View Single Post
Old 05-27-2010, 10:48 AM   #65
Jaime_Astorga
Member Retired
Jaime_Astorga has a spectacular aura aboutJaime_Astorga has a spectacular aura aboutJaime_Astorga has a spectacular aura aboutJaime_Astorga has a spectacular aura aboutJaime_Astorga has a spectacular aura aboutJaime_Astorga has a spectacular aura aboutJaime_Astorga has a spectacular aura aboutJaime_Astorga has a spectacular aura aboutJaime_Astorga has a spectacular aura aboutJaime_Astorga has a spectacular aura aboutJaime_Astorga has a spectacular aura about
 
Posts: 274
Karma: 4446
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Florida
Device: PRS-350-SC: Sony Reader Pocket Edition
Quote:
Originally Posted by Format C: View Post
No recording will ever replace a real orchestra in an auditorium.
Sure they will. In fact, they already have. How many people who would have in ages past resorted to going somewhere to listen to live musicians instead enjoy their music now at home with radios and iPods and internet streaming? Orchestras and other live musicians have become a small niche. Useful for rare special occasions or for people with enough spare money, time, and taste for them to afford the luxury, but the large scheme of things largely irrelevant.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Format C: View Post
What I'm saying is: there is at least a 33% of readers who won't ever be completely satisfied by ebooks as they're now.
Even if it is true that 33% of readers will stick with paper books as opposed to eBooks (and BTW, just because there are 3 kinds of people it does not follow that the population is evenly distributed among those categories), in a few more decades most of those people will be dead. Who will prop up the mass paper book industry then?

Quote:
Originally Posted by omk3 View Post
Do you want them to play a sound when you turn a page?
That would probably be pretty easy to implement with a speaker, if truly desired.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tompe View Post
The difference is that horses are very expensive and inefficient. A paper book is very efficient and cheap.
Horses were once considered very efficient in the setting they operated. And then trains and cars were invented, and, relatively speaking, horses became very inefficient. Same thing with paper books; for hundreds of years, the printing press, ink, and paper have been a winning combination for producing a cheap and efficient way to communicate via books and newspapers. But now that energy-efficient computers and the internet have arrived, along with eInk screens which consume power only to change a page, paper books begin to look dreadfully inefficient by comparison. All the water and resources that must be spent growing trees, cutting them down and making them into paper, distributing the physical books in slow cars as opposed to transferring electrons via cables at near-instantaneous speed, storing them in warehouses and bookshelves as opposed to tiny flash drives, etc...
Jaime_Astorga is offline   Reply With Quote