When will printed media become obsolete?
 

Before you read on, if you haven't read Mr. John Watkins Jr.'s predictions of today's society from the year 1900, take a look. There were definitely more people with grander (more bizzare?) expectations of the future throughout the middle of the 20th century, and many of those expectations sound seriously misguided in retrospect.

Looking at the situation with computers and the Internet, it's becoming clearer to me that some day in the future newspapers, magazines, and potentially even books will be almost exclusively, if not 100%, digitized and never see a printing press in their lives. Within the last couple of decades we've seen the early stages of this change, with many publications now having online counterparts to their printed versions...and, in some cases (The Rocky Mountain News, Electronic Gaming Monthly) the print versions no longer exist.

Between the increasing costs of labor, printing materials, and delivery, and the decreasing ad revenues, subscription numbers, the increasing popularity of electronic book readers and mobile devices that have Internet access, and, of course, the ease and price of getting news and information online, I believe we'll be seeing a paradigm shift in the field of publication over the next century or more.

Bad example. EGM Is coming back, actually.

Hopefully never, I find there's a layer of polish to actual publications that internet-only mediums lack. I think just the added pressure of publishing something that becomes near-impossible to change means there's that much more scrutiny put in. But realistically I think it very well may go out of style, though I haven't seen the sales figures.

It's not going to happen. Reading print on a screen won't ever be as convenient in form or presentation as reading a book.

Things like the Kindle are the first step away from that. It'll happen, but not for a few decades yet.

I don't think the argument regarding comfort and convenience of books is necessarily an accurate one. Have you tried reading a paperback that's 1000+ pages long? It's a pain in the balls.

A Kindle has the same hand-held appeal as a book but is a lot lighter and less bulky.

Ah, I hadn't really thought about the issues of books really. I haven't tried one of the e-readers yet but I like hauling around a book, staring at a screen to read doesn't do well to my eyes after a few hours, but maybe it's not as bad as I think?

Maybe, I haven't had chance to test one yet. All I know is that most screens make my eyes tired more readily than print on paper does.

Additional Spam:
Actually I have, and boody good point. I keep hoping someone is going to see sense and start splitting large paperbacks into multiple volumes for ease of use. I like some authors who turn out enormous volumes, and it's not pleasant at all. Mind you I don't have the same issue with hardcovers.

Based on your post and Krel's I've got to admit that the new Kindle might be the first step towards weaning me away from printed volumes.

Give me a color Kindle DX at a fraction of the current price, and I'm so abandoning printed media. Goodbye, ink rubbing off on your hands. Goodbye, huge ass books that are a pain to flip, and an even bigger pain to carry around. And you save some trees at the same time.

A lot of things can happen in 50 years. A lot of our everyday routine today is unthinkable in 1959. I'd bet real money that we'll be seeing a shift in printed media within that time.

Books will never die entirely. There's something intangible about holding a book in your hands, flipping the pages - even the fucking smell - that a Kindle clearly lacks. And maybe it is that tangibility, being able to see a row of books on a shelf, and on and on. They hold weight, occupy space, they're real.

Much in the way vinyl records have made a resurgence of late, I expect there to be a backlash against digital text sooner or later. I, for one, am not at all ready for books to go the way of the eight-track. And I think a lot of people stand with me in that regard.

Well, that digital attitude was the same (that of thinking digital will replace everything) in the film world, but many cinematographers/photographers still use film because there's just something missing from a digital print. I know it's a vastly different world in terms of publishing but I agree that there is something different about holding a copy of a book in your hands. Maybe that's just my poncy, pretentious side talking.

That and there's something terrifying about the prospect of losing my e-reader, or my hard drive crashing and losing ALL of my books. I know they're replaceable (like real books) but yeah.

And I'm with Capo, until they can replicate new book smell, I'm not sold.

This tends to be one of the main problems with all of our shifts towards digital media. The lifetime on information has dropped off pretty radically as we've moved towards newer forms of storage. The usable lifetime on bricks could be measured in 1000's of years, the lifetime for paper was 100's if not more, while items like CDs are having recovery issues after 10's of years. We may reach a point where we're simply copying back and forth constantly because our media ages so fast - kind of a reverse singularity.
There's nothing particularly intangible about the items you mentioned, and while the Kindle may lack them, all are approachable with changes in technology. They already have designer smells, and creating an interface where you can actually flip, touch, move, ect... the electronic paper, is likely not impossible.
While there will always be people who will prefer a different medium, over time they could become a subset rather than the norm for the industry (film or books). Like in music, there will always be folks who want vinyl for the perceived sound quality, but the general trend has consistently been towards accessibility, customizability, and ease of use, as with most industries. While many film-makers have continued to use cellulose, there is also a significant set who have embraced digital for the ease of manipulation it offers. There's also a strong monetary incentive this direction, as you can either a) shoot in a crazy location, b) build an amazing set, or c) shoot on some green and then edit in the crazy. Due to scarcity, and to get the most bang for their buck, many will choose option c) so they can spend their money elsewhere.

On the book question specifically, I think it will take quite a while to reach the point of "obsolete", but I think we will see a drastic reduction in traditional printed media.

That's a natural consequence of information density. If your books had lettering so small that you required a microscope to read them, a single ink blot, a single tear could wipe out entire chapters of text.

I am prone to migraines. I cannot stand reading too much on a computer screen. I'm sure I'm not the only one who has this problem, so even if they did get rid of print media (which I hope they don't, I design newspaper pages), I think it would come back, or there would be small pockets of dedicated publishers, due to the backlash of people who cannot stand reading so much on a screen.

There are far too many people who enjoy reading a book or magazine in their hands. Especially magazines: The artwork, the page layouts, the pages that aren't clogged with terribly animated ads.

The reason people flock to the internet to read news is because it's free. Once news outlets start charging for online subscriptions just to read their stories (as they should), people won't be as keen on reading online. Of course it's convenient, but how hard is it to transport a newspaper? Not very. You don't even need a hotspot to read it — crazy, I know.

I don't think it will ever die — we'll need something to read when we run out of internet. :D

Printed Media replacement is more than just browsing the web with a flickering computer screen, with annoying animated ads.

The current Amazon Kindle DX utilizes e-ink display technology, which mimics the effect of light on paper, and doesn't need electricity to maintain display. They are currently limited to 16 shades of gray, and it's kinda expensive ($489).

Once the technology matures enough to have colors coupled with a price drop, then all bets are off. I daresay even an 8-bit color depth (256 colors) would be plenty enough for most publications.

See, that's what I wasn't sure on was what the screen of one of the e-readers was like. I'd love to get my hands on one of the nicer kindles just to see what it looks like/how it feels to read on it after a few hours. VERY curious now.

This was a huge topic at the Writer's Conference I attended this past week, for obvious reasons.

While most people, including myself, were reluctant to accept the idea that printed media will be considered 'outdated' at some point in the future, it was also a bit refreshing to hear from editors of major publishing houses say that it was the future, so it should be embraced. Not necessarily rushed, but embraced.

Something that stuck with me was when one of the speakers pointed out that if he were to go to the New York Times website, he'd read one or two articles... but if he had the paper itself in his hands, he'd be more likely to flip through the entire thing, reading 80% of it along the way. Similarly, I'll flip through an entire newspaper, but unless an interesting news piece pops up on my homepage when I first get online, I rarely search for anything.

All in all, I'm in no rush to lose the feeling of a paperback book in my hands, and while I dont think it will ever be completely obsolete in my lifetime, I'm also not gonna stop reading if the only option is a computer screen. Unfortunately, its not as easy to curl up under the covers with a laptop as it is with a book. I'm almost positive a Kindle will sit on my bookshelf at some point in the future, but I doubt I'll stop buying books as a result. Books dont need to be loaded, dont require batteries or a charger, and certainly dont have the potential for hardware/software issues.

I find it quite interesting that so many people are quick to renounce printed media, given how many people here will buy guides for games and artbooks, irrespective of the fact that the same information is available online (And free normally).

No matter how good the Kindle thing claims to be display-wise, I'm guessing that it's not as easy to read in extremes of light and dark as print in a book is, although I could of course be wrong. Until there's an e-reader that you can use in direct, bright sunlight and that's sand proof, people will always buy books to take on holiday and read on the beach, it's as simple as that. Whilst I'm sure the market for digital books will grow over time, I don't believe that'll come at much cost to the market for physical books for a good 50 years or so.

Another aspect of this debate that should be taken into account is the issue of research. Granted, most, if not all research journals are now available online (and a great deal of them exclusively at that), and most people won't ever need to go into a library archive to search for information. However, older issues of many of these journals are yet to have been scanned, and it will be a long time before every single archived piece of info is available in a digital form. This also applies to a great number of books of all kinds, which means that pretty much anybody who likes to read will sooner or later wind up having to look for a paper copy of one.

As far as my own preference for print or digital, I would have to say that I have no quarrel with either. I might lean slightly towards digital, as my eyes aren't weak enough to not be able to withstand looking at a screen for a long time, and there is no question that my apartment could stand to lose a few pounds and square feet of books right now, lacking in space as it is.

Just you wait! "Kindle, now with Smell-O-Vision!"

You know one of those marketing geniuses will think of it sooner or later.

Edit:

As far as the lighting issue, I much prefer reading on a screen in all situations save direct sunlight. Ever spent a sleepless night reading in a dimly lit room? Or sitting near a window on a sunny afternoon? I certainly have, and I must say that the screen was easier to read from than the page in those instances, given the uniformity of the lighting.

As well as older things that aren't scanned in keeping paper alive, books will also always find a use in the military, due to their unique ability to withstand EMP pulses.

The two Dr. Who episodes about the library planet were the best.

Working for FedEx Office, I can tell you that when the economy started to go sour, so did our number of orders. I'd say one of the first things to go is printed media.

People still love to have something printed in-hand, but when it comes to the cash, they could care less.

So, I'd say the next 20 years or so. Technology is making it cheaper and easier to get devices to just download books instead of having physical copies. I think there's still a market for books as collector's items or for the aficionados that enjoy something tangible, though.

I, for one, can't really stand reading anything longer than about 20 pages on a computer screen. I feel it's just a really frustrating format to take in information on on a large scale. If I have a document longer than that that needs to be read, often I'll find some way to have it printed (at my school or something as I don't have one myself).

Also, even if newspapers/magazines are suffering in overall sales, I don't think that printed news media will necessarily drop off entirely, especially in places like cities that involve mass public transit and a great deal of waiting. The convenience, as someone mentioned, of being able to grab and read something on the go far outweighs the portable access of technology, as of right now. Even if I had immaculate service on a portable internet device on a train, I still think I'd rather hold and read something personally than sifting through a news site on the internet.

I'm not sure that e-books will ever really replace printed books; I think this might be due to what I said earlier and other mentioned - a natural preference for a physical thing that can be carried and reaccessed easily. And you know, that "book feel".

As much as digital advances, I don't think it'll necessarily replace analog entirely for the simple fact that people like owning things.