Paper is dead? Hardly... Sep26 '04
Feedback
# (2 of 4): Ucosty » ucosty.net
9 hours, 49 minutes after the fact. (Sun 26 Sep 2004, 7:56 PM CST)
Just one question, would you rather read a book or the pdf equivalent of it? Reading large documents [on a computer] can be cumbersome at best.
# (3 of 4): Matthom
11 hours, 32 minutes after the fact. (Sun 26 Sep 2004, 9:39 PM CST)
Joshua,
I guess I am more concerned with the "space saving" aspect of digital text. And like you said, you can do so much more with the digital version, like fulltext search.
So, in a sense, I wasn't truly comparing - one cannot replace the other, like you said. I was more or less welcoming the transition - or, better yet, wondering if that transition will ever happen.
Ucosty,
I would rather read a book. A PDF has no "feeling."
# (4 of 4): Stuart » smkz.is-a-geek.net
12 hours, 56 minutes after the fact. (Sun 26 Sep 2004, 11:03 PM CST)
Paper will never die. It's too tasty for words. *begins to devour yummy paper* Ahem... The positives I find with the digital counterpart of paper is that it's so much easier to find your work on a PC than in a not so tidy stack of study notes. Then you have the ability, as you said, to do fulltext searches, which is such a great time saver especially at the moment as I 'study' (procrastinate) for my HSC.
Oh oh oh and i'd be thinking less about reading large documents as cumbersome as such... more like extremely straining on those peeperlike things that situate themselves a tad above and to either side of the nose.
/me goes back to procrastinating
RSS feed for comments on this post
Leave feedback
matthom
is published and produced by Matt Thommes - an independent publishing enthusiast, mobile blogger, content creator, informative writer, web developer from Chicago.
Never one to conform, Matt intends to promote the effect the web has on our lives, in an effort to intensify, instruct, and clarify all that is happening around us.
Wasn’t it Peter Venkman, in Ghostbusters (1986), that declared, "Paper is dead"... ? Unfortunately, this will never be true.
You are at the feedback permalink page for: Paper is dead? Hardly...
# (1 of 4): Joshua Street » joahua.com
9 hours, 38 minutes after the fact. (Sun 26 Sep 2004, 7:45 PM CST)
Or, alternatively, computers become able to better interact with the material, through improved digitisation methods (OCR, etc.)
I think that for me, if my filing on computer was represented in a physical realm, my paper organisation skills would be far, far better. I don't really think it's that bad, aside from the space-saving aspect of it all, of course.
The only thing you missed in there is that paper can't be indexed, it isn't searchable... that's the biggest drawback, for me, that paper has when compared to a digital medium. That said, I disagree with the comparison of mediums like this -- there's no reason for one to necessarily replace the other. It's far more sensible to suggest that both have applications, and can or may be used to augment the communication of the other medium (for example, a book, with an online reference system with a fulltext index -- you get the best of both world; a physical, tangible copy of the book, and the ability to search it).