Quote:
Originally Posted by anurag
|
I actually went and read the article. I find the proposed dichotomy between Formless and Definite content to be interesting.
Certainly, Formless content moves easily among various technologies. But for that very reason, I don't believe that "disposable" paper books are going to go out of existence. Instead, the user will make the choice of how to get the content by considering the manner in which the content is best consumed, and taking into account the economics, practicalities, and convenience of the situation.
In terms of economics, there are many many people who cannot afford to make the investment to acquire any kind of eReader. They just don't have a couple hundred bucks or more
at one time to spend on a non-essential device. But they can spend a few bucks on a paperback, or better yet, borrow books from the library. Their personal economics dictate paper, not digital.
In terms of practicalities, I am not, for instance, taking my iPad, eReader, or iPhone to read on the beach. Instead, I'll take a paperback, or a magazine. I am not taking my iPad on the train or bus. It's too bulky, and a target for thieves. I am not taking a hardback book on the train or bus - I wind up standing too often & it just isn't workable. In addition, paper doesn't require attention to maintenance and loading - there's practically no investment of time in acquiring and getting to the content.
In terms of convenience, a paper newspaper or magazine is much more easily shared among several people. A newspaper can be shared out in sections. Newspapers and magazines, and paperbacks can be left in convenient locations to be read when one is at that location, instead of someone having to remember to take the edevice with him around the house.
All of these considerations are important to a lot of people - enough that paper will remain one of the choices for distributing content, even if eDevices become very cheap.
I think that Definite content might be a more important factor in determining whether content is paper or digital. I understand "Definite" to relate to the presentation of the content, its exterior rather than its interior, its presentation rather than its meaning.
But this might be of less significance than it at first seems. For instance, it appears to me that the writer, Craig Mod, thinks that the content of his article is Definite rather than Formless. Yet when I ran the article through Instapaper, which can be seen as transforming Definite content into Formless content, there did not seem to be any meaningful change. And in fact, when I used Readability on the article, I liked the presentation better.
So while some content might be Definite because one medium allows it to be presented better than another, other content presented in a Definite matter might just be a question of aesthetics.