|
Post by arcrow on May 13, 2009 23:37:28 GMT -5
Which side are you on? Are digital books the wave of the future or the destruction of what we love?
|
|
|
Post by HarleyThomas1002 on May 13, 2009 23:48:16 GMT -5
I'll stick with paper. Only fire or a flood will destroy them... and other forces of nature and acts of man such as the copy of Wolves of the Calla I borrowed from the library and because of assholes throwing it off my desk it's falling apart.
With digital books you have the risk of them killing you when the machines take over.
|
|
|
Post by tiado on May 14, 2009 3:44:55 GMT -5
Which side are you on? Are digital books the wave of the future or the destruction of what we love? I will stick with good old paper books. They don't require power to operate, and the data is nonvolatile.
|
|
|
Post by lunarxero on May 14, 2009 3:57:27 GMT -5
Paper always. Mainly because future generations may not be able to read digital stuff from present times. Like most computers now days can't use floppy disks by default anymore. Paper is always readable, wherever and whenever.
|
|
|
Post by DarkfireTaimatsu on May 14, 2009 4:33:46 GMT -5
Paper. No boot-up time, no loading, no upgrades, cheaper to buy/replace... Paper is just a good way to go, no matter how much shelf space it's taking up.
|
|
|
Post by Mira on May 14, 2009 4:53:39 GMT -5
I overall prefer paper books, but I got to handle a Kindle 2.0 last Sunday and was quite impressed. In an ideal world I would have a paper library with digital copies of each book.
|
|
|
Post by Vypernight on May 14, 2009 5:37:17 GMT -5
While being able to carry hundreds of books in my pocket is appealing, I don't like that I could lose them all with a single glitch, magnet, etc.
I wouldn't mind owning both though.
|
|
Zabimaru
Full Member
Always amused and bemused
Posts: 241
|
Post by Zabimaru on May 14, 2009 6:01:32 GMT -5
I love paper books for sentimental reasons; I think books are something beautiful and special. I have several bookcases overflowing with books and I love that. But I'm strongly on the side of digital books anyway. With digital books you can own a whole library even if you don't have much physical space. You can make books and transfer them around the world instantly without the environmental impact of making paper and transporting them on trucks. And they're practical in many ways. Carrying a library in your pocket is an obvious perk. So is the fact that if you're in a hurry to find some particular passage in a digital book, you can actually make a search for it and find it almost instantly. And great advancements are being made in the text to speech area - while far from perfect yet, those without the eyesight needed to read can easily make their computer read a digital book for them. Now I'd like to try to answer some of the criticisms I saw here As for paper books being a safer, less volatile, I only have one word: backups. In the world of modern computing digital books are really tiny in size. You can very easily back them up in several places. We have no idea what treasures were lost in the library of Alexandria, but with backups that doesn't have to happen again, even with the most limited edition of books. Even if floods and other natural disasters have destroyed the fragile paper in the great libraries of today, I'm certain that our cultural treasures will continue to be preserved in things like Project Gutenberg. A computer holding millions of books is much easier to protect from the elements and the ravages of time than hundreds of tons of degradable paper. And future generations will surely be able to read them. We will continue to have networked computers as long as our civilization persists, and more and more data transfers are made over networks, so that isn't a problem. And even formatted digital books are mostly plain text, which I'm certain that even computers in the most distant future will be able to read text. So, in short: I love paper books very much. But since the most important thing for me is the content, not the paper, I still hope that digital books really are the wave of the future.
|
|
shrike
Junior Member
Polyamorous Atheist
Posts: 56
|
Post by shrike on May 14, 2009 9:58:36 GMT -5
Paper. Thus far, I haven't found an e-book system on PC or handheld that is as easy to handle and read as a paper book.
|
|
|
Post by deliciousdemon on May 14, 2009 11:05:58 GMT -5
Paper always. But I agree with the attractiveness of being able to carry my library with me anywhere. It would sure make writing papers easier. Still, paper.
|
|
|
Post by The_L on May 14, 2009 11:06:00 GMT -5
Paper books.
As Maddox once infamously pointed out, staring at a white screen with black text on it is like staring into a lightbulb in terms of eye damage.
Plus, you can't read your screen well in bright sunlight.
Plus, real books can still be obtained free from the library and taken anywhere.
Plus, what would I do with all my bookmarks if I didn't have any books to read?
|
|
|
Post by Madame Scarlet on May 14, 2009 11:07:27 GMT -5
Personally, I prefer paper books. I see the uses and advantages of digital books, but I simply cannot read a book on a screen. I've tried and it's just a bad medium for me (though a handheld screen may be a bit different than sitting at a computer trying to read a book).
I'd be happiest if paper books didn't phase out of use (though if that does happen I'll likely be long dead), even if digital books become more popular.
|
|
|
Post by Bezron on May 14, 2009 11:41:10 GMT -5
For me, it depends on the book itself. For whatever latest throwaway paperback I happen to be reading because I'm on the train for 40 minutes each way, digital all the way. For classics and books that I really want to read and will probably keep, paper. It's the same argument that I make in my head about paperback vs hardcover/trade paperback. For books that I know that I will want to keep on a shelf (Dark Tower series, William Gibson, Hitchhiker's guide, etc), I will spring for either the hardcover or trade paperback (the big, nicer ones). If it is something that I am probably never going to read again, nor want to put on a shelf to impress people who are impressed by such things, then it gets the cheap, pulp paperback. Those usually end up on the swap rack at the train station or donated to a library. Sometimes they end up in the recycling bin.
|
|
|
Post by Trevelyan on May 14, 2009 12:09:49 GMT -5
I like paper books, always have and always will. However, I do like the idea of the digital books. I think as time progresses we are going to see most people, especially the newer generations, getting away from paper books altogether. Mainly because of the environmental impacts of paper I think.
|
|
|
Post by Yaezakura on May 14, 2009 12:29:41 GMT -5
I do tend to prefer paper books. One of my greatest joys is just laying around reading. And while I suppose I could do that with handheld devices, it simply would never feel the same.
Of course, I do see the usefulness of digital books. I often use them for gaming and such since they're a handier reference than bulky real books. But when it's just me, alone, wanting to read, I prefer a good old pile of dead tree in my hands.
|
|