confused?? you should be!

i know it's been a whole 'nother month since i last blogged, but it's summer and you're probably not around to read it anyway. the hamptons, the cape, cancun, fiji. i know how ya'll roll.

but now that you're taking a break from your travels, i have to admit something to you, dear readers . . .

i . . . am . . . confused!

are e-readers and iPads good? or not so good? and are we even listening anymore? is this the new "paper or plastic" argument? can i put my iPad in a paper bag? or my paperback in a walmart plastic baggy? okay, that's just silly.

but . . . this morning, i woke up to a story (well, i actually woke up before the story came on, since i heard it in the car) about stanford university. specifically, stanford's engineering library. the title of the story is: stanford ushers in the age of bookless libraries

"In 2005, when the university realized it was running out of space for its growing collection of 80,000 engineering books, administrators decided to build a new library. But instead of creating more space for books, they chose to create less."

the new physical collection size? 10,000. that's right, TEN thousand, not EIGHTY.

so this e-reading thing must be catching on. most of the engineering periodicals the library subscribes to are now available online. so no need for "paper."

so, case closed. if it's good enough for stanford, it's good enough for . . . no, cornell university. their engineering library is headed in the same direction.

now, you should have noticed that these articles refer to the engineering libraries of these fine institutions. but i suspect other non-engineering libraries will follow suit.

so there. but wait . . . there's more.

because while students are reading their fancy schmancy digital journal editions, they will be reading . . . more slowly. according to a nielsen study, you read slower on an iPad, even slower on a kindle, than you do a traditional paper book. i take issue with the reading selection, ernest hemingway, which was referred to as "pleasant and engaging to read." i beg to differ. but i digress.

julie sartain over at PC world mag takes issue with the study in her article titled "why e-readers are a worthy investment."

i mentioned to a "colleague" that i thought for every two steps e-reading takes forward, there is some force to push it one step back. i don't know why. it's not evil, it's just different. and you don't HAVE to read an electronic copy of a text unless one isn't available. this is america!!! land of the free!! free to be, you and me!! thank you, marlo thomas!! (yes, click the link-it's how we used to learn stuff)

happy reading . . . no matter the format!