A family friend who is a librarian just sent me the link to this CNET article about a service that aims to be a Netflix for books:
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13512_3-10223739-23.html
It's an interesting idea, but I do wonder how well such a service will catch on. It doesn't seem as convenient as Netflix, especially since you have to worry about how much a book weighs. I guess it would be a good source for specialized books or titles from small publishers that a library might not carry. I just wonder how many of these kinds of books BookSwim owns. It sounds like the service may be more for people who just can't wait to get a bestseller from a library and are willing to pay a little money to get their hands on the book now. I wonder if BookSwim will sell used copies of bestsellers once they aren't so popular any more and aren't needed for their subscribers. Hmmm, a new source for used books, perhaps...
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
The main question is why not go to the library?
ReplyDeleteHe says, "The company's answer includes these main points: no late fees, 24-hour browsing, a wider selection, less waiting for popular titles, and no need to leave home."
The catalog *is* browsable 24 hrs, and I expect that the selection is *way* wider.
They probably have us on the waiting for popular titles, and certainly have us on the not leaving home part.
I really think, though, that people just don't know how much they can do with the library. Requesting online, downloadable materials, and online notification that that holds are in, not to mention the ease of renewing online (and being able to pay the miserable fines that do accrue, online), are all relatively new services that most folks don't know about.
Ah, but it's the home delivery that's so appealing. First time I heard about it, I immediately thought it WAS referring to a library - but now I see that it's the delivery that is the point, and we don't. Hmmm ... if Link+ can get books to libraries, why can't they be checked out like books by mail and delivered to the patron instead?
ReplyDelete