Talk:Apple Books

Functions of this reading software ?

Does anybody know which functionality the software offers? For example

• Creating own bookmarks, maybe including formatting (important, good,...) or typing them (definition, summary,...)
• creating of notes, maybe with type (question, urgent,...) or tags
• own hyperlinks within a ebook or to another ebook
• highlighting text
• DRM support. Can one use DRM-free and/or DRM-protected EPUBs from another source than BookStore, e.g. existing EPUB-books already bought?

--94.217.113.149 (talk) 15:01, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

Does anybody know about the language capability of this reading software? Foe example can it handle

• Any language that uses Latin alphabet? (e.g French or German with their accents)
  
• Alphabetic languages that don't use Latin alphabet? (e.g. Greek, Russian)
  
• Oriental languages (Chinese, Japanese)
  
• Right-left languages (Arabic, Hebrew)
  

If the software is limited to only English and a small subset of the above, then I think this article should give details.
109.154.167.207 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 20:42, 12 March 2012 (UTC).

Merge into ipad or itunes

This article should be merged into itunes or ipad articles. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.206.9.210 (talk) 20:35, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

I wholeheartedly agree. It is a stub that will never garner much expansion (besides a laundry list of available books, which is spam). Let's put it in to iPad and be done with it. HereToHelp ^{(talk to me)} 01:23, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

I also agree with the merge, there is not enough information about the subject right now. Mushroom (Talk) 01:28, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

I would expect it to be worthy of an article when the software has been released. But if it should be merged for now that would be fine with me. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 10:47, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

No! iBooks is not the iPad, nor is the iPad iBooks. We have articles for the iTunes Store and App Store, so why not iBooks and the iBookstore?--Nickthegeek (talk) 17:00, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

This should merge into iBookstore. 70.29.210.242 (talk) 14:11, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

Maybe. But maybe we should wait until people are actually using iPads and using iBooks first, otherwise we might just have to unmerge it again if the topic becomes popular. Vote "wait and see?" ErkDemon (talk) 04:13, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

I think this should be merged into iBookstore (or vice versa), but certainly not iPad (it doesn't even come preinstalled on the iPad) or even worse iTunes Store (the App Store has a separate article, why shoudn't the iBookstore?). —Preceding unsigned comment added by EdoDodo (talk • contribs)

I agree. Definitely not for merging it with iPad or iTunes, and for merging iBookstore into here. At this point I think anyone who just goes ahead and does it won't see much criticism.... HereToHelp ^{(talk to me)} 16:17, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

I agree with merge with iBookstore and nothing else. Hcobb (talk) 16:48, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

Application vs old publishing company

There was a book publishing company that went out of business a few years ago called iBooks, Inc. I can't ever find anything on it anywhere due to the new application by Apple. I think at the very least there should be a blurb about it at the top of the iBooks Wikipedia page, or a link to a short article about the publisher. Mwirsig (talk) 18:40, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

I think that although IBooks Inc. is too little known to have an article of its own (unless reliable sources can be found it doesn't meet notability guidelines) it is mentioned in the article on Byron Preiss, for which there is already a link to at the top of the iBooks page. I may be wrong and it may be an entirely different publisher also called IBooks but I don't think so. If you know some more about IBooks Inc. and can find good sources for it then feel free to add more info about it on that article or even create its own article if there is enough information. - EdoDodo ^talk 18:51, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

Removal

I have removed the following sentence from the article:

The Kindle App for iPad is free and offers many books for less than the iBookstore.

The sentence did not have a neutral tone, because of phrases like "is free", "offers many books", and "for less" which sound more like an advertisement than an encyclopedia article. If you think this sentence should stay in the article, or have a more neutral alternative, then I will be happy to discuss it here. - EdoDodo ^talk 14:45, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

I think the availability of other readers on iOS needs to be mentioned somewhere, but you're right, this particular sentence is promotional. HereToHelp ^{(talk to me)} 15:16, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

How about a "ebook readers for ios" category then? Hcobb (talk) 19:04, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

No objections to that, as long as there's at least 5+ articles we can add to it, so we don't have a tiny category. - EdoDodo ^talk 19:10, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Kindle, Stanza, Barnes & Noble, http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/borders-ebooks/id368067444?mt=8 and http://www.macworld.com/appguide/app.html?id=522204&expand=true Hcobb (talk) 20:02, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Adding video tutorial

I added a link to a video tutorial I created for my class here at San Jose State.

This video is:

• licensed Creative Commons
• too long to add to the Wikimedia Commons
• focused on educating
• shown without ads

See the related video for ePub with discussion here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:EPUB#ReAdded_video_link

jk (talk) 23:52, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

Merger proposal

I propose that iBooks#iBooks Store be merged into iTunes Store. I think that the content in the iBooks Store section can easily be explained in the context of iTunes Store, and the iBooks Store section is of a reasonable size that the merging of iTunes Store will not cause any problems as far as article size or undue weight is concerned. Proud User (talk) 22:14, 19 September 2015 (UTC)

Two problems here. 1) The iBooks Store is distinct from the iTunes Store so merging as proposed would not be helpful. 2) The section on the iBooks Store contained within an article on the iBooks app is incongruous. This probably resulted when the text formerly in iBooks Store was moved to iBooks. I suggest the best resolution would be to move the content in the iBooks Store section to its own topic. After all the iBooks Store is the second largest seller of eBooks globally. It deserves a topic of its own and a more extensive write up. Same for the iBooks app. This topic lacks the detail usually found in Wikipedia for significant software products. TPiwowar 02:06, 22 September 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tpiwowar (talk • contribs)

Two counterparts to your argument:

1. The iBooks Store is part of the iTunes Store. On a Mac or PC, you could use the iTunes application to search for and buy books, and it would be done under the "iTunes Store" section. Also, material from the iBooks Store is sold on the same website (itunes.apple.com) as music, movies, TV shows, or apps. It is not on a distinct website like ibooks.apple.com.
2. The article is about the app called "iBooks." Its main purpose is to educate readers about the app. We could talk about how the iBooks Store is integrated with iBooks, but that still doesen't change that the iBooks Store is part of the iTunes Store and a more approprate place to go in detail about the iBooks Store itself is in the iTunes Store article.--Proud User (talk) 20:37, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

I disagree that the articles be merged. If I open my iPad, I use the iBooks app to buy e-books. Just like the App Store (iOS) is not in the iTunes Store article, the iBooks Store information should not be in that article. Perhaps the iBook Store should be in its own article, but that is another discussion.--Frmorrison (talk) 18:18, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Request for help in updating the version number on this page

Yesterday I edited other Wikipedia pages to update the version number of each application that has changed on the recently released OS X 10.11. However I am not sure how the page for "iBooks" can have its version changed (from 1.2 to 1.3). Clicking on the "plus/minus" symbol to the right of "1.2 (June 30, 2015; 2 months ago)" takes me to a page that is apparently a redirect to "Template:Latest stable software release/iBooks", but I do not understand how to change this version to "1.3 (August 23, 2015)". Can anyone help? Many thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gepree (talk • contribs) 08:58, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on IBooks. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110531025736/http://www.iphonewzealand.co.nz/2011/all/winnie-the-pooh-goes-mia-from-nz-ibookstore-demands-money-from-other-territories/ to http://www.iphonewzealand.co.nz/2011/all/winnie-the-pooh-goes-mia-from-nz-ibookstore-demands-money-from-other-territories/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140820214155/https://www.apple.com/quicktime/qtv/specialevent0110/ to https://www.apple.com/quicktime/qtv/specialevent0110/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120711052352/http://www.informationweek.com/news/software/productivity_apps/232500227 to http://www.informationweek.com/news/software/productivity_apps/232500227

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:35, 10 November 2017 (UTC)

Source for Objective-C?

Do we have a source that Apple Books is written in Objective-C?