Let’s Hope The Print Oxford English Dictionary Really Dies

“Falling away by tens per cent a year,” the print dictionary market “is just disappearing”. That’s what Oxford University Press CEO Nigel Portwood says. And that’s exactly why the third edition of the Oxford English Dictionary may be online only.

While the company will not stop printing smaller dictionaries yet – which are still fairly popular – the 20-volume, $US1150 dictionary will most surely die, unless “there is sufficient demand at the time of publication’.’

Let’s hope there’s none, because no matter how you feel about books this is very good news. 60kg of paper – which is what the second editions weighs – mean a lot of production resources for something that offers an inferior experience compared to the ease of use, speed and convenience of the electronic version. [SMH via Obsolete]

Discuss

(7 Comments)
  • [–]

    Ehren

    Tuesday, August 31, 2010 at 8:36 AM

    The hardcopy of this dictionary is an object of beauty. It’s something that if looked after will last, and longer than a computer ever will. A dictionary like this can be passed down as an heirloom, as it truly shows the same level of craftsmanship as an antique table etc.

    I hope it doesn’t completely “die” as you are wishing.

  • [–]

    Jon Underwood

    Tuesday, August 31, 2010 at 8:39 AM

    you’re right, that is a lot less dead trees, and a far more efficient use of those resources elsewhere.

    however, its a tad sad, the end of an era in a way, or a signpost for a broader transition. there’s nothing quite like randomly sampling bits from multi-volume texts (a second hand copy of a 8-volume set of Gibbon’s Decline and Fall was a favourite as a youngin’).

  • [–]

    Tim

    Tuesday, August 31, 2010 at 10:02 AM

    Totally agree with @Ehren. Happily, though, print-on-demand technology is such that I suspect it will always be possible to get this edition, even if it’s taken out of general circulation.

  • [–]

    Sam Timmins

    Tuesday, August 31, 2010 at 1:25 PM

    Considering we now have “print as needed” kiosks for ebooks, books’ll hardly be gone.

  • [–]

    Nathan Holmes

    Wednesday, September 1, 2010 at 1:41 AM

    If these were $1100 cheaper, I’d totally by them.

  • [–]

    Geoff

    Wednesday, September 1, 2010 at 2:56 PM

    It really frustrates me when people bring up the “think of the trees” arguments pertaining to this sort of thing.

    The trees that are providing the paper for books is farmed. It isn’t coming from the rainforest, and no monkeys live in them, so you can rest easy. What you’re actually doing by buying books, is ordering more trees to be planted. That is all.

  • [–]

    Jamie

    Tuesday, January 11, 2011 at 4:52 PM

    I am after a copy of the 20 volumes. If I get one, I will for ever refer to it, even if I have to walk the length of the house to use it. This is because it is a sensual experience to refer to such a thing of beauty. Each time I shall refer to it I will remember how I acquired it, and who previously owned it. It will then lead me into some little chambers of the language, yet less easily accessed by the computer, and with the warmth and regard only a book gives to its holder.

Join The Discussion