Physical Books are superior to E-books

Sensory ExperienceMy opponent makes an interesting point about paper being potentially hazardous. Conversely, e-book devices are made of plastic which can be just as hazardous. [1]FeaturesMost of the features on reading devices are similar to those that we use when we are on the internet, skimming through articles and clicking around. This does not put us in the same focused mindset as opening up a book does. Half The BookDifferent readers will offer different features to try and make up for the lack of a whole book. There will still be missing parts of the book, making it less of a book than a physical book.VarietyMy opponent claims that more books will become available as the demand grows. It is impossible to find them all. The point still stands that there will be many valuable books never to make it to e-book.AnonymityI accept my opponent’s rebuttal as a legitimate way to get around that issue. For her clarification, this could be a deciding factor for people who are concerned about putting their personal information online, where they could be subject to hacking. Condition of BooksMy opponent said that e-books can be read while not online. This is the case for reading already saved books, but not a new book. E-books are still less of a secure buy than physical books for these reasons: They are files. Files can be damaged or lost regardless of the owners’ care. Technological devices can malfunction, freeze, and lose power. They are known for long-term inconsistency at best. This is not the case with a book.The length of time in which technological devices stop working properly is consistently less than 20 years (as seen in source 4 of the second round.) Books can be known to last hundreds of years. SignaturesMy opponent agrees that a signed book has value. Her rebuttal is that books can become damaged. So can anything else that gets signed. This does not change the fact that books can be signed while e-books cannot. EconomyE-books are not always cheaper than regular books. We can look on Amazon for a comparison. They are selling a new copy of Grapes of Wrath for 8.66. They are selling a used copy for as low as 3.99. The Kindle edition of Grapes of Wrath is 12.99. [2] E-books can be more expensive than a physical book, and you will never have a chance to buy an e-book for the discounted, used price. Therefore, my original point still stands that books are more beneficial to the . C1- While it is true that books use paper, paper can be made from other materials aside from trees. Cotton and flax are two examples. Also, e-book devices are made of plastic, which is more harmful to the environment than paper.C2- My opponent brings up a very good point about the space that books take up. Books are physical; they can be displayed. They can be sold, donated, or given as gifts. They can be recycled for profit. That space turns into money in the pocket.C3- Availability of free books is true of physical books as well. You can go to the library and get a free book. There are also book exchange programs to get involved with. People who are too poor to buy a book are too poor to buy an e-book reader, rendering her case on promoting literacy void.You can clearly see where my cases show superiority. I thank my opponent for an interesting debate! 1. http://www.health.state.ny.us...2. http://www.amazon.com...