Electronic or paper books it is better? (chast2 “Quotes and comments“)
In last article the subject of eReaders and usual paper books was touched. It aroused rough emotions and sometimes indignation from some readers. Also there was a criticism that article not full. Therefore solved in this part once again will stop on banal questions and to quote the main popular wrong beliefs with which the Internet abounds. In the subsequent articles I will pass already to more serious things and councils.
Some readers of ShZh and users from other resources - decided that I impose e-books.
- - “wants to look through pages “alive“. What to shoot their (readers) for it that - whether?“
to Shoot, of course not whom is not necessary. By the way, a poguglita “potato revolts“ article on zn ua point. Alas, and in the 21st century is, opponents of potato, GMO, the personal computer, etc. They are called conservatives. To impose something to them there is nothing. They live in izbas and do not use the civilization benefits. There are at a level of development 17 - 18 centuries. There are still wild tribes which still absolutely naked run. It is “reserve“, as if - “tinned history“ - them already do not shoot, and study. It is already possible to carry to some kind of conservatives also adherents of paper books. Which cannot overcome in themselves a habit, or not in forces it will be trained in new technologies, thinking out different excuses. They can help to adapt in modern society, but it is natural if they want it. Otherwise, if they are not retrained, having become full-fledged citizens of modern society - will remain (concerning books) at a level of development of the 20th century - when there were only “pieces of paper“. It can influence their general development …
One more the absurd, but constantly repeating argument of fans of paper, (if it is possible so will be expressed) - “bumag - scents“
- - “The paper book it for me as live that can be finer than it, it has the smell, the history....“ or there is no
- - “anything more concerning, than began to smell the book which just appeared the press.“
did not want to comment on so senseless argument, but time so many people bring him - it is necessary. The joke is remembered. It I will not quote all but an ending very much even by the way - - “and you smell, lick.“ also by the way the fable - “A monkey and points“ - if in the book the main thing a smell but not sense, and it is not of historical value... Perhaps in the light of the appearing situation, during a time to think to perfumers of alternative branch - to sell spirits with a smell of popular printing houses? And also, especially for fans to smell, the becoming obsolete printing houses, can offer season novelties: books with a smell of a lavender, strawberry or vanilla. Though perhaps these smells to glue sniffers … I apologize - will be to the taste to readers and not since they like chemistry of printing houses. But tastes differ. However, - heard about tastes on sale, there were very interesting brands … the paper book in this plan is even more perspective. I think, it would become the best-seller. Once again I apologize for sarcasm, but not what another I cannot answer so silly arguments. Even if they are given practical each fan of paper to whom these qualities are valuable in the book. By the way as alternative, for adaptation, I can still suggest to smell smartphones and the personal computer.
- - “About 2% of people have insuperable problems when reading from the screen, these problems of physiological character and feature of TsNS.“
It to know an excentric joke from the category “the British scientists proved“ …
But many a true word is spoken in jest too. Perhaps, the declared 2% it is banal turn on the screen on the full brightness then at them eyes bake and water. So really very few people will sit out. The benefit already electronically - beam monitors consigned to the past, and at observance of certain rules, (I hope, will stop on them in other article) it will not “be one many more dangerous“ than reading than from paper.
- - “The majority of books which can be read on the eReader - literature are not.“
is not clear what is not literature? Same “War and peace“ or set of other scientific and art works which can be found in the Internet in the digitized look. They from - for digitizations lose meaning?
the Following arguments of fans of paper books even more impressive -
- - “I like to look through pages.“ there is no
- - “such technologies that to replace with the e-book paper“
- - “. the paper book is a BOOK!.“
- - “In the paper book is soul.“
- - “The e-book you will not wipe a bottom of century.“
I Think, these “iron“ arguments do not demand comments any more. Though many were not once considered in comments to last article.
Other argument which to me was given not in the Internet any more is that “paper books are more practical“. And if, for example: “light will be gone, naturally you will not turn on the computer. And if it breaks, then e-books will disappear“. It of course more rational statement. But I will already consider them in the following article, and I will also give some facts.