I say books are not dead. Are any in agreement!?

Why look at cave drawings when you can look at the Mona Lisa?

Why play NES when you can play Xbox?

Why read books when you can watch movies?

Not to be bigoted, but the constant bashing of technology is driving me loopy. I have to ask why someone would rather stare at markings on paper than actually see the expression on the person's face, hear the sound of their voice, see a gorgeous CGI monster roaring at you that someone poured their blood sweat and tears into creating so you can stare at the quality of it.

Historically speaking,have been both works of art (and thus displays of wealth) in addition to holding information. It was only with the creation of the moveable type printing press and mass production that they become just tomes of information (and even then, just in the last 100ish years). It's likely we will see a reverse in this trend as the main people who will still buy hard copies will be those who love books for their physical presence.

Somethings will likely never be fully converted to ebooks (any book that needs to be frequently referenced but cannot be easily parsed into searchable terms or a table of contents: as a researcher, I can easily turn to the section of a hard copy of a book that I need, but it can take me several minutes to find the same spot in an electronic copy).

Likewise, as Print on Demand becomes faster and cheaper, I wouldn't be surprised if we see the advent of "disposable" books, either.

That said, there is a reason why books like Mein Kamph are seeing an increase in popularity once they make the shift to ebook form: people can read something they wouldn't be caught dead with a physical copy of. Thus ebooks will probably corner the market on embarrassing trash. We can expand that reasonably to all books that a person might want to read but have no great desire to "own." You know, those books that you're happy to have read once but don't need to have displayed in your home.

While physical books have their advantages, they also have their disadvantages. chief among these is the space they take up. I hear people talk about how they love physical books and want a huge library. My husband and I need a new house for our books. We have over 5000 of the things. Every available bookshelf is completely full, with books piled on top and in the gaps. Paperbacks are two rows deep. Every available wall surface is covered with bookshelves. And we still have boxes of books piled up. I read a horror story a few years ago in the paper about a couple, much like us, who had purchased an older home and lined the walls with book cases. The weight of all of the books pushed the outer walls of the house out. It cost them tens of thousands of dollars to repair the home and keep it from being condemned.

To me, the words are what matter. If those words are in the form of electrons that don't take up physical space, I'm all for it.

Technology is trying to get rid of real books...but I don't think they're dead..not yet..

What will happen to future generations if something happens and wipes out all the electric power in the world...?

No electricity...no Kindles, or laptops etc...

Real books are important..they should stay..along with the Kindles etc...they shouldn't be taken over by them..

I only read the first paragraph when I called to mind Dorothy Parker's review of The House at Pooh Corner, "Tonstant Weader fwowed up" and I hadn't the fortitude to continue.

I'm a "real book " reader I prefer them more then their E version counter parts + most sales for my novels are books , actual books , unless its a children's book then most my sales are E books.

Anyways viva la books

I love reading real books!

i am almost thirteen and im writting a book and i have over thirteen thousand words and not even half way finished. is that a good or bad thing?

Some books are dead, but they're dead because nobody reads them.

books are not needed the internet rules!