eBook formats

Hi,

I have a boatload of books, papers, etc. in a variety (too many!) of
different formats (TXT, PDF, PS, CBR/CBZ, MOBI, EPUB, DOC, RTF, etc.).
I'd like to pick *one* format and convert them *all* and forget
about having to make sure I have the *right* reader on the right
*device*, etc.

Any comments (pointers to references) to help in deciding which
would be the "least bad" choice?  And, what I risk losing in the
process?

Thx,
--don

On 02/06/15 07:10, Don Y wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I have a boatload of books, papers, etc. in a variety (too many!) of
> different formats (TXT, PDF, PS, CBR/CBZ, MOBI, EPUB, DOC, RTF, etc.).
> I'd like to pick *one* format and convert them *all* and forget
> about having to make sure I have the *right* reader on the right
> *device*, etc.
> 
> Any comments (pointers to references) to help in deciding which
> would be the "least bad" choice?  And, what I risk losing in the
> process?
> 

txt is portable, compact, and easily parsed - but you lose all the
formatting, structure, images, etc., and it is not necessarily easy to
convert other formats to txt.

pdf is the most portable (while still retaining structure and
formatting) - there are readers for it on every device and every OS.
You have the advantage and disadvantage that the page layout is fixed
and the same on every screen or printed page.  When done properly, you
can copy-and-paste from it.  While there are utilities for manipulating
pdf files a bit, it is basically a non-editable format.

ps is a little like the pdf of two decades ago.  You need a PC (with
Ghostscript) to view it, but that is not a common program on non-*nix
systems (Windows, pads, etc.).  It also has less structure (indexes,
table-of-contents, etc.) than pdf.

I don't know what CBR/CBZ and MOBI are - and therefore cannot recommend
them.  If they are sufficiently obscure that I don't recognize them,
they are not well enough supported for your needs.

epub is a possibility if the majority of your reading will be on
small-screen devices (small pads, telephones).  epub reads flow the text
to suit the screen.  But that also means that the appearance of the
document changes depending on the device used to view it.  epub readers
are available for most systems, but are not nearly as common or mature
as pdf readers.

doc and rtf are word processor formats, with all the disadvantages that
brings - being editable means the data can be changed, but that's a
disadvantage for this sort of use.  You need a PC to display them, and
the appearance changes depending on the version of office program used
and the fonts on the system.  You view them using a word processor,
which is not an optimal program for reading - you don't get convenient
links, contents, cross-references, etc., and your screen is filled with
editing controls (or a hideous "ribbon" if you use MS Word).



In my view, this is an easy decision - pdf is the only practical choice.
 It also has the advantage that the majority of the stuff you have will
probably already be in pdf format.  doc and rtf (and even txt) can be
easily converted using LibreOffice (which can be automated from the
command line if you have lots of files).  ps2pdf will handle any ps
files you have.

In comp.arch.embedded David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote:
> pdf is the most portable (while still retaining structure and
> formatting) - there are readers for it on every device and every OS.
> You have the advantage and disadvantage that the page layout is fixed
> and the same on every screen or printed page. [...]

There are PDF readers (like qpdf on Android) that can reflow document
text, which is immensely helpful on smartphone displays.

-- 
Nils M Holm  < n m h @ t 3 x . o r g >  www.t3x.org

Don Y <this@is.not.me.com> wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> I have a boatload of books, papers, etc. in a variety (too many!) of
> different formats (TXT, PDF, PS, CBR/CBZ, MOBI, EPUB, DOC, RTF, etc.).
> I'd like to pick *one* format and convert them *all* and forget
> about having to make sure I have the *right* reader on the right
> *device*, etc.
> 
> Any comments (pointers to references) to help in deciding which
> would be the "least bad" choice?  And, what I risk losing in the
> process?
> 
> Thx,
> --don

I use Calibre for my books, papers,... library. It takes care of opening
the files with the right tool on the pc, and convert to the appropriate
formate when I move the file on another device (ebook reader,...).

Bye Jack
-- 
Yoda of Borg am I! Assimilated shall you be! Futile resistance is, hmm?

Hi Don,

On 02.6.2015 г. 08:10, Don Y wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have a boatload of books, papers, etc. in a variety (too many!) of
> different formats (TXT, PDF, PS, CBR/CBZ, MOBI, EPUB, DOC, RTF, etc.).
> I'd like to pick *one* format and convert them *all* and forget
> about having to make sure I have the *right* reader on the right
> *device*, etc.
>
> Any comments (pointers to references) to help in deciding which
> would be the "least bad" choice?  And, what I risk losing in the
> process?
>
> Thx,
> --don

I was through this some time ago. I picked MOBI - for a reason I don't
remember and I am not sure I could have explained back then when I
did, may be I had read a few books in it.
Someone mentioned calibre, I have used it to convert.

On Android devices I use a reader written by a Russian guy,
let me check.... CoolReader, the icon is a brownish/yellowish
open book. Works really well, may be it has a preference for
mobi so I went there (but I don't remember if this is the case).

Dimiter

Hi David,

On 6/2/2015 12:00 AM, David Brown wrote:
> On 02/06/15 07:10, Don Y wrote:

>> I have a boatload of books, papers, etc. in a variety (too many!) of
>> different formats (TXT, PDF, PS, CBR/CBZ, MOBI, EPUB, DOC, RTF, etc.).
>> I'd like to pick *one* format and convert them *all* and forget
>> about having to make sure I have the *right* reader on the right
>> *device*, etc.

> txt is portable, compact, and easily parsed - but you lose all the
> formatting, structure, images, etc., and it is not necessarily easy to
> convert other formats to txt.

Too often, formatting contains information, itself.  E.g., most documents
contain multiple flows; how do you distinguish between these in a pure
text document format?

> pdf is the most portable (while still retaining structure and
> formatting) - there are readers for it on every device and every OS.
> You have the advantage and disadvantage that the page layout is fixed
> and the same on every screen or printed page.  When done properly, you
> can copy-and-paste from it.  While there are utilities for manipulating
> pdf files a bit, it is basically a non-editable format.

You seldom want to *modify* a document (that you haven't authored).
OTOH, it is frequently desirable to be able to *annotate* a document.
In this regard, Adobe smartly foresaw this need.  I miss being able to
annotate (Windows) "Help" files...

> ps is a little like the pdf of two decades ago.  You need a PC (with
> Ghostscript) to view it, but that is not a common program on non-*nix
> systems (Windows, pads, etc.).  It also has less structure (indexes,
> table-of-contents, etc.) than pdf.
>
> I don't know what CBR/CBZ and MOBI are - and therefore cannot recommend
> them.  If they are sufficiently obscure that I don't recognize them,
> they are not well enough supported for your needs.

CBR is commonly used for comic books; it's the equivalent of storing
TIFF's of scanned pages in a PDF (except the scans are JPEG's -- because
comics can easily tolerate the losses that JPEG's introduce!)

CBZ is a compressed form.

MOBI is a format designed for small screen devices (e.g., Palm PDA's).

I've also forgot to mention DJVU -- which is similar to CBR/TIFF PDF's.

> epub is a possibility if the majority of your reading will be on
> small-screen devices (small pads, telephones).  epub reads flow the text
> to suit the screen.  But that also means that the appearance of the
> document changes depending on the device used to view it.  epub readers
> are available for most systems, but are not nearly as common or mature
> as pdf readers.

Yes.  Put all of these in the same category as HTML documents.

> doc and rtf are word processor formats, with all the disadvantages that
> brings - being editable means the data can be changed, but that's a
> disadvantage for this sort of use.  You need a PC to display them, and
> the appearance changes depending on the version of office program used
> and the fonts on the system.  You view them using a word processor,
> which is not an optimal program for reading - you don't get convenient
> links, contents, cross-references, etc., and your screen is filled with
> editing controls (or a hideous "ribbon" if you use MS Word).
>
> In my view, this is an easy decision - pdf is the only practical choice.
>   It also has the advantage that the majority of the stuff you have will
> probably already be in pdf format.

This ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ is the biggest win.  The biggest down-side
is viewing documents on "smaller screens" (where "small" is defined as "less
than the size of the original medium").  E.g., most "papers" would require
at least a ~15" diagonal screen to avoid the "pan and scan" interface.

Other advantages are support for multimedia, interactive documents and
as a "packaging" mechanism (e.g., I "include" attachments in the PDF's
that I create instead of having to add other "files" to a repository
and somehow tag them as "belonging" to a particular "document".

> doc and rtf (and even txt) can be
> easily converted using LibreOffice (which can be automated from the
> command line if you have lots of files).  ps2pdf will handle any ps
> files you have.

Hi Dimiter,

[We're now above the 100F mark... expecting more of the same until
~September.  Have your *icicles* melted, yet??  :> ]

On 6/2/2015 2:05 AM, Dimiter_Popoff wrote:
> On 02.6.2015 г. 08:10, Don Y wrote:
>
>> I have a boatload of books, papers, etc. in a variety (too many!) of
>> different formats (TXT, PDF, PS, CBR/CBZ, MOBI, EPUB, DOC, RTF, etc.).
>> I'd like to pick *one* format and convert them *all* and forget
>> about having to make sure I have the *right* reader on the right
>> *device*, etc.

> I was through this some time ago. I picked MOBI - for a reason I don't
> remember and I am not sure I could have explained back then when I
> did, may be I had read a few books in it.
> Someone mentioned calibre, I have used it to convert.
>
> On Android devices I use a reader written by a Russian guy,
> let me check.... CoolReader, the icon is a brownish/yellowish
> open book. Works really well, may be it has a preference for
> mobi so I went there (but I don't remember if this is the case).

I'd like to move my book/paper archives onto "dedicated devices".
Presently, these things are stored on NAS devices just because of their
sheer quantity.

So, to access one, I have to fire up a PC, fire up the appropriate
NAS, then, invoke the right "reader" (software).

I'd like, instead, to just copy everything onto the internal drive
of a "tablet PC".  This makes access easier:  fire up the tablet PC
and browse for the file/document of interest.

The pen interface would also make it easy to make annotations to those
documents (esp drawings).

And, by treating the documents as part of a *collection* (instead of as
individual documents), I can better organize and cross reference them
(instead of just lumping them into dubious "groups"/folders based on
very limited descriptions:  medical, mathematics, metal-working, etc.
I.e., adding/maintaining metadata would be facilitated because it's
all part of the same "collection".

On Mon, 01 Jun 2015 22:10:51 -0700, the renowned Don Y
<this@is.not.me.com> wrote:

>Hi,
>
>I have a boatload of books, papers, etc. in a variety (too many!) of
>different formats (TXT, PDF, PS, CBR/CBZ, MOBI, EPUB, DOC, RTF, etc.).
>I'd like to pick *one* format and convert them *all* and forget
>about having to make sure I have the *right* reader on the right
>*device*, etc.
>
>Any comments (pointers to references) to help in deciding which
>would be the "least bad" choice?  And, what I risk losing in the
>process?
>
>Thx,
>--don

Definitely .CHM  LOL. 

What device will you mostly be reading them on? And do you read a
letter size page at a time or peek through a small window? 

-- 
Best regards, 
Spehro Pefhany
Amazon link for AoE 3rd Edition:            http://tinyurl.com/ntrpwu8
Microchip link for 2015 Masters in Phoenix: http://tinyurl.com/l7g2k48

Hi Spehro,

On 6/2/2015 5:35 AM, Spehro Pefhany wrote:
> On Mon, 01 Jun 2015 22:10:51 -0700, the renowned Don Y
> <this@is.not.me.com> wrote:
>
>> I have a boatload of books, papers, etc. in a variety (too many!) of
>> different formats (TXT, PDF, PS, CBR/CBZ, MOBI, EPUB, DOC, RTF, etc.).
>> I'd like to pick *one* format and convert them *all* and forget
>> about having to make sure I have the *right* reader on the right
>> *device*, etc.

> Definitely .CHM  LOL.
>
> What device will you mostly be reading them on? And do you read a
> letter size page at a time or peek through a small window?

I want to move them all onto a couple of tablet PC's (~12" dia screen)
which will be the "normal" (portable) means of accessing them.  Anything
that I need to reference for longer periods of time (e.g., while writing
code, designing hardware, etc.) I will network mount and access from
my regular workstations.  (I don't use/carry "mobile devices" so I'm not
bound by their tiny screen sizes)

Some of the novels *might* be nice to read on a paper-back sized
device but most that I've seen would be too tiring on my eyes.

I'd prefer something even larger (e.g., TRULY page-sized) but that's
not essential; viewing half a page, magnified, with the tablet in
landscape orientation will probably be sufficient.

On 2015-06-02, Don Y <this@is.not.me.com> wrote:
> Hi David,
>
> On 6/2/2015 12:00 AM, David Brown wrote:
>>
>> In my view, this is an easy decision - pdf is the only practical choice.
>>   It also has the advantage that the majority of the stuff you have will
>> probably already be in pdf format.
>
> This ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ is the biggest win.  The biggest down-side
> is viewing documents on "smaller screens" (where "small" is defined as "less
> than the size of the original medium").  E.g., most "papers" would require
> at least a ~15" diagonal screen to avoid the "pan and scan" interface.
>

Hello Don,

Do you have any current or potential future requirements to examine
these documents in a character cell/non-GUI environment ?

Simon.

-- 
Simon Clubley, clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP
Microsoft: Bringing you 1980s technology to a 21st century world