...and were gradually moving away from bulk printed matter because of maintenance hassles it causes.
The maintenance of printed material can really be a PITA. As an instructional designer, I deal with this subject on a frequent basis. Also, the company for which I work is moving toward a "soft-copy" form of student guide for our classes.
Some words about paper-based documentation:
Nothing is required of the user to read printed material other than sufficient lighting. Yes, assuming the user can actually read. The material sits nicely on the shelf, ready for the user to retrieve and read. Done and done. Drawbacks are all the political/social/environmental arguments for using paper (aka killing trees), along with the mentioned hassle of maintaining correct versions.
Some words about soft-copy forms of documentation:
Soft-copy documentation immediately removes itself from instant access; the user must now use a tool to read the information. Having the ability to print the soft-copy can alleviate this issue. So now, the access to the information is restricted, but saves trees if the user doesn't print the material. Also, it's easier for the manufacturer of the material to maintain the documentation and issue electronic updates.
Some words about on-line forms of documentation:
Now the access to the information has been restricted even more. Not only does the potential reader require a tool (computer), they must now have application software (for something possibly not wanted) in which the documentation is buried. The user must also now deal with any search functionality that may, or may not work well. Attempting to debug a search routine's search-key is far more difficult than simply flipping through manual pages. The advantage is only to the manufacturer.
In Scandinavia, Russia and elsewhere they have a lot of forest. They have had a pulp and paper industry since forever. They still have a lot of forest.
The guys I have met who own that forest are very good at replanting what they cut. After all it's in their best long term interest to so.
In Scandinavia, Russia and elsewhere they have a lot of forest. They have had a pulp and paper industry since forever. They still have a lot of forest.
The guys I have met who own that forest are very good at replanting what they cut. After all it's in their best long term interest to so.
I guess Heater believes is sustainable resource concepts. But have we ever actually proven sustainability? History has demonstrated the opposite, resources are exploited for the least in unit costs and alternatives are found when supply becomes dear.
New sustainable timber is just not as good as old growth because the rate of growth is faster and the life cycle is shorter. Over 50% of all trees consumed these days are used to make paper and much of that paper has a very transient useful life.
Paradoxically, I still feel that books might just be one of the better uses of trees for paper... when the book has durable value. But these days, I tend to print to PDF as the cost of printer ink and printers is absurd and so is the clutter.
Comments
The maintenance of printed material can really be a PITA. As an instructional designer, I deal with this subject on a frequent basis. Also, the company for which I work is moving toward a "soft-copy" form of student guide for our classes.
Some words about paper-based documentation:
Nothing is required of the user to read printed material other than sufficient lighting. Yes, assuming the user can actually read. The material sits nicely on the shelf, ready for the user to retrieve and read. Done and done. Drawbacks are all the political/social/environmental arguments for using paper (aka killing trees), along with the mentioned hassle of maintaining correct versions.
Some words about soft-copy forms of documentation:
Soft-copy documentation immediately removes itself from instant access; the user must now use a tool to read the information. Having the ability to print the soft-copy can alleviate this issue. So now, the access to the information is restricted, but saves trees if the user doesn't print the material. Also, it's easier for the manufacturer of the material to maintain the documentation and issue electronic updates.
Some words about on-line forms of documentation:
Now the access to the information has been restricted even more. Not only does the potential reader require a tool (computer), they must now have application software (for something possibly not wanted) in which the documentation is buried. The user must also now deal with any search functionality that may, or may not work well. Attempting to debug a search routine's search-key is far more difficult than simply flipping through manual pages. The advantage is only to the manufacturer.
Probably preaching to the choir...
In Scandinavia, Russia and elsewhere they have a lot of forest. They have had a pulp and paper industry since forever. They still have a lot of forest.
The guys I have met who own that forest are very good at replanting what they cut. After all it's in their best long term interest to so.
Sarcasm, my friend.
I must remember to get some new batteries for my sarcasm detector.
I guess Heater believes is sustainable resource concepts. But have we ever actually proven sustainability? History has demonstrated the opposite, resources are exploited for the least in unit costs and alternatives are found when supply becomes dear.
New sustainable timber is just not as good as old growth because the rate of growth is faster and the life cycle is shorter. Over 50% of all trees consumed these days are used to make paper and much of that paper has a very transient useful life.
Paradoxically, I still feel that books might just be one of the better uses of trees for paper... when the book has durable value. But these days, I tend to print to PDF as the cost of printer ink and printers is absurd and so is the clutter.
I removed the copy I posted... Everyone can go to #23 to get the document.