|
Post by Sigmaleph on May 14, 2009 12:30:54 GMT -5
I like digital books, have read several of them, and they have all the obvious advantages of storage, search and backup, but I still prefer paper. Easier to read, plus they don't need power. (I get a lot of reading done when I can't access a computer for one reason or another. A Kindle or similar would solve that problem, though)
|
|
|
Post by arcrow on May 14, 2009 12:33:59 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. Thats the problem I have with digital. Its so impersonal. The content is important but the relationship with the book is just as important. I remember where I got all my books, the emotions I felt reading the book, it being hate for a character, saddness over a tragedy, or happiness over a victory. I remember every bent page, scuffed dust jacket, and over inked word. If I lost all my books, I could just buy them all again, but the book I loved will be gone forever. You can't have all that with a digital book.
|
|
|
Post by Aqualung on May 14, 2009 12:59:45 GMT -5
I prefer paper. I like being able to sit with the thing in my hands and turn pages. I get a lot of books from the thrift shops or buy used off of Amazon. One day if I ever have a house I want to have a whole room just for my bookshelves....
|
|
|
Post by Mira on May 14, 2009 13:08:30 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. That's why I thought the Kindle was so cool. It is very easy on the eyes as it tries to imitate paper as much as possible. It is pretty damn expensive though.
|
|
|
Post by Sigmaleph on May 14, 2009 14:49:04 GMT -5
Thats the problem I have with digital. Its so impersonal. The content is important but the relationship with the book is just as important. I do form some form of relationship with my books (more so than with most people...), but only with the content of the book, not the physical object
|
|
|
Post by arcrow on May 14, 2009 15:15:53 GMT -5
Thats the problem I have with digital. Its so impersonal. The content is important but the relationship with the book is just as important. I do form some form of relationship with my books (more so than with most people...), but only with the content of the book, not the physical object I can't separate the two. As I said, I know every book I have, and all my emotions I felt reading them are in those books. I was taught that books were your friends. I can't make personal relationships with digital, something I don't think is real. Not like books. I bought a diary in little used book store a few years ago. It was started in in 1923 and in what I believe is russian. Even thow I can't read it I love it so much. It is one of a kind, and the person writing it took great care in it. I can make personal relationships because they are one of a kind. Digital, you can make thousands of copies that are exactly the same, you can't put any feelings into that.
|
|
|
Post by The_L on May 14, 2009 15:30:02 GMT -5
I do form some form of relationship with my books (more so than with most people...), but only with the content of the book, not the physical object I can't separate the two. As I said, I know every book I have, and all my emotions I felt reading them are in those books. I was taught that books were your friends. I can't make personal relationships with digital, something I don't think is real. Not like books. I bought a diary in little used book store a few years ago. It was started in in 1923 and in what I believe is russian. Even thow I can't read it I love it so much. It is one of a kind, and the person writing it took great care in it. I can make personal relationships because they are one of a kind. Digital, you can make thousands of copies that are exactly the same, you can't put any feelings into that. I know exactly what you mean. *hugs* When I was a kid, I ordered a copy of Redwall from Scholastic, and I loved it. I've re-read the very same book dozens of times. Once, the cover got torn off. It's a cheap paperback, and the stains from spilled drinks, the missing cover--for about $10 I could replace all that. But I don't want to. Because THAT COPY of Redwall is the one I first read, the one that got me into reading novels longer than 200 pages. THAT COPY shocked me with its plot twists, made me laugh, cry, and cheer along with the characters. Another copy just wouldn't be the same.
|
|
|
Post by Jedi Knight on May 14, 2009 16:37:20 GMT -5
Paper! Digital books are convenient, and that's all. I said in the addiction thread that I'm addicted to books, so I naturally own a lot. I buy new books mostly for the content, but sometimes I will pay more and get an exclusive edition, like the beautiful hardcover edition of "The Lord of the Rings" with Alan Lee's paintings inside. The real passion is the secondhand and antiquarian books I buy and take home. Some of the books are beautiful in themselves, and some have a history. Inside I may find the name of a previous owner, I own books that have belonged to fairly well known persons, some books have a wonderful Ex Libris, some owners write little notes in their books, usually comments to the text. I have found many newspaper articles, cut out, folded up and placed within a book. I once found a personal letter. Buying antiquarian books is like random treasure hunting. I don't want to lose that excitement.
|
|
|
Post by arcrow on May 14, 2009 16:49:57 GMT -5
I wish I could find the books you're gettin JK. The only ones I got is the diary and either a poetry book or a book on poetry in greek. I believe from the 1930's. Can't remember the exact date. Its between 1900-1930. It has a piece of greek newspaper as a bookmark which I find very neat.
|
|
|
Post by malendras on May 14, 2009 18:22:57 GMT -5
I like both, actually. I like paper books for most things - sitting outside in my backyard in the summer with a beer, a book, and my music blaring is one of my most beloved pastimes. I do it every day I can stand the weather, and that includes 100+ degree days. The feeling of turning the pages, the corners where I dogeared the book, the little notes I write in from time to time - word definitions and the like - are really great when I re-read a book. I get to relive all those past times I've read it, all those great afternoons in the sunshine. Also, as much stuff as I have on my hard drive, I love owning a physical copy of a book.
That said, digital files have their uses. When I'm writing a paper, or reading something fast, or when it's cold and rainy and my lightbulb is a piece of crap, or sometimes when I just wanna read a book - digital copies are great. I can read off the screen as easily as I can off paper, and being able to do it on the laptop is great.
|
|
|
Post by Oriet on May 15, 2009 23:19:02 GMT -5
I often prefer a physical copy of a book, but the ease and availability of digital makes them really nice. I wish there was an affordable device for displaying different formats of them, but I'm find reading them at my computer. Especially as since I have Ubuntu, I can change the colour of text entry/display areas so don't have to have a glaring white background (though that doesn't really work on .pdf files) and make them even easier on my eyes to read.
|
|
|
Post by antichrist on May 15, 2009 23:23:53 GMT -5
I love paper books. I have childhood books that I will never open again because I'm afraid they'll fall apart. But I'll never get rid of them.
I love the smell of used bookstores. I can just go in and smell the air, new bookstores don't have that smell. Also you can get much better quality books used than you can new.
|
|
|
Post by Aqualung on May 16, 2009 8:26:12 GMT -5
There's a really cool used book store downtown here too that smells wonderful. Their prices are still a bit too high for my taste though. I wish I had money to blow on a ton of books.
|
|