I have a series that compiles first lines (see here) as well as last lines (see here) so it was with rapt attention that I read The Kill Zone this morning and saw a post on first lines over there.
It's a fun post to read, among the best passages is this quote from Stephen King:
“[A good opening] is not just the reader's way in, it's the writer's way in also, and you've got to find a doorway that fits us both. I think that's why my books tend to begin as first sentences -- I'll write that opening sentence first, and when I get it right I'll start to think I really have something."
Then P.J. Parrish says of many crime novelist openings:
I mean, don't you get a little tired sometimes reading the tortured openings some writers give us? Crime novelists might be the worst offenders because we are led to believe that we have to shock and awe in the opening graph or the story is DOA. As a reader, I hunger for books lately that open in a lower gear. As a writer, I am trying hard to follow the lead of King (and the King of Hearts) and just begin at the beginning.
I have been thinking the same thing. I remember when I was a judge for the local novel writing contest (see here) I was constantly being assaulted by the action oriented opening.
Then Miss Parrish provides the four openings from her favorite books, and boy is there a doozy or two in there. What I think is the best is this one:
"I was born twice: first, as a baby girl, on a remarkably smogless Detroit day in January of 1960; and then again, as a teenage boy, in an emergency room near Petoskey, Michigan, in August of 1974."
Middlesex by Jeffrey Eugenides
Tuesday, August 6, 2013
Monday, August 5, 2013
Speaking of Great Analogies
I try to select and post passages from books that I find to be examples of good, great or stunning analogies (see sampling here). One came at me from an unlikely place concerning a topic which has been discussed here quite often.
My indispensable brother wrote me with another update on the ongoing Apple anti-trust lawsuit and follow-on decisions. This press release from the Department of Justice Office of Public Affairs shows just how ridiculous this decision against Apple has become. Readers will remember that I was original agin Apple (see here), then following a terrific article by L. Gordon Crovitz (here) I changed my views. This analogy by my brother, which sums up this ruling perfectly, puts me even more squarely in Apple's corner.
I'll trust the savvy readers of this blog to go read the press release themselves, but my brother's summation and analogy is better than anything the Federal Government can produce.
The justice department is telling Apple that to remedy what they have been found guilty for, they will have to change the way the iOS universe works to allow other publishers to build their own e-bookstores, and allow people with iOS devices to go to that. As I see it, that would be like telling Barnes and Noble that they have to allow Penguin to open a store inside their shop right? The iOS app and iTunes stores were created with the express purpose of providing a curated experience to the user. Apple wanted to control the experience to limit confusion, to protect themselves and also, probably not altruistically, protect the user. Now the government is telling them they can't do that.
I guess now they will look at amazon and allow anyone to sell Kindle books to it right? No need to go through amazon anymore to buy kindle books. That's the only logical outcome.
On point if you ask me.
My indispensable brother wrote me with another update on the ongoing Apple anti-trust lawsuit and follow-on decisions. This press release from the Department of Justice Office of Public Affairs shows just how ridiculous this decision against Apple has become. Readers will remember that I was original agin Apple (see here), then following a terrific article by L. Gordon Crovitz (here) I changed my views. This analogy by my brother, which sums up this ruling perfectly, puts me even more squarely in Apple's corner.
I'll trust the savvy readers of this blog to go read the press release themselves, but my brother's summation and analogy is better than anything the Federal Government can produce.
The justice department is telling Apple that to remedy what they have been found guilty for, they will have to change the way the iOS universe works to allow other publishers to build their own e-bookstores, and allow people with iOS devices to go to that. As I see it, that would be like telling Barnes and Noble that they have to allow Penguin to open a store inside their shop right? The iOS app and iTunes stores were created with the express purpose of providing a curated experience to the user. Apple wanted to control the experience to limit confusion, to protect themselves and also, probably not altruistically, protect the user. Now the government is telling them they can't do that.
I guess now they will look at amazon and allow anyone to sell Kindle books to it right? No need to go through amazon anymore to buy kindle books. That's the only logical outcome.
On point if you ask me.
Friday, August 2, 2013
Technology is Cyclical
I was all set to post on one of my favorite scenes. It offers very little to the advancement of the story, but I think it's such a great scene with a terrific line that whenever I see the movie, Roxanne, I have to keep watching it till I see this scene.
CD: Ten more seconds and I'm leaving.
Roxanne: What did you say?
CD: I said "ten more seconds and I'm leaving."
Roxanne: Oh.
CD: Wait, what did you think I said?
Roxanne: I thought you said "earn more sessions by sleeving."
CD: Well what the hell does that mean?
Roxanne: I don't know, that's why I came out.
Then I saw this article on the resurgence of Audible books in the WSJ. Can You Hear Me Now by Alexandra Alter is worth a read. Among the more prescient passages are these:
The digital revolution may have dealt a heavy blow to print, but it is boosting literacy in other unexpected ways by fueling the explosive growth of audio books.
And this:
Once a static niche for aficionados renting clunky cassettes or CDs for their commutes, audio books have gone mass-market. Sales have jumped by double digits in recent years. Shifts in digital technology have broadened the pool of potential listeners to include anyone with a smartphone.
At the same time, publishers are investing six-figure sums in splashy productions with dozens of narrators. Using the Netflix model, some audio book producers have even started experimenting with original works written exclusively as audio productions, ranging from full-cast dramatizations in the style of old school radio plays, complete with music and sound effects, to young adult novels, thrillers and multipart science fiction epics.
I know that this is true for me. I have read (listened to) more audible books in the past few years than before. This is a combination of having read Stephen King's On Writing, where in he wonders why writers don't spend every waking moment writing or reading, and because of my ever lengthening commute.
There might also be a genetic reason for my listening to books on tape. My paternal grandfather was a huge fan of books on tape. Whenever I got into his car he had a small little box full of cassettes that he would slip in and listen to as we drove. It was always there. I used to rent books on tape from the library and still recall sitting in the parking lot before high school listening to Dick Francis on tape. I think I heard Bolt for the first time that way.
At the moment I'm listening to the complete works of Sherlock Holmes on tape. Usually I listened to military histories or biographies, I branched out with Sherlock Holmes thanks to a recommendation from my brother. Personally I think it's genetic and I'm glad that it is.
CD: Ten more seconds and I'm leaving.
Roxanne: What did you say?
CD: I said "ten more seconds and I'm leaving."
Roxanne: Oh.
CD: Wait, what did you think I said?
Roxanne: I thought you said "earn more sessions by sleeving."
CD: Well what the hell does that mean?
Roxanne: I don't know, that's why I came out.
Then I saw this article on the resurgence of Audible books in the WSJ. Can You Hear Me Now by Alexandra Alter is worth a read. Among the more prescient passages are these:
The digital revolution may have dealt a heavy blow to print, but it is boosting literacy in other unexpected ways by fueling the explosive growth of audio books.
And this:
Once a static niche for aficionados renting clunky cassettes or CDs for their commutes, audio books have gone mass-market. Sales have jumped by double digits in recent years. Shifts in digital technology have broadened the pool of potential listeners to include anyone with a smartphone.
At the same time, publishers are investing six-figure sums in splashy productions with dozens of narrators. Using the Netflix model, some audio book producers have even started experimenting with original works written exclusively as audio productions, ranging from full-cast dramatizations in the style of old school radio plays, complete with music and sound effects, to young adult novels, thrillers and multipart science fiction epics.
I know that this is true for me. I have read (listened to) more audible books in the past few years than before. This is a combination of having read Stephen King's On Writing, where in he wonders why writers don't spend every waking moment writing or reading, and because of my ever lengthening commute.
There might also be a genetic reason for my listening to books on tape. My paternal grandfather was a huge fan of books on tape. Whenever I got into his car he had a small little box full of cassettes that he would slip in and listen to as we drove. It was always there. I used to rent books on tape from the library and still recall sitting in the parking lot before high school listening to Dick Francis on tape. I think I heard Bolt for the first time that way.
At the moment I'm listening to the complete works of Sherlock Holmes on tape. Usually I listened to military histories or biographies, I branched out with Sherlock Holmes thanks to a recommendation from my brother. Personally I think it's genetic and I'm glad that it is.
Wednesday, July 31, 2013
Movies About Writing and Writers
I love this post by P.J. Parrish in The Kill Zone entitled What writers can learn from movies about writing.
In the post five movies are highlighted, Wonder Boys, Throw Momma From the Train, As Good As It Gets, Adaptation, and Deconstructing Harry. It's a fun article to read if you've seen these movies and P.J. Parrish does a good job of making them relevant to actual writers.
The line that is mentioned for Throw Momma From the Train is a favorite of mine and i'm glad it's pointed out so well in the post.
I think the better question is, why are movies about writing and writers so mediocre and/or bad? I've seen Wonder Boys and had to force myself not to yawn. I hated Throw Momma From the Train despite the fact that most of my friends loved it. The fact that Jack Nicholson's character was a writer was unecessary and was really only there for him to provide a memorable line. I fell asleep during Adaption and still don't know how it ends and I've never seen Deconstructing Harry.
In the post five movies are highlighted, Wonder Boys, Throw Momma From the Train, As Good As It Gets, Adaptation, and Deconstructing Harry. It's a fun article to read if you've seen these movies and P.J. Parrish does a good job of making them relevant to actual writers.
The line that is mentioned for Throw Momma From the Train is a favorite of mine and i'm glad it's pointed out so well in the post.
I think the better question is, why are movies about writing and writers so mediocre and/or bad? I've seen Wonder Boys and had to force myself not to yawn. I hated Throw Momma From the Train despite the fact that most of my friends loved it. The fact that Jack Nicholson's character was a writer was unecessary and was really only there for him to provide a memorable line. I fell asleep during Adaption and still don't know how it ends and I've never seen Deconstructing Harry.
Tuesday, July 30, 2013
Penguin Pinching Pennies
My avid reader (the one) has sent an article and a quick review which I will post for him.
The article is found on Boing Boing and is titled Penguin's insane policy on electronic galleys for authors. It goes on to describe Penguin Publishing rather antiquated paradigm for distributing galleys to agents and authors.
To deal with this, Penguin (and a few other places), have set it up that you can buy a PDF file for $250-300 to send the book to foreign publishers. That cost is often borne by the author or the agency. Ridiculous. To get around it, agents have tried to approach at negotiation. But, when making a deal in the six figure mark, even at auction, agents still can't get that one little guarantee. We're talking BIG books and BIG agencies, but nope. Won't go into contracts (even though I'm sure there are exceptions, the point stands). What's more, Penguin will laugh off the idea of getting around it by making an author's advance, say, $20,300. Or $250,300.
It's a fun article to read if you think its entertaining to see how publishing houses are pushing back against the changes in the publishing world, a topic we explore here religiously.
Our reader, my indispensable brother who sends ideas and articles often (for a smattering see here), wrote regarding the article:
Thought this was interesting. I don't buy their argument, but it is worth noting that the one book that leaked, still went on to be a #1 best seller. Much like the movie and music business, the big businesses, always say that piracy and "digital" has caused them to loose money, but in reality, you see data like this. People will buy good things, and eschew the crappy, whether it's been pirated or not.
I think he should be the writer with prosaic phrases like: People will buy good things, and eschew the crappy, whether it's been pirated or not. I couldn't say it any better.
I've recently been involved in buying and selling houses. I've been impressed to find that since the last time I bought a house, three or four years ago, our real estate agent has embraced technology. Gone are the endless, highlighted forms that must be signed and dated. Now there is a dotloop document that gets e-signed quickly and passed back and forth even quicker. Sadly the financing folks haven't yet followed suit. It's only a matter of time I predict, just as I imagine it will only be a matter of time for Penguin too.
The article is found on Boing Boing and is titled Penguin's insane policy on electronic galleys for authors. It goes on to describe Penguin Publishing rather antiquated paradigm for distributing galleys to agents and authors.
To deal with this, Penguin (and a few other places), have set it up that you can buy a PDF file for $250-300 to send the book to foreign publishers. That cost is often borne by the author or the agency. Ridiculous. To get around it, agents have tried to approach at negotiation. But, when making a deal in the six figure mark, even at auction, agents still can't get that one little guarantee. We're talking BIG books and BIG agencies, but nope. Won't go into contracts (even though I'm sure there are exceptions, the point stands). What's more, Penguin will laugh off the idea of getting around it by making an author's advance, say, $20,300. Or $250,300.
It's a fun article to read if you think its entertaining to see how publishing houses are pushing back against the changes in the publishing world, a topic we explore here religiously.
Our reader, my indispensable brother who sends ideas and articles often (for a smattering see here), wrote regarding the article:
Thought this was interesting. I don't buy their argument, but it is worth noting that the one book that leaked, still went on to be a #1 best seller. Much like the movie and music business, the big businesses, always say that piracy and "digital" has caused them to loose money, but in reality, you see data like this. People will buy good things, and eschew the crappy, whether it's been pirated or not.
I think he should be the writer with prosaic phrases like: People will buy good things, and eschew the crappy, whether it's been pirated or not. I couldn't say it any better.
I've recently been involved in buying and selling houses. I've been impressed to find that since the last time I bought a house, three or four years ago, our real estate agent has embraced technology. Gone are the endless, highlighted forms that must be signed and dated. Now there is a dotloop document that gets e-signed quickly and passed back and forth even quicker. Sadly the financing folks haven't yet followed suit. It's only a matter of time I predict, just as I imagine it will only be a matter of time for Penguin too.
Monday, July 29, 2013
More on the Writing Group
As I mentioned last week, there is a genre smorgasbord in my writing/critique group.
We have two writer's whose specific writing genre's I don't know. Then there is one Victorian murder mystery writer, another who has a background in zombies and horror but who is writing a WWII era murder mystery (I think) and a gentleman who is writing a compelling, high-landeresque, gruesome fantasy. Then there is your's truly who is writing a thriller/mystery centered on conspiracy theories.
So it was with great attention I read this article in the WSJ on murder's in the Victorian era, Bloodied Minded Victorians by Alexandra Mullen. Naturally I sent the link to the story to my writing group friend, but I link to it here because the author's position is that the fundamentals of today's murder mysteries started during this era.
Fenning's sad tale, like many of the other murder cases recounted here, was quickly adapted into fabulously melodramatic fiction. This is the final piece of Ms. Flanders's puzzle: how writers—from hack journalists to highfalutin novelists—eventually used such raw material to shape the narrative expectations for the mysteries and thrillers that we read today.
Then there is the fact that so many of the murder's that were popular to read about and follow in the press were so lurid and horrific.
At first, this was a bit shocking then I thought about some of the horrific modern day massacre's and murders and I decided maybe things haven't changed so much.
It's a terrific little article about the nascent stages of the murder mystery and how they came about in the Victorian era. But it was the books suggestion portion of the article that really made me take notice, particularly the way that "avoirdupois" is used so adroitly.
The Woman in White (1860)
By Wilkie Collins
Collins's story is sensational in all senses of the word, but the bravura effect comes from the way Collins drew on his time watching a trial: the novel imitates the collection and evaluation of often contradictory documentary evidence, diaries and witness accounts. And there's the first master-criminal to boot, the charmingly evil Count Fosco, as large in avoirdupois as he is in ego.
We have two writer's whose specific writing genre's I don't know. Then there is one Victorian murder mystery writer, another who has a background in zombies and horror but who is writing a WWII era murder mystery (I think) and a gentleman who is writing a compelling, high-landeresque, gruesome fantasy. Then there is your's truly who is writing a thriller/mystery centered on conspiracy theories.
So it was with great attention I read this article in the WSJ on murder's in the Victorian era, Bloodied Minded Victorians by Alexandra Mullen. Naturally I sent the link to the story to my writing group friend, but I link to it here because the author's position is that the fundamentals of today's murder mysteries started during this era.
Fenning's sad tale, like many of the other murder cases recounted here, was quickly adapted into fabulously melodramatic fiction. This is the final piece of Ms. Flanders's puzzle: how writers—from hack journalists to highfalutin novelists—eventually used such raw material to shape the narrative expectations for the mysteries and thrillers that we read today.
Then there is the fact that so many of the murder's that were popular to read about and follow in the press were so lurid and horrific.
- Most evocative for fans of the great sleuths of the mystery novel are the middle-class murderers, quietly going about their nefarious business in country houses and suburban villas. Who savagely murdered the 3-year-old Francis Kent, last seen sleeping in a room with his nursemaid and later found "thrust down the outside privy, his throat cut"?
- There are unsolved violent crimes, such as the Ratcliffe Highway murders in 1811, in which a whole family (including a baby in his cradle) was massacred in their house.
At first, this was a bit shocking then I thought about some of the horrific modern day massacre's and murders and I decided maybe things haven't changed so much.
It's a terrific little article about the nascent stages of the murder mystery and how they came about in the Victorian era. But it was the books suggestion portion of the article that really made me take notice, particularly the way that "avoirdupois" is used so adroitly.
The Woman in White (1860)
By Wilkie Collins
Collins's story is sensational in all senses of the word, but the bravura effect comes from the way Collins drew on his time watching a trial: the novel imitates the collection and evaluation of often contradictory documentary evidence, diaries and witness accounts. And there's the first master-criminal to boot, the charmingly evil Count Fosco, as large in avoirdupois as he is in ego.
Thursday, July 25, 2013
Writer's Continually Stun Me
I don't know where writer's come up with their ideas. I've said before in his arena that some writers and author's ideas are amazing to me. Vernor Vinge's novels, or Hugh Howey's Wool are good examples of authors who have ideas that are just mind blowing to me.
My critique group hosts only three or four other writer's but it's stunning to me that they are so creative. One writer is working on a mystery in 19th century London. Another, who has a background in writing about Zombies, has a novel start that takes place in the WWII era and stars a WAC. Finally, one writer has a story, similar in nature to the Highlander series, but is so intriguing that I, who never fall for stuff like that, find myself reading it eagerly and wanting more.
I'm a tad worried that I'm out of my league. These are deep, deep books with some really well thought out plots, themes and stories. Then again, that's sort of the point of joining a writing group . . . to push oneself beyond the normal boundaries we are used to. As I said yesterday, so far . . . I'm marking it as a success.
My critique group hosts only three or four other writer's but it's stunning to me that they are so creative. One writer is working on a mystery in 19th century London. Another, who has a background in writing about Zombies, has a novel start that takes place in the WWII era and stars a WAC. Finally, one writer has a story, similar in nature to the Highlander series, but is so intriguing that I, who never fall for stuff like that, find myself reading it eagerly and wanting more.
I'm a tad worried that I'm out of my league. These are deep, deep books with some really well thought out plots, themes and stories. Then again, that's sort of the point of joining a writing group . . . to push oneself beyond the normal boundaries we are used to. As I said yesterday, so far . . . I'm marking it as a success.
Wednesday, July 24, 2013
If Not "Rousing" a Success Nonetheless
First meeting of the new critique group. It was successful, although not completely so.
The unsuccessful parts? I thought we were meeting near my house. We were not. I found out 20 minutes before the start of the meeting that we would be meeting 20 miles away near downtown Houston, not in the burbs. I had decided to work from home so that I could skip the commute. I ended up commuting anyway.
One of the members didn't show. We were already down from 5 to 4 since Michael was at a writer's retreat. One of our members had to fill in for a neighbor mom who went into labor. She was stuck caring for the kiddos. Then, as it turns out, one member got the time wrong, she showed up at 1:30, thirty minutes after we had left. So all told the entire critique group consisted of me and Lindsay (but it was a quorum nonetheless).
Actually, there were two members who had the time wrong. I thought it started at 11:00. Nope. 11:30. But, that was to my favor as I was running late anyway.
Those are all the negative or pieces that we need to work on.
The positives?
Having a deadline made me write more and get more done on Vapor Trail.
That alone cancels out all the negatives. We'll try again next month. I'm sure it will be more successful even still.
The unsuccessful parts? I thought we were meeting near my house. We were not. I found out 20 minutes before the start of the meeting that we would be meeting 20 miles away near downtown Houston, not in the burbs. I had decided to work from home so that I could skip the commute. I ended up commuting anyway.
One of the members didn't show. We were already down from 5 to 4 since Michael was at a writer's retreat. One of our members had to fill in for a neighbor mom who went into labor. She was stuck caring for the kiddos. Then, as it turns out, one member got the time wrong, she showed up at 1:30, thirty minutes after we had left. So all told the entire critique group consisted of me and Lindsay (but it was a quorum nonetheless).
Actually, there were two members who had the time wrong. I thought it started at 11:00. Nope. 11:30. But, that was to my favor as I was running late anyway.
Those are all the negative or pieces that we need to work on.
The positives?
Having a deadline made me write more and get more done on Vapor Trail.
That alone cancels out all the negatives. We'll try again next month. I'm sure it will be more successful even still.
Tuesday, July 23, 2013
I'd File This in the Great First Lines Folder
No, it's not pithy or reverent. It's long and the reader has to have some contextual background to understand it fully, but this first passage from Executive Orders by Tom Clancy, the book I started reading this weekend, is a great first line:
IT HAD TO BE THE SHOCK of the moment, Ryan thought. He seemed to be two people at the same time. One part of him looked out the window of the lunchroom of CNN’s Washington bureau and saw the fires that grew from the remains of the Capitol building— yellow points springing up from an orange glow like some sort of ghastly floral arrangement, representing over a thousand lives that had been snuffed out not an hour earlier. Numbness suppressed grief for the moment, though he knew that would come, too, as pain always followed a hard blow to the face, but not right away. Once more, Death in all its horrid majesty had reached out for him. He’d seen it come, and stop, and withdraw, and the best thing to be said about it was that his children didn’t know how close their young lives had come to an early conclusion. To them, it had simply been an accident they didn’t understand. They were with their mother now, and they’d feel safe in her company while their father was away somewhere. It was a situation to which both they and he long since had unhappily become accustomed. And so John Patrick Ryan looked at the residue of Death, and one part of him as yet felt nothing.
Clancy, Tom - Executive Orders
Truth be told though, it's not the first passage that is compelling me to read on . . . its the entire story. I want to know what happens down the line.
IT HAD TO BE THE SHOCK of the moment, Ryan thought. He seemed to be two people at the same time. One part of him looked out the window of the lunchroom of CNN’s Washington bureau and saw the fires that grew from the remains of the Capitol building— yellow points springing up from an orange glow like some sort of ghastly floral arrangement, representing over a thousand lives that had been snuffed out not an hour earlier. Numbness suppressed grief for the moment, though he knew that would come, too, as pain always followed a hard blow to the face, but not right away. Once more, Death in all its horrid majesty had reached out for him. He’d seen it come, and stop, and withdraw, and the best thing to be said about it was that his children didn’t know how close their young lives had come to an early conclusion. To them, it had simply been an accident they didn’t understand. They were with their mother now, and they’d feel safe in her company while their father was away somewhere. It was a situation to which both they and he long since had unhappily become accustomed. And so John Patrick Ryan looked at the residue of Death, and one part of him as yet felt nothing.
Clancy, Tom - Executive Orders
Truth be told though, it's not the first passage that is compelling me to read on . . . its the entire story. I want to know what happens down the line.
Monday, July 22, 2013
More on Apple
To continue with the saga about Apple's pricing structure and the court case (see here, here and here) then I recommend this terrific article (pro-apple) that is in today's WSJ by Gordon Crovitz called A Judge Convicts Apple of Competition.
It's a great article (with a terrific title) but the best line in the article could be this one:
The ruling against Apple means that any company trying to provide a new service that requires negotiating with multiple parties to get access to content (like books, music or video) is at risk of antitrust prosecution. That includes Apple, which is planning to launch new offerings such as iTunes Radio. Other innovative consumer products that required the kinds of multiparty negotiations Apple had with book publishers include Netflix, Hulu and Pandora.
It's a worthwhile read whether you agree with the ruling or you don't, and I don't.
I am a convert. Originally I was anti-apple (see here) but having done just a bit of research and looked into the little bit I have, I think Apple has sure gotten a raw deal. They treated their book publishing business no different than any other app they had. They were busting up a monopoly not contributing to one, and they were forcing no one to do business with them. Where's the illegality?
Do I like the model? Not particularly, but then there are dozen of other sites where I can put my work. I don't understand the other side of the argument anymore, and have yet to find anyone to convince me that I'm wrong on this count. One more passage from today's article that speaks to me?
Company 2 entered a market in which Company 1 had a 90% market share—then Company 2 was found guilty of antitrust violations. Only in America. To the infamous antitrust prosecutions of technology companies such as IBM and Microsoft, add the Justice Department's July 10 "win" against Apple relating to sales of e-books.
It's a great article (with a terrific title) but the best line in the article could be this one:
The ruling against Apple means that any company trying to provide a new service that requires negotiating with multiple parties to get access to content (like books, music or video) is at risk of antitrust prosecution. That includes Apple, which is planning to launch new offerings such as iTunes Radio. Other innovative consumer products that required the kinds of multiparty negotiations Apple had with book publishers include Netflix, Hulu and Pandora.
It's a worthwhile read whether you agree with the ruling or you don't, and I don't.
I am a convert. Originally I was anti-apple (see here) but having done just a bit of research and looked into the little bit I have, I think Apple has sure gotten a raw deal. They treated their book publishing business no different than any other app they had. They were busting up a monopoly not contributing to one, and they were forcing no one to do business with them. Where's the illegality?
Do I like the model? Not particularly, but then there are dozen of other sites where I can put my work. I don't understand the other side of the argument anymore, and have yet to find anyone to convince me that I'm wrong on this count. One more passage from today's article that speaks to me?
Company 2 entered a market in which Company 1 had a 90% market share—then Company 2 was found guilty of antitrust violations. Only in America. To the infamous antitrust prosecutions of technology companies such as IBM and Microsoft, add the Justice Department's July 10 "win" against Apple relating to sales of e-books.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)