The Amazon.com catalog entry for Vernor Vinge’s much-anticipated novel, RAINBOW’S END, reads “RAINBOW’S END (Zones of Thought)”.
That would suggest a link between RAINBOW’S END and Vinge’s classics, A FIRE UPON THE DEEP and A DEEPNESS IN THE SKY.
Cataloging error, or humongous spoiler?
The new cover of this Tor reissue is more restrained than
this old Baen cover:
I have an even more egregious paperback somewhere, but can’t find a scanned image online.
Digitization 101: How is Google’s digitization quality?
How is Google’s digitization quality?
When Google announced its project nearly a year ago, I was anxious to hear how they were going to digitize the materials. I soon realized that confidentiality agreements and the air of secrecy was going to keep me (and you) from learning from this project. I know that we’ll learn more about copyright because of Google’s work, but would it be wonderful to learn more about how they are going about this effort? Even just some tidbits?We can learn a bit from looking at the books that Google has digitized. And what we learn is that their quality isn’t all good. If you search through the materials, you’ll find items were the images are very crisp and clear, and others that are blurry and (perhaps) sloppily done.
For example, if you flip through this book (from 1908 and in the public domain), you’ll see a fingernail, book clamps, obscured pages, pages missing (p. 61), and pages that are crocked. And nearly every page is hard to read. Is this an anomaly? No. Look at this book (from 1916 and in the public domain) and you’ll see brown pages (p. 22). What’s up with that?!
Without signing in, you can only see a few pages of the newer books. Even without signing in, one quickly senses that the pages are clearer and much easier to read. (Look at this example from 2004.) Is Google doing something different with these so that they are scanned better?
Not necessarily. The cover of my newly scanned book has visible scan lines. Irritating because they are working from my PDF!
WSJ.com - The ‘Da Vinci’ Cash Cow
For book publishers, the most provocative question raised by the upcoming movie version of “The Da Vinci Code” is: Can a three-year-old best seller that has already been endlessly milked for profits yield one more windfall for the industry?
[image]
With the film opening in May, the publishing industry is placing one of its biggest bets ever on the staying power of a blockbuster book. Publishers are using the movie’s release to anchor numerous “Da Vinci”-related titles and tie-ins, including the novel’s first U.S. paperback run. And all of them are trying to harness the selling power of the most successful novel in recent memory, with an estimated 40 million copies in print world-wide.
The pile-on is a common model in the book world, but “Da Vinci” is having an unusually long run of tie-ins. “The publishing industry sees something that’s working and keeps doing it until it keels over,” says Robert Miller, president of Walt Disney’s Hyperion book-publishing unit. “When angels were hot, the first 40 books about them succeeded. Then not. The first 20 O.J. Simpson books worked. Then not.