displayed.

Short version this is a story about a Japanese woman who lives in Japan.

who would get "idiot americans" from that.... Well only an idiot!

Nope. The AV engine is exactly the same between free and pro.

Pro simply allows:
* longer licenses (free license expires after year and must be renewed)
* scripting protection
* ability to sandbox applications (most useful for browsers)

Other than that they are identical in both functionality and interface. I used Avast free for couple years and after version 5 purchase pro version mainly to support the company rather than any value in the added features of pro. They make good software and I want to support that. The multi computer multi year license works out to less than a dollar per month per computer. Hard to beat that.

SDXC supports exFAT. Some HD camcorders support it, however many sadly still only support FAT32.

"A better interum solution would be to fill the 4GB file size, increment the filename by one, and keep going. I don't understand why they don't do that... it would be a simple firmware fix."

At least a couple Sony camcorders do this (have done so for a couple years). If you do some research though you can find one that supports exFAT on SDXC and no need for workaround hacks.

95MP ~60MB Raw file size.

That is roughly 33,000 shots on a 2TB card.

I don't know many photographers who would be saying damn I have to change my memory card after 33,000 photos.
Even in specialized niche (say automated camera taking 1 shot per second of stars thats roughly 9 hours of capacity.

Anyone claiming 2TB isn't good enough for "pro" equipment is full of shit.

2TB = 30,000 to 180,000 high resolution shots (10 to 60MP)

2TB = 24 hours of uncompressed 1080p uncompressed @ 24fps, 36bit deep color (1920 x 1080 x 36 x 24 / 8 / 1000 ./1000) =223 MBps

Except it won't be. In 2020 Disney will lobby to extend copyright to 100+ lifetime and then 150+lifetime then 500 + lifetime and each time Congress will roll over. They have 4 times in the past. There is no evidence to indicate that 70+lifetime creates any more incentive than 27 years do. Steven King would still be very rich under 28 year copyright system. A no name author is going to be extremely poor under 28, lifetime+70, lifetime + 700, or infinite copyright.

Eventually "public domain" will mean works created prior to 1900. Period. Everything else will be owned and owned forever. Even works that are nearly worthless will simply be bought up pennies on the dollar by copyright troll companies (looking for future lawsuit when they can claim movie x is a derived work from their long since forgotten title).

Um just because an author has titles on amazon isn't exactly a definitive proof that it is under copyright.

I submit Edgar Allen Poe. - 214 titles

http://www.amazon.com/Edgar-Allan-Poe/e/B000APVRP2/ref=ntt_athr_dp_pel_1

The larger issue isn't profitability the issue is accessibility. Still the law is the law. PG shouldn't be breaking the law. However we desperately need copyright reform. Lifetime + 70 is insane. If Disney has its way it will be extended to lifetime+120 in 2034. Then it will be lifetime +200, then lifetime +500, then lifetime + 1000. Essentially public domain will be fixed at items created prior to Disney. The concept of a copyright was never the intent of copyright to provide a infinite supply of revenue from a single work. The idea was to provide ENOUGH protection to encourage people to create works. I find it hard to believe that nobody will write a book, paint a painting, or make a movie unless they have complete control over it for 70 years + their lifetime. I would be willing to wage if copyright was returned to the original 14 years + a single filed 14 year extension we would still see works being created.

Nope. Making a complete "backup" of a book doesn't fall under fair use. PG simply making a digital copy to put in the PG vault (for release in 20xx) would be a violation of copyright. Stupid but that is the reality of our utterly broken copyright system.

The only exemption for making a backup is computer software. Not books, not movies, not ebooks, not any other form of copyrighted material.

One can make a partial copy (for example photocopying pages from a reference manual) which technically is a violation of copyright but falls under fair use protection but fair use doesn't extend to complete copy except in the case of computer software.

What makes it even worse is that DMCA will in the future make even the creation of archiving tools a crime. Say in 80 years there is an interest for PG but for movies. Someone making software to break encryption on movies would have a legitimate use however DMCA doesn't provide any carve-out for legitimate use and thus the software would be prohibited and creators and distributors in violation of the law.

We have in the span of less than a century turned a wonderful idea; providing LIMITED protection to content creators to encourage such content into something that now only holds back innovation. Pathetic. In 2034 Mickey Mouse will go into public domain. In 2030 Disney will lobby (and if the past 3 times are any indication win) to extend copyrights to 120 years after death of author. Then in another 50 years they will do it again and again and again and again.

Essentially the pool of public domain works will never grow because companies will never allow their "property" to become public domain. Even marginal works have some value. Companies can simply buy up copyrights for negligible amounts hoping that some future work will be derived from it and sue for compensation. The copyright equivalent of patent trolls.