Re: why books?

Subject: Re: why books?
From: Romay Jean Sitze <rositze -at- NMSU -dot- EDU>
Date: Thu, 22 Sep 1994 21:15:41 -0600

IMHO Susan makes a lot of sense. I, too, feel that it would be a mistake
to dump paper manuals totally. This definitely seems to be another case
of choosing the right tool to fit the person and the situation. Susan,
your point was well stated.

On Wed, 21 Sep 1994, Susan Stewart wrote:

> This message is heart-felt, if not prompt. It's also long-ish and
> full of opinions. Be forewarned.

> Many, many messages ago Rick Lippincott said (about some folks'
> aversion to books/documentation on-line):

> > I think that this is a normal response people have with any change to
> > technology. Some people reject TV because the prefer the ability of a radio
> > drama to stir the imagination. Some people reject CDs because they say a
> > vinyl LP has "warmth." Some writers reject computers because they claim
> > like the sound of a typewriter. When the printing press was invented, many
> > people probably cited the advantages of a hand-written manuscript.

> Well, I think that some people probably do have this kind of response.
> I also think that there are probably as many people having the
> Whoa,-slick-new-toys!-I-want-one! response as there are technological
> reactionaries. Which camp seems credulous and which well-informed depends
> on which camp you're in. ;)

> There was an interesting article in the New York Times Book Review,
> recently -- "Are These Books, or What? CD-ROM and the Literary
> Industry" (I'd tell you when it came out but the copy I have has no
> date on it). It's a thoughtful and thought provoking piece. It gave
> some shape to the amorphous ideas I had about this topic.

> I love words, whether they be spoken, printed, or flashed on the
> screen. My personal predilection (at least for reading anything more
> than a page or two at a time) is for old-fashioned books. Not because
> I'm frightened of change or of technology but because I enjoy the
> tactile part of the experience.

> One of the reasons I came to work for my current employer is that the
> technology is tied up with words and ideas and information. We help
> people go on-line. Our software is geared toward managing and
> leveraging the value of electronic information -- whether that
> information is prose or fiction, database, or graphic, or what.
> I'm comfortable promoting this new technology because I
> can see how many truly useful applications it has. Technology
> making our lives easier, you know?

> So -- I have ties to both sides of this debate. What it comes down to
> (for me, anyway) is that this isn't an either/or situation. Will books
> go away? I don't think so. Does this mean that the electronic
> information industry won't grow and flourish? Of course not. As the
> Book Review article pointed out, what matters is content. The kind of
> format or presentation we, as purveyors and consumers of that content,
> will choose will depend on comfort level, accessibility, efficiency,
> and many other factors and will change from instance to instance.

> Electronic and traditional books don't cancel one another out, they
> (can) coexist peacefully and also augment and amplify one another.
> The question isn't which is the better tool but which is the better
> tool in each particular instance.

* RoMay Sitze rositze -at- nmsu -dot- edu *
* Mirrors should reflect a *
* little before throwing *
* back images. *
* -Jean Cocteau- *

Previous by Author: Re: Third-party books for FrameMaker -- do they exist?
Next by Author: Re: Word
Previous by Thread: Re: why books?
Next by Thread: Re: pubs dept., or development of online and print docs

What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:

Sponsored Ads