…professionally published software that looks slick and usable use the services of a number of different people.

What are those costs?

A software producer: the person who works with the developer on the big picture of the software. How are these interfaces tied together? Does this feature make sense? What software should we work on next?

A typesetter: makes the inside of the book look professional and easy to read, well put together

Designer: layout, more look and feel of the software. The look and feel of the website and related marketing and how it incorporates the logo and branding.

Illustration: someone has to paint, create, or put together the graphics that sell the software. May also contribute to design of elements of the software proper.

Internal Tester: this person goes through and makes sure the software is usable and error free, looks for internal consistency (your highlight color is blue here, but brown there. People don’t usually look for “Find” to search, but rather “Search”).

Beta testers: this final pass looks for any final bugs that have slipped through everyone else.

———

So, really, there are *so* many reasons that software developers can’t *possibly* develop quality software without a team of people working for them! I mean, not something people would *pay* for, right?

Look–this isn’t rocket science. It’s not that hard and it’s getting easier. Authors are quite capable of learning this stuff, and outsourcing what they can’t–just like small software vendors (uISVs) have been doing for quite some time. In fact Wikipedia just told me (alas, with no citation) that “[c]hanges to the publishing industry since the 1980s have resulted in nearly all copy editing of book manuscripts being outsourced to freelance copy editors.” So to some degree this is already happening.

Yeah, he likes Amazon. He likes them because they get him books, instantly and easily. If someone else comes around and offers him instant, easy access to his drug of choice, then he’s *there*, man.

Patrick, where I think the argument breaks down is that you’re talking about going to another publishers’ offerings if an electronic edition of a book is delayed at release. I don’t see you doing this, as you mentioned yourself you’re not taking a stance on principle but rather convenience. Why wouldn’t you just buy the book when it *does* come out in electronic form, then? It’s not like they’re suggesting that they’ll never offer an electronic version.

In other words, you’re talking about buying whatever’s available electronically, and being publisher agnostic in the process. So if the delaying publisher finally gets that electronic version out, why wouldn’t you end up buying it then? It’s not like you already would have read it; you mentioned you *only* read on the Kindle and of course a book is only available on one publisher.

I agree with you that the process kinda stinks right now, and it’s going to change. But as mentioned before, a given author doesn’t really have a say in this process. And once you start publishing, changing publishers appears to be rare.

Eventually the publishers are just going to be editors, or editors/marketers. Seems like a good opportunity–a small shop that does the editing and essentially SEO for an author, who would be published online only. Of course we’re not there yet, but ebook reading is increasing. But aside from that problem the biggest problem is that authors want big advances. To those of us who write software this seems silly, but I can understand the attraction of someone else shouldering the risk and paying you a lump sum.

I can tell you’re biased by your love of Amazon, and while I admire that you’re loyal, I don’t think loyalty has ever been an intelligent stance in a discussion about business. Work with the facts. Be loyal, by all means, but also realize that Amazon has made some choices that aren’t friendly to non-Amazon customers or to portions of the industry that don’t originate from within Amazon, and that it might be more responsible of Your Favorite Store to behave in a way that allows me to have my own separate Favorite Store, one that doesn’t DRM my material or force me to buy THEIR reader instead of letting me choose my own method.

Most readers don’t spend as much money as you do, and while you might think that spending more than 20 households makes you a more important customer, it actually places you in a smaller segment of the market. I am actually the majority: someone who buys books they’ve been waiting for and books they browse, but doesn’t have the cash to scoop up everything Amazon recommends. Instead, I have to be choosy, and sometimes that means I wait for a hardcover I wanted to come out in paperback so I can afford it. In total, there are more of me than there are of you, and we spend more dollars because we are thousands of households, not twenty. I’m not saying we’re more important–we’re not–but I do think it’s selfish for you to ignore us because you have more money to spend.

I guess it all comes down to being privileged enough to afford what you want when you want, but I don’t find Macmillan’s proposed $14.99 too shabby when it also means I can wait awhile and get something for $5.99. Amazon hasn’t mentioned that anywhere, of course, because the $5.99 price for older books falls below THEIR chosen $9.99. Macmillan isn’t being evil–they’re trying to be flexible. And there ARE books I would pay $14.99 to have right away. If you’re such an avid reader, you should know that feeling. I’d pay $50 for an e-book of Scott Lynch’s Republic of Thieves if I could have it this very second, and forgo the next eight books I would have bought with my book budget because I want that one so badly.

I hope you can be open-minded reading Buckell’s post, because it has information you should know.

This quote comes from the same letter as your quote:

“At first release, concurrent with a hardcover, most titles will be priced between $14.99 and $12.99. E books will almost always appear day on date with the physical edition.”

It contradicts the first one (unless you are reading a LOT into the word ‘almost’), and I think it should be given greater weight as it is more specific. Presumably in the first one, windowing was referring to price and not availability.

Some of this I knew already, but some of it I had failed to take into account. I too would like to get my books as quickly as possible. I’m a total bookivore. But what the market bears right now and what the return for the publisher and author is at the moment makes Amazon’s price-fixing untenable. If you look at Toby Buckell’s numbers he was getting ebook sales in the three digits.

I think it’s naive to think any of us know exactly what went down, why it went down, and where it’s going.

i also think it’s unfair to lay blame solely at the feet of Amazon when two other players, MacMillan and Apple, both have a rather “forceful” business reputation.

Regardless of what any of us think, Amazon has the right to run their business anyway they want- even in to the ground. (Although I hardly think that’s likely).

They’re all big boys; let them work it out.