Will Apple’s next iPod help e-books reach the big time? There’s a real chance that it could, if industry speculation can be believed.
It’s widely expected that the new iPod, whenever it comes out, will have a much larger screen than the current model—a screen big enough to display several paragraphs’ worth of text, perhaps. And now Engadget reports that at least one major publishing house is archiving all of its manuscripts and sending them over to Apple.
It seems unlikely that a book-reading feature will have skeptics rushing to reconsider the iPod’s value as a learning tool. But receptive professors—like those at Duke University and Georgia College and State University—may find an iPod that embraces e-books to be even more useful than its predecessors. —Brock Read
18 Responses to E-Books Meet iPods
jliedl - April 20, 2012 at 10:18 am
Dang, TR, you make me wish I was an American historian! Especially as we’re being blanketed with 6-10 inches of snow today.
historiann - April 20, 2012 at 2:41 pm
Thanks for this report–I was hoping you’d give us a blow-by-blow.
What a great story about being recognized by a civilian who also recognized other familiar faces from the History Channel.
loumac - April 20, 2012 at 3:55 pm
Interesting observation on why the History Channel seems to be on 24/7 in many institutions. At least, there’s a *perception* that it’s neutral. One of the most interesting conversations I’ve had with total strangers was in a car repair shop’s waiting room, where the History Channel was broadcasting something on Black History Month. The programme (I forget the title, it was a few years ago) featured many white talking heads, talking mostly about prominent white people’s roles in the civil rights movement. None of us White folks in the waiting room had really been watching it, but precisely because of our privilege (we’re used to seeing people who look like us give us history lessons), we hadn’t really engaged with the racial dynamics of white people writing Black History Month. The only Black person in the room pointed out to the rest of us how offensive this was. Most of us snapped out of our complacency, and we had an engaged conversation.
dieslunae - April 20, 2012 at 5:53 pm
I was flying across Canada last year and a special about John Dillinger came on the TV when I was on the plane. When you came on to do your bit I blurted “the Tenured Radical!” out loud, which quite surprised and confused my neighbours.
Tenured_Radical - April 20, 2012 at 5:55 pm
Actually by non-controversial I meant no sex and no gratuitous violence (only World War II.)
historiann - April 20, 2012 at 6:53 pm
I hope you prefaced your ejaculation with “By Jove! It’s. . . “
Rob Gee - April 21, 2012 at 1:38 am
Wish I could be at OAH, but one conference expedition out of Halifax for this month was all my check book could handle. Mine was to ASEH (Environmental History) in Madison a few weeks back. I attended a great panel that showcased some work by digital historians working on environmental themes–using digital tools either to reach broader audiences or to enhance their data and/or ask different questions. During the Q&A though, many of the same issues were raised that you’ve raised in your bullet points above, and one person even said that digital historians facing issues of how faculty peers might “count” their more unconventional products towards tenure or promotion reviews would find ready allies amongst the population of public historians who have faced such challenges for some time. I later wrote a blog post reflecting on some of what I’d heard, called “Am I a Digital Historian” (http://wp.me/p1KobA-aF) which touched off a bit of conversation amongst several environmental history bloggers. Much of that conversation has been compiled at http://antspiderbee.net/ if anyone from OAH or beyond would like to contribute further from their own experience or what they’ve heard in Milwaukee. And thanks to TR and the tweeters and bloggers bringing OAH to those of us who can’t be there.
Tenured_Radical - April 21, 2012 at 10:02 am
Thanks for this great comment, and the connection to other sites.
physioprof - April 21, 2012 at 6:03 pm
filet mignon and an Absolut rocks
Steak and fucken booze FTMFW!!11!1!
As far as public history, it sounds sort of like museum curation. As I understand it, there are already tenure and promotion standards for museum curators. Couldn’t these be adapted to public historians?
vanalstyne - April 23, 2012 at 9:00 am
Surely there’s nothing “wrong” with “public history,” assuming only that it is done with the same degree of genuine rigor, skepticism, and detachment one hopes and expects of more “conventionally-oriented” books and journals commendably published by historians, as by scholars of other disciplines as well. The “rub” comes when “public history” historians, like other “public figure” “scholars” succumb to a predictable “ideological tilt” in their “public” publications as, alas, is true of on or two of those identified in the list of accompaning “notables” in the bold-faced advertisement for the advertised “roundtable” readers were “encouraged”to “be there or be square.”
The choices for serious historians, frankly, is not so narrowly or “cleverly” defined or definable in this tawdry phrase.
Wm. Van Alstyne
Lee Professor of Constitutional law,
Marshall-Wythe School of Law
College of William & Mary
tenured_radical - April 23, 2012 at 4:01 pm
I’m always flattered when a distinguished colleague like yourself takes the time to comment, but I’m curious: what’s with all the scare quotes? And which ones of us are the most ideologically tilted? I hope one of them is me, because the other three are far more famous than I and it would be cool to be part of such a pairing.
physioprof - April 23, 2012 at 5:01 pm
What I am trying to figure out is why “rub” got scare quotes, but “tawdry” didn’t. And also, what kind of honorific is “Wm.”? Is that some kind of special law professor dealio?
22074041 - April 24, 2012 at 3:05 pm
I wonder why someone might imply that a public historian would do anything but have “the same degree of genuine rigor, skepticism, and detachment” as so called “conventional” historians? That could feel demeaning to professional historians working in public history.
tenured_radical - April 24, 2012 at 3:28 pm
I can assure you that it is.
historiann - April 24, 2012 at 3:39 pm
This is the same snobbery that has been used like a cudgel against public historians for decades now. The fact is that as Tenured Radical notes, public historians who are on academic faculties are held to the same standards for tenure and promotion, AND ALSO are expected to work as public historians. It’s not fair, but I will suggest that it is a successful way to counter the reflexive snobbery expressed above.
In my view, it’s we non-public historians who are getting away with murder, standards-wise. (And no, I won’t use the term “academic history” as the opposite of public history.)
historiann - April 24, 2012 at 3:41 pm
(Wm. = William! I think it’s cool to have a personal abbreviation for a first name, but my name is so brief to begin with that it would be a pointless abbreviation.)
I “hope” “you” “like” “this” “explanation.”
movers in mississauga - April 26, 2012 at 2:32 am
i agree with you.
urbanexile - April 27, 2012 at 10:50 pm
Did you Press for Polka? Did the water park ever open? How was the coffee? Inquiring minds want to know. And your question is a good one: Why do they have meetings of historians in buildings that have none? Of course, perhaps better for historians of Recent History! :-)