Monday, October 3, 2011

Pixels Vs. Paper

Why Dustin is right:
- E-Readers save an enormous amount of paper by using digital books
- Most books are not used multiple times by the buyer therefore they are left on a shelf to rot
- E-Readers save people money in the long run

Why Hannah is right:
- E-Readers are quite expensive in comparison to a single book
- The physical form of a book or novel is more meaningful somehow

Why Hannah is Wrong:
- E-Readers are initially expensive to purchase but do save money depending on how many books you are buying
- Books in physical form feel meaningful but also remind you of dead trees, because they are dead trees

Winner: Dustin.

1 comment:

  1. I disagree. Are we so certain digital readers are great for the environment? Books are at the very least biodegradable, and composed of a renewable resource. With the constant tech upgrades which rule the present age, and likely will continue into the future what is going to happen to all the outmoded kindles, Ipads and android tablets? Although the Ipad may be marketed as recyclable in practice they will go straight to landfill I should think. And what of the rare earth metals needed to manufacture smart electronics? There is not an inexhaustible supply of these materials. It is possible print is greener than we've been told.