Thus, ‘stocking a new library’ with eBooks requires purchasing new licenses, but the publishers will not grant them. Likewise the titles are made available for libraries distribute by the company “OverDrive”, which controls what they bother to carry (FULL DISCLOSURE: Atomic Fez has no eBooks available through OverDrive and mentioning that is a good way to make the publisher grumpy and start ranting). Thus, as the libraries are tied to OverDrive’s catalogue, and the publishers can directly control what OverDrive is supplied, the ‘Big 6′ get to control what the libraries have in the way of eBooks in a way that they cannot control with paper books, because if the library wants ten copies of the hardback that HarperCollins won’t sell them, they just pop down the corner and shop at Bollum’s Books.

See earlier comment about “Knowledge is Money”.

I think some of your source values may be wrong about textbook costs, though. Plus, you haven’t remembered to cover the number of books during the entire lifetime of the iPad (which isn’t really the most economical unit one should use, but that requires the consideration above to be reconciled). Let’s say five textbooks for each semester, for a two-year programme (and also presuming the life of the iPad is only the two years). I’d say you’re looking at each of those textbooks costing $100 each in printed format (psychology and engineering are insane multiples of that), so that’s $2,000 over the period. If the ‘apps’ are used instead, you’ve got $300 in software on the $600 iPad, thus $1,000 over the same period (presuming $100 in tax for the latter example, but ignoring it for the printed scenario). Even if you account for some of those textbooks to be “course packs” of photocopied material, typically there’s a book to accompany that stack of loose paper as well, so the cheapness of the photocopies is more than offset by the required book, and even the photocopies are a good $50 a batch in many cases.

The re-sale value of text books is something that many text book publishers would dearly love to crush, just as many publishers would dearly love to nuke every single used book store and library in the world, thus making their products only available to those who can afford them. This continues the notion that ‘knowledge is power, and power is money, thus knowledge is money and those who are poor remain ignorant. The Rich Rule All.’ QED

It’s not the solution, no; but this is the start of one.

Let’s do a little math: your new Apple eTextbook at the touted price of $15 times say 5 textbooks for your average school year + an iPad2 at $500 = $575.

Your average print book is around $100 times 5 textbooks = $500 MINUS the average resale value of, let’s say 40% = $300.

Let’s say that you can afford to purchase the iPad2, which most middle school/grade school (depending on where you are) parents cannot for each kid in the class. That iPad will probably have a lifespan of say, 2 years. This is assuming that your kid doesn’t demand that you run out and buy the new, shiny “iPad X” as soon as they come out about every year.

Now, you’re stuck with books that can only be viewed on one device (or likely your Apple computer) and Apple is happy because you will be using their products for the foreseeable future because you don’t want to lose you current library of “books.”

The same problem arises with the Amazon Kindle, by the by. When you purchase Kindle-formatted books from Amazon, you’re stuck using Amazon’s device (or your computer) to read “your” books. Is this a good idea? Hell no.

Let’s also not gloss over the fact that Apple says that any books created using their fancy iTextbook authoring tool CAN NOT be sold anywhere else but Apple iTunes. You want to throw together a book for your class and sell it on your website? Too bad! Apple wants its 30% tariff, Baby.

So it’s a bit of a delusion that Apple is going to “solve” the problem with eTextbooks. It should be obvious: Apple is only out to help Apple.

I love Apple products, but I am dead set against being forced to view MY content on a device of THEIR choosing. Content needs to be device-free before we “solve” anything.

YES “in both orientations”!