flex-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From jude <flexcapaci...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: O'Reilly Apache Flex book help
Date Sun, 26 Jan 2014 02:31:03 GMT
Do you want us to email the O'Reilly guys? One suggestion since books can
take a great deal of time is to get a few tech editors. Maybe one or two
per chapter?


On Sat, Jan 25, 2014 at 10:06 AM, Joseph Balderson <news@joeflash.ca> wrote:

> Anyone is free to do as they wish... I am not standing in the way of
> anyone who
> wants to write a Flex book. This is simply the path that I am taking.
>
> In this day and age of self-publishing, of what relevance are traditional
> publishing houses? That's a good question. It's not because they print
> physical
> books anymore, that model has long since died. It's for other reasons.
>
> 1) Perception: stakeholders and managers still look upon traditional
> publishing
> houses as thought leaders, or at least responsive to tech market trends as
> opposed to developer fanbase trends. The perception is that the dog (market
> trends) wags the tail (developer adoption), but in many cases it's
> actually the
> tail which wags the dog. What's the same in either case is the dog and the
> tail,
> they are part of the same ecosystem. Self-published books sidestep this
> perception. So that you have only the tail, so to speak. All of which
> means that
> a self/community-published book needs to have an awful lot of buzz to wag
> the dog.
>
> In the case of O'Reilly, they are a publishing house and they're
> considered a
> thought leader in the tech space, which is why it would have been nice to
> have
> such a title. An O'Reilly book would have been as good as an endorsement
> of the
> continued viability of the tech, but that's merely the perception. In
> reality
> O'Reilly is not so much a thought leader as a thought promoter: they still
> respond to perceived market trends as much as everyone else.
>
> 2) Reach. Traditional publishing houses can guarantee books in
> brick-and-mortar
> stores and online marketplaces. The former is becoming less and less
> relevant,
> but the latter is key. No matter what self-publishing capabilities exist on
> Amazon and other online marketplaces, the distribution is fragmented. In
> the
> case of a major publishing house, brand recognition helps distribution and
> sales. And increased sales means increased reach. That's not to say that
> self-publishing cannot do the same, but it takes more work and more buzz.
>
> 3) Infrastructure. This one is key. Many people do not realize it, but the
> resources a publishing house brings to the table are not only about graphic
> design and distribution. They have full-time staff editors with literary
> qualifications to ensure that the book itself is well written with no
> glaring
> typos and grammatical mistakes. Having been through the publishing process
> on
> several occasions, I can emphatically say that I am eternally grateful for
> editors who had my back. The tech editor, usually chosen by the author,
> verifies
> the quality of the technical aspects of the book. But it takes a literary
> editor
> to ensure that the book as a whole is well-written. We are so used to
> well-written books that all you have to do is read a few reviews of books
> from
> lesser publishing houses which basically exist to rubber-stamp
> self-published
> works, and you can feel the heat from the flames in the reviews: it doesn't
> matter how engaging the material, but if the grammar is sloppy and the
> text is
> rife with uncaught typos, the book will tank.
>
> Not to mention that they have access to legal resources that a
> self-publisher
> would not have or would be a real pain to do oneself. When I write an
> Apache
> book, I don't have to worry a whit about copyright or trademark issues: the
> publisher deals directly with the trademark suits at Apache, Adobe or
> anyone
> else referenced in the book. I can use the words "Apache Flex" in the book
> title
> without getting into long and frustrating conversations with Apache's legal
> department. It's already taken care of, because chances are that that
> publishing
> house already has a few Apache-related books under its belt and the process
> becomes automatic. One less headache for the author. I have enough
> headaches
> just writing the thing, I don't need to deal with that as well.
>
> 4) Remuneration. No one makes a living writing tech books, it's like
> working
> retail for the amount of hours one puts in. But at least there is a slight
> chance you'll get paid; there is an advance, and if you're lucky the
> publisher
> will break even and you may even see a dollar or two of royalties. If one
> is
> fortunate enough to be in a tech that's popular and you have a reputation,
> some
> authors can write several books a year and make it into a nice part time
> job.
> For most of us though, after working on a book for 500-1000 hours, it's
> nice to
> see a few dollars in the bank at the end of it all. With self-publishing,
> that's
> all up in the air.
>
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
>
> Joseph Balderson, Flex & Flash Platform Developer :: http://joeflash.ca
> Author, Professional Flex 3 :: http://tinyurl.com/proflex3book
>
> Jeffry Houser wrote:
> > On 1/24/2014 5:10 PM, Justin Mclean wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >>> Well, I just heard back from O'Reilly. And unfortunately they're not
> >>> interested
> >>> in publishing an Apache Flex book of any kind
> >> While it would of been nice to have them as a publisher (print book,
> >> distribution, marketing etc etc) do we actually need a publisher?
> >>
> >> In this day and age it's easy enough to publish ebooks.
> >
> >   I was thinking the same thing.  The big benefit of having a
> > traditional publisher is that they can get 'paper copy' books into real
> > bookstores.
> >   The real drawback of 'paper' books in real bookstores is that
> > programmers will never know this book existed.
> >
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message