Flat World Knowledge Continues To Innovate: Make Your Own Textbook Platform
from the very-cool dept
We've been impressed by Flat World Knowledge from its very early days. The company offers open source textbooks, and has a business model that really fits with what we talk about: the books are free online (even without registration). But if you want a printed version, or certain additional conveniences, you have to pay. And, as an "open source" textbook company, it's always encouraged "remixing" of the textbooks in question to meet different classroom needs. However, it's now taken things a step further by launching a platform to make it easy to "make your own," by taking a textbook and remixing it, editing it, etc, directly in their platform. As soon as you're done, the new version becomes a "published" version. So a professor can create the "perfect" textbook for his or her class, building on the works already offered. This seems like a very useful offering for lots of professors.
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Nice but not innovative
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Nice but not innovative
Yeah, but a ton of content at FWK...
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Nice but not innovative
I know some universities 'strongly encourage' professors to use personalized textbooks, because those textbooks can only be bought though that university's affiliated booksellers. FWK is doing the academic world a great service by offering freely-available personalized textbooks.
I don't that O'Reilly has gone quite so far in this area, but they are another of the more respectable publishers as regarded by my personal acquaintances. I don't much care which of them comes up with a good idea, so long as that idea is out in the world helping people.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Nice but not innovative
So is this where O'Reilly sue, claiming to have a patent that covers the online remixing of textbooks thus killing the idea and "helping drive innovation"? Or is that just be being cynical....?
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Nice but not innovative
otherwise, they find a way to be better, or serve a wider customer base, either of which leads to more sales for them (though the former also deprives FWK of customers, in theory, while the latter does not, also in theory)
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Nice but not innovative
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Nice but not innovative
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Nice but not innovative
(this statement is made within the context of our broken patent system and within the context of what IP maximists generally consider innovative).
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Nice but not innovative
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Nice but not innovative
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Nice but not innovative
It is innovative. You're confusing inventive with innovative.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
For the greater good
[ reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]
Add Your Comment