Public Service Announcement: A degree in Communications is not totally worthless
I feel like lately there's been a lot of warring (specifically in my group of friends) between lovers of paper books and fans of e-readers. Maybe I'm only noticing/caring about it now because I have an e-reader finally. Regardless, it always seems to come down to the same points repeated over and over again.
Books are a pain to carry around
The files on your e-reader can be lost/deleted at any time
People say these two things over and over again, as if there's something horribly wrong with them, when in reality, this is exactly how it's supposed to be.
In the history of communications, there is an inverse relationship between durability and portability. A stone tablet will last the ages but you can't take it anywhere. A clay tablet is a little lighter, but it's easier to break. Papyrus can be carried easier than a clay tablet, but it decomposes eventually. And so on and so on, from parchment to paper to ones and zeros.
Basically, yes, electronic files are fragile. Files may get corrupted, deleted, or just become obsolete. But you can carry many books for the same weight and size as a physical book, and you can send the files all over the Internet with a few clicks of a mouse. You have traded durability for portability.
Now, I have nothing against books and happen to enjoy the physical object very much. But next time you want to say that you only enjoy "real" books, think about those that came before. The guys with the stone tablets were probably all like, "I like the feel of cold, smooth stone beneath my fingers when I read my proclamations" while the guys with the clay tablets danced around them singing "nonny nonny these clay tablets are awesome for doing my sums nonny nonny." (You know, because they could in fact, dance around with them, since they weren't giant-ass stone tablets.)
People say these two things over and over again, as if there's something horribly wrong with them, when in reality, this is exactly how it's supposed to be.
In the history of communications, there is an inverse relationship between durability and portability. A stone tablet will last the ages but you can't take it anywhere. A clay tablet is a little lighter, but it's easier to break. Papyrus can be carried easier than a clay tablet, but it decomposes eventually. And so on and so on, from parchment to paper to ones and zeros.
Basically, yes, electronic files are fragile. Files may get corrupted, deleted, or just become obsolete. But you can carry many books for the same weight and size as a physical book, and you can send the files all over the Internet with a few clicks of a mouse. You have traded durability for portability.
Now, I have nothing against books and happen to enjoy the physical object very much. But next time you want to say that you only enjoy "real" books, think about those that came before. The guys with the stone tablets were probably all like, "I like the feel of cold, smooth stone beneath my fingers when I read my proclamations" while the guys with the clay tablets danced around them singing "nonny nonny these clay tablets are awesome for doing my sums nonny nonny." (You know, because they could in fact, dance around with them, since they weren't giant-ass stone tablets.)