http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2009/09/04/a_library_without_the_books/?s_campaign=yahoo
"There is another major difference between books and digital books that the article fails to mention. When a library buys a book or newspaper or magazine, they own the item with a one time payment and keep the item for people to read and use as long as it exists. But digital media only gives you the right to access the book or newspaper or magazine as long as you pay the vendor. You are buying access only and you need to keep paying forever to keep it. So you can pay for Time on line for 10 years, and the day you cannot pay for it, you lose all access to Time. With a hard copy, you would still have the 10 years worth of magazines. Not so with digital media-- and it is very expensive. This school is very shortsighted."
This is just very, very sad to me. Yes, times change and all, but why? Why on earth would you want to replace all that with digital stuff? As someone else mentioned in a comment, why not then replace all the art in art galleries with digital pictures on iPhones/computers etc., since they take up so much space? It is not the same as holding a book and smelling the pages, or standing before a brilliant work of art (classic example: Mona Lisa), if you are just staring at a screen. I am not very good at explaining this, but I just cannot stress how sad it is to me.
Books have lasted thousands of years, no matter in what form. This laptop? On its last leg(s). 8 years old, perhaps 9.
It would be nice if books would be around a few thousand years more. Just because something is 'modern' does not mean it is better, call me old-fashioned if you want. Yeah, computers and laptops are a great invention. But reading stories on here cannot ever replace books (to me). They are just stories. Not books. You cannot have a book, without a book.
*sigh*
Not that I have anything against Kindles. I just hate that it's starting: "new technology! So let's throw out books!"
No, just no. You get the Kindles. Maybe trim your collection of books a bit. But you keep the books. I sure as heck hope they do not still call the library a library. It is no library without books.
This is just very, very sad to me. Yes, times change and all, but why? Why on earth would you want to replace all that with digital stuff? As someone else mentioned in a comment, why not then replace all the art in art galleries with digital pictures on iPhones/computers etc., since they take up so much space? It is not the same as holding a book and smelling the pages, or standing before a brilliant work of art (classic example: Mona Lisa), if you are just staring at a screen. I am not very good at explaining this, but I just cannot stress how sad it is to me.
Books have lasted thousands of years, no matter in what form. This laptop? On its last leg(s). 8 years old, perhaps 9.
It would be nice if books would be around a few thousand years more. Just because something is 'modern' does not mean it is better, call me old-fashioned if you want. Yeah, computers and laptops are a great invention. But reading stories on here cannot ever replace books (to me). They are just stories. Not books. You cannot have a book, without a book.
*sigh*
Not that I have anything against Kindles. I just hate that it's starting: "new technology! So let's throw out books!"
No, just no. You get the Kindles. Maybe trim your collection of books a bit. But you keep the books. I sure as heck hope they do not still call the library a library. It is no library without books.
I agree completely.
ReplyDelete