Update, February 8
Responding, it would appear, to the brouhaha surrounding its iBooks Author licence agreement, Apple today released an update for the application, specifically to clarify the intent of the “important note,” which now reads:
IMPORTANT NOTE:
If you want to charge a fee for a work that includes files in the .ibooks format generated using iBooks Author, you may only sell or distribute such work through Apple, and such distribution will be subject to a separate agreement with Apple. This restriction does not apply to the content of such works when distributed in a form that does not include files in the .ibooks format.
Perhaps this will put to rest rumours that Apple is trying to claim ownership of content.
I’ve spent the last 36 hours playing with Apple’s new eBook editing application, iBooks Author. I must say, after some initial confusion, caused by looking for options that this tool leaves behind, I’m impressed.
Before I go further, let me explain that this editor is meant to produce books for the iPad. That means you can’t view publications generated by iBooks Author on your iPhone, Kindle, or other reader. The iBooks 2.0 textbook format is tied to iBooks 2.0 on iPads.
It uses a whole new kind of file system, with proprietary code—apparently a strange new brew of ePub3, CSS, XHTML5, and other secret ingredients.
For codeophobes like me, this is irrelevant; though I’ve read that the modified CSS is non-standard. Again, this is unlikely to affect anyone outside the development community … or is it? I won’t pretend to fully understand the ramifications of the decisions Apple has made with this new standard, but web developer Baldur Bjarnason has plenty to say on the subject.
The biggest confab surrounds the iBooks Author Licence Agreement, which begins with the proviso
IMPORTANT NOTE:
If you charge a fee for any book or other work you generate using this software (a “Work”), you may only sell or distribute such Work through Apple (e.g., through the iBookstore) and such distribution will be subject to a separate agreement with Apple.
I’m not sure that this is much different than what Amazon attempts to do with its Kindle format.
Apple wants to own some of the lucrative digital publishing business. It is targeting the educational market with the initial textbook templates that come with the app.
Like its competitors, it will take 30 percent of the profits, thank you very much. That means you keep 70 percent.
The main issue I see for publishers is the need to create multiple formats to reach all potential readers. This is already the case, but other formats are more easily converted. It looks like Apple’s bespoke format precludes that option.
As I announced last month, I will soon add an e-book store to VeloWeb. These considerations—what formats to offer and how to generate them—are responsible for slowing my entry into the brave new world of digital self-publishing. I want to do it right.
I’ve been fiddling with the latest version of Pages (yes, another Apple product), which can export documents as ePubs, but have found the learning curve rather steep.
Admittedly, I can’t provide a comparative review here, because my experience with eBook editing tools is limited, but here’s what I’ve found so far with iBooks Author:
- The help menu is well-organized and clear. It’s what technical writing should look like.
- The layout is clean and intuitive—particularly for Mac users familiar with Keynote.
- Mac users will also take to the toolbar, inspector, media browser, etc.
- Chapters, sections, and pages are simple to add and edit.
- Templates are easy to use and modify.
- Widgets enable drag-and-drop of multi-media, including photo galleries, video, Keynote, and 3-D objects.
- Preview (just plug in an iPad and open iBooks) is a breeze.
- Table of contents is generated automatically and can be modified in the inspector.
- Glossary creation is a no-brainer. Glossaries can be used in place of expiry-prone hyperlinks. Readers click on a glossary term and get a short definition (written concisely, by you). The option is then provided to consult the dictionary, search the Web, or Wikipedia. I love glossaries!
- Allows export as PDF
- It’s, like, totally WYSIWYG.
- It’s free!
In short, the first publication you’re likely to see at the VeloWeb Book Store, will be made with this shiny new toy. Of course, in accordance with the licence agreement, I’ll be giving it away.
For the iPadless, I will also offer a PDF version. What formats would you like me to offer?
I’d also appreciate hearing from publishers who have experience with other authoring tools.
The work associated with establishing the book store and stocking its shelves (I’ve worked through the weekend) will eat into the time I can spend on this blog.
Still, I’ll try to post a couple of times a week, as usual. However, content will likely be of the Reader’s Digest condensed version. I will alert you to new content on VeloWeb, and progress on the first eBook.
Latest Tweets
“Again, this is unlikely to affect anyone outside the development community … or is it?”
Well, it will certainly affect you, since if you author anything in Apple’s new format and will also be selling via your own website, you will have to create multiple versions of the book.
But it will also affect anybody who ever buys one of your books and then, for one reason or another, needs to shift it to any non-Apple product. The reason for standards in this context is to facilitate interoperability–just like on the web.
Your blog works equally well on any modern web browser running on any modern desktop, laptop, phone, tablet, and probably more web-enabled devices I’ve omitted. If you use a standard format for your other publications, they should also be usable on practically any device that can read eBooks in the first place.
If I were authoring eBooks (I’m not!), this is the model I would emulate.
(Disclaimers: 1. I’m a web developer who’s been preaching web-standards for many years, and 2. the appalling license you quoted above has convinced me, at last, to begin gradually exchanging Apple’s increasingly locked-down ecosystem for Linux).
Overall, I agree standards are important … imperative for the Web.
But we aren’t talking about the Web; we’re discussing eBooks. There are already multiple formats and most publishers offer their books in the most popular ones. If a publisher wants to use iBA, yes, they will need to put in the time to create another version on Apple’s free app. However, in the process, they will have gained not only the possibility of adding new interactive features but also a new venue for their work.
I can’t see a downside to this.
I see your point about transferability of a single format, but I’m not sure how often this would be an issue. Presumably, this would be the case with other proprietary formats. There are free conversion tools out there and I’m betting some smart people are right now figuring out how to add this new format to the mix.
As far as I can see, there is no really relevant difference between the web and eBooks when it comes to interoperability.
There are multiple eBook formats for different devices currently, just as we used to see ‘best viewed in…’ banners at the bottom of websites, but this doesn’t mean it’s a good thing. As in the wider software world, most of the proprietary formats exist for one reason: to lock consumers into specific platforms and vendors (think of e.g. .doc, .dwg etc, etc) As a consumer–and as a citizen, since various industries are actively lobbying to enshrine such lock-ins into national laws–I find this aggravating at best.
It’s also not the case that you gain a new venue for your work by using Apple’s new format since it’s possible to get ePub books into the iTunes store.
The only real advantage I see to Apple’s tool is the gui for creating interactivity. But to enter into a license agreement that presumes to dictate how and where I can sell resultant work seems like an extremely high price to pay for the use of a “free” tool.
Chris, I ultimately agree with the idea of interoperability and I wish companies that have jumped into e-publishing had behaved differently.
As in the computer business, competition seems to be the driving force. As we see from the history of computers, operating systems, and software, the best doesn’t necessarily get top billing or adoption by the majority.
I still have a copy of Lotus SmartSuite on an old PC, to open WordPro files I created in the ’90s. That was incredible software but it was eclipsed by MS Word.
The thing people seem to ignore in this debate is the fact that Apple’s EULA is not much different than a traditional contract between author and publisher. In fact, it is less restrictive. The difference here is that Apple restricts the distribution of the format, with its interactive features.
There are widespread complaints that this limits (for-profit) books using the format (not the content) to the iBookstore, and is dependant on Apple approving the publication for sale.
Say what you like about the latter point, but it assures your quality book does not have to compete with the kind of “spam” books flooding Amazon by the thousand.
Finally, authors have the freedom not to enter into Apple’s contract.
Going on Apple’s holiday quarter report, there might be quite a bit of demand for the books made with iBooks Author.
The New York Times reports that company sales doubled, with 72 percent of the total coming from the iPhone 4 (37 million units) and iPad (15.4 million).
Meanwhile, I was interested to read this measured response to Apple’s new app and its licensing terms from ePub developer Bill McCoy.
I notice McCoy doesn’t mention the onerous licensing terms 🙂
I can easily believe that Apple’s license is an improvement on those offered by traditional publishers. I only think it’s odd to voluntarily submit to such lopsided terms when you can access the marketplace (the self-same marketplace) without doing so.
Today, Apple released an updated EULA, to clarify the intent of their usage restrictions. See above.
Comments on this entry are closed.