My point is that no technology, no matter how ubiquitious, how entrenched, and how seeming state of the art, is permanent. I'm not surprised in the least that you didn't get it.
We can sit here and say this isn't going away, that isn't going away, all day until we're blue in the face. It's easy to look at the past and see a glorious, uninterrupted future. I'm sure that's how all of the nation's skilled linotype operators felt in the 1950s. America was booming, every city of any note had 2 or more newspapers, and circulation was skyrocketing. Now the work of 100 typesetters can be done in 1/10th the time by 2 men on a Mac or IBM driven system.
In 1900 there were nearly 2,000 buggy, wagon and carriage makers in the United States, all of whom were doing a thriving business. Less than a generation later there were fewer than 100, and a generation after that there were virtually none.
In the first decade of the 20th century newspapers and magazines were full of stories about how the motorcar would never replace the horse and wagon.
Who knows, printing on paper may well stay with us for another 1,000 years. Or it may be pushed into a speciality nich by something that could come out next week.
I'm sure 20 years ago Eastman Kodak never though the first digital technologies would amount to a hill of crap, either. That's why they were so late into the industry, and why they've paid such an enormously heavy price for their shortsightedness.
