Some people believe that the libraries are a waste of resources and money so computers should replace them. However, others do not agree. Discuss both sides and give your opinion. v.1

In this technological era, the mechanism of sharing and enhancing knowledge is evolving, owing to digitization. It is argued by many that computers are better than libraries in providing information, and suggest that libraries should be replaced by computers. In my opinion, libraries are indispensable for providing information at a centralized place and also, they offer a way to be device-free in this exhaustive technical time. Firstly, giant book places can accommodate many people at a time. Moreover, a single book is shared amongst multiple people, until the book becomes unusable. Secondly, books are less tiring for eyes than computers, as blue light from these devices can cause various eyes disorders, which can eventually weaken the eyesight. For Instance, ophthalmologists suggest that people working on computers should always wear spectacles, as screen harmful rays can penetrate the eyes, damaging the eyesight. Computers, on the other hand, offer benefits like automatic book search and take less storage for multiple books. One, hundreds of books can be stored inside a computer due to large memory and also, the memory of systems can be increased, using the hard drive. Furthermore, it is easy to search a book based on name, writer and, the topic on a computer, as compared to a library. To illustrate, in libraries people have to search various shelves for a single book till they get a book of interest, but in computers, they can just type the topic and book will be shown in the results. In conclusion, computers are a great way to read books, but they are not as good as libraries. Not only libraries provide a space to read books, but also they provide a space to share books at low-cost.