Re: value of books

[Sarah Lee <slee -at- ROSEBAY -dot- MATRA -dot- COM -dot- AU>]

>>>>Multimedia does not an idiot make. Many things do a Luddite make, however,
>and it does not behoove those of us who suck at the teat of technology to
>deliver gratuitous kicks and scratches to our nurturing mother. <<

> Nobody told me I had to have a blind belief in all things technological just
>because I write about technology! If the technology has problems, why
>shouldn't we discuss those problems, rather than pretend they don't exist?

I think the word "technological" needs to defined. Put into proper context,
it is only in our day that online books is *new* technology, and the common
book, *old*. Each is a type of technology by itself, in the sense that each
was an innovation which came into being, at some time.

Both have their advantages and disadvantages, but only with respect to what
a user's needs are. For example, as I am both a collector of books
(especially old and rare ones) and a voracious reader, I can say that
nothing replaces the beauty of a well-bound and printed book or the
"look-and-feel" a book provides. However, for the purpose of quick access to
information and material, increasingly, online catalogues are my preferred
option.

I think that which is better is subjective, as it depends on the purpose of
the user. True, online catalogs serves some purposes such as the one
mentioned above, better than books do. In terms of accessibility, books in
some ways cannot compete. However, online books do not serve all the
purposes that a book
serves - better.