Will books ever be replaced?
The latest version of Kindle, an online newspaper and magazine repository developed by Amazon, is predicted to 'revolutionise publishing' It can hold up to 1,500 titles, all of which can be downloaded in less than 60 seconds. They vary in cost but most are free. Many people already buy e-Books and subscribe to online newspapers. The New York Times iPhone application has now been downloaded by over 1 million people. Are we nearing the end of the use of physically published material?
You can also add to the debate by leaving a comment at the end of the page.
digital media is replacing the old media in other areas
Music CDs replaced records and MP3s are replacing music CDs. Terrestrial TV has been mostly replaced by digital TV. Books themselves descended from parchment, which descended from papyrus scrolls and before that, stone tablets. Digital publications are the next technological step and so if the pattern is uniform, they will also replace the last step almost entirely.
The thing you are saying is wrong typing and printing is a compelete different thing we used to write with our hands until the computer came out
Now people type more than they used to
printing is a differnt method
Not all digital media completely replaces its older versions.
A lot of the time they coexist.Although people own digital cameras they still like to print their images (the good ones anyway).
When reports are generated in computer packages they are still printed out for meetings etc.
Books are a very long lasting medium. If you are on holiday and lying by the pool or lying on the beach you wouldn't want some expensive reading screen device. A £3 paperback is so much better.
Also, there has been a recent increase in record sales to people of all ages. Many music stores are finding that the younger generation is actually getting into records, and the generations that originally experienced records want to re-live the old days. This means that the "pattern" of replacing old media with digital media is being turned on its head.
e-books use up far less storage space
Books take up a lot of physical space. Files take up no more space than the storage device does. File sizes are also becoming smaller and smaller as are external storage devices and computers in general.
There are internet archives, even digital books can be preserved. And give my mother a paperback and it will never be in readable condition again. I think e-books are better preserved/durable/long-lasting.
Because , we need to have lots of files and folders when we use computers to learn . Where as in books, we just need to turn the pages . And the information in pages remain there for years .
Books can be felt where as computers cant .
cheaper and easier to share information
E-books cost much less to produce and less to buy than physical books. The information in a digital format can be shared easily by email or by copying the files onto someone else's computer. It is also easier to edit the information. This makes it overall more convenient for students who might not be able to afford one copy of a book each and who doesnt want to make notes and underline points.
Sharing can occur via a physical book. This can be done without the risk of virus infection which can cost you the price of a new laptop if left untreated.
As to students, when the material is on the computer screen it is almost impossible to write notes in and around the wording like you can do with physical books. Highlighting is an extremely mechanical task online and sometimes does not show up enough to suit purpose. It is much more time effective to highlight a book with a highlighting pen and then to write notes in the margin. It is for these reasons that books will not be replaced by digital media versions.
Sharing e-books brings up issues of copyright infringement, and may become illegal if it becomes a popular habit. If people have to pay more money in copyright lawsuits, sharing e-books would not be cheaper for anyone.
much easier to search for information
Even a simple search tool on a word processor is much more efficient than trying to find information in a book, even if the index is really well written.
The opposite point about dedication is a strawman argument at best, dedication is not simply shown through the acceptance and use of outdated technology but the application and use of whatever technology is available. Time organisation is no longer taught because it is implied and made so simple by the advances in technology; that is not to be abhored but rather cherished.
This is an argument truly from a person cultivated into laziness through our age of technology. Yes, it is easier to search information; it is much quicker, but this is not necessarily a good thing. It means that students no longer need to be as dedicated in order to get good university degrees. As students are getting better grades for doing less work, employers are finding it increasingly difficult to find suitable employees from the hundreds with the same degree classification. It used to be an achievement to get a 2:1, nowadays as searching information becomes easier, a 2:1 is a sign of mediocrity. Students are no longer taught the ability of time organisation via their degree. Research takes minimal time compared to before the age of technology.
With a generation of 2:1 bearing doofus's in the making, perhaps the easiness of searching reading material will result in a reverting to the use of physical books to get the nation thinking once more.
textbooks are geting more and more expensive whilst universities are bringing the goods online
Free information means free/'at least cheap' education. Sites like http://www.rapidlibrary.com, Google(search free textbooks in your subject area) and Google books, permit students with a limited budget to get what they want without having to spend exorbitant amounts of cash.
http://www.youtube.com/edu is also a great source of information, people who cannot afford tuition fees at prestigious universities like Stanford(or aren't smart enough to get in) can access lectures online and since you don't get accreditation for taking these courses (since you're not paying tuition fee) it doesn't make sense to buy a bunch of expensive tangible textbooks. Free e-books make education accessible and cheap thus more widespread.
Even if it is "cheaper" it is the internet and anyone can make changes to the information that is put on it so therefore the "free" information could be incorrect.
Go Green with Ebooks
E-books can reduce the usage of paper.It is one of the best ways to go green.And also it is easier to read when all the books are stored in one small device.
Computers require energy and resources to build, ship, and recycle and/or dispose of. In addition, when computers and other electronics are disposed of, they can release harmful chemical substances into the surrounding environment, making them substantially less green than paper books, which can be recycled in easier and more environmentally friendly ways.
Having an entire library at your fingertips may also decrease reading levels as people start a book, but do not finish it, deciding instead to move on to another book, and another, etc.
reading a screen isn't as comfortable
People like to sit down and read a book from cover to cover, and to stare at a screen for that long feels uncomfortable, damages your eyes and gives you neck cramps. A book can be held in the hand more easily than a laptop, even a netbook, because paper is a flexible material.
Also for the people that don't have laptops you have to sit at the computer desk and many people enjoy reading a book while lying in bed before you go to bed because it is more relaxing.
Vision problems have skyrocketed due to increased time spent staring at a computer screen. In addition to being uncomfortable, reading a book on a computer screen actually has a serious negative effect on the health and abilities of your eyes.
Books are more durable than computers.
A book dropping off a table isn't a concern, whereas it might seriously damage a laptop that is open and switched on. A laptop can't be safely operated while walking around holding it. Information inside a book also doesn't get corrupted, accidentally deleted or affected by power shortages.
digital media has too many copyright issues and is less trustworthy
Replacing books with e-Books entirely will create a similar problem to that faced by the music industry with MP3s. Digital information is entirely too easy to copy and redistribute for free. Academic publications can be hacked and plagiarised easily, and with online material being continuously updated and the copyright laws not entirely clear with digital material, it will make it difficult to prove that the work was plagiarised. In general, information found on the Internet is generally from unverifiable sources and may be extremely biased or incorrect. It is not useful for writing essays.
books do not need constant maintenance and repair is cheaper
you could keep your book away in your attic and completely forget about it.......it is more likely to be found in its previous condition (though a little dusty ) by your grandchildren than an ipad or lappy you havent used in 35 years . if u tear your paperback the repair might cost a few bucks while a malfunctioning laptop or ipad will cost way more than that.
Old versions of e-books may not be compatible with new software systems
Technology is currently in a constant state of improvement. New software for electronics are continually being developed, and are often incompatible with data from other software systems. For example, computers that have old versions of Microsoft Word, or Adobe Reader, cannot open or read files from the new versions. This would be the same for e-books, as they are data and file-based, meaning that they may have to be re-loaded or re-purchased as software improves. This makes e-books inefficient and potentially more costly than print books.
computers will die on you...
Computers will die on you because they need power.
What do you think?