It's the digital age and just about every piece of media we encounter is now brought to us via 1's and 0's. Digital technology has taken over to the point this generation of kids don't even recognize the original analog counterparts. Things are slimmer, more convenient and accessible...but are they necessarily better? Here are a few analog vs. digital comparisons of yesterday with today's counterparts...
Print
Print is dead! Long live Print! This particular battle royale has spawned its own billboard ads. We may receive most of our news on the internet through LED displays these days, but the majority of us still appreciate the feel of a good book or the sheen of printed pages on a magazine. To me, the cold blue cast of a display can't compare to the warmth and tactility of print. A black and white portrait on a screen becomes artwork once printed on quality paper. Print has a way of exuding more drama, more character, and more emotion.
Winner: Analog
Music
Another classic battle that you may hear being debated at your local coffee shop. "Digital is exacting, every note is just as the artist intended." "Vinyl has a certain vibe that digital just doesn't bring." Vinyl was before my time, so I don't have the emotional attachment others hold onto — I only remember the plastic primary colored disks I'd play in my Playskool record player. Despite this, I will admit that there is something about the look of a needle on a spinning disk and the warmth of stereo fuzz that I can appreciate. Compared to digital, these elements have a way of setting a mood, and transporting you back to the Mad Men era — a time when you just wanted to sit back, have a scotch, and appreciate your company.
Winner: Analog
Photography
Digital cameras have come a long way the past few years, to the point where I feel a digital image can replicate the artistic character of one taken with film. It may require filters, it may require post-processing, but I feel the overall look can be achieved. Where analog may triumph is in the presentation, as those captures are often printed on paper vs. shared on a computer screen. I feel, however, like that is a battle of print, and the battle of imagery is a solid tie.
Winner: Too close to call
Television
When it comes to television, unlike music, you'll be hard-pressed to find someone who says they like analog broadcasts more than digital. Digital television adds clarity and reliability, and lets us enjoy the medium in new ways — in 5.1 surround sound. I think all these features help bring the content on-screen to life, and provide an overall more immersive experience. Especially when it comes to the movies.
Winner: Digital
For all these comparisons I ignored the convenience, accessibility, and portability advantages digital obviously brings. I wanted to judge things purely on the end result, and as such I feel analog prevails in mediums that are often associated with art.
(Images: Chris Perez)
The Ultimate Used Furniture Cleaning Kit
Ana Creates a Community at Home
Good Food to Share 
The Big Book of Small, Cool Spaces 
Apartment Therapy Presents 
The Eight-Step Home Cure 
Z2 iPod Dock and Wi...
Soda Recipe: Homemade Ginger Ale
Recipe: Spring Fruit and Nut Tabouli
Some magazines are better digitally, I think. National Geographic is a magazine that, by going digital, benefits from not requiring a five-page pullout to show an entire infographic. You can pinch and zoom your way through each section without needing to balance an entire magazine, and it can preserve the information without all of the distraction of holding the physical media.
you haven't defined better are you listening to it or looking at it? you can get some ugly turntables if that is your benchmark. If you want to look beyond the myth read this:
http://www.eetimes.com/electronics-blogs/audio-designline-blog/4033468/Audio-myth-Vinyl-better-than-CD-
Most newspapers are better digitally. Especially since they're updated in real-time. The portability of tablet newspapers is also much better on the subway.
I have my HD flatscreen TV hooked up to a 30 year old stereo, with a receiver and a amp and a dual cassette deck and a new turntable that can convert vinyl to digital (but that's only because the old one broke beyond repair). While it's not surround sound, the sound quality is very good. (I also live in an apartment, where surround sound could be a liability.) I keep looking at home theater systems, but as long as the old stereo keeps working, I can't justify replacing it.
And I still listen to vinyl, as well. There are some records that simply never got transferred to cassette tape or CD, let along digitized.
I grew up listening to vinyl. I remember the needle hiss and crackly sound from worn out albums. Even from new albums. I get none of that from CDs or even high quality digital files. I have no desire ever going back to vinyl. I do, however, like analog amplifiers. Those do seem to add a little bit of warmth that digital amps are lacking- true with instrument amplification.
For photography, some B&W film and color slide film produce incredible images, but digital is just so much easier and is always improving. Digital not only changes the way you develop, but the way you shoot- you can shoot to your hearts content and then edit in camera or computer. You no longer have to develop a bunch of film to pick and choose your best shots. I had to learn a new way to shoot, but one that awards you with higher quality pictures.
I think the most interesting thing about this discussion is that radio isn't even mentioned. I assume that has to do with being too young to remember vinyl. Maybe the writer is also too young to remember when radio in the home for anything else than news and emergency broadcasts.
For me analog wins hands down for radio. If you've ever tried to get your favorite independent station on a digital tuner when there is another station with a commercial satellite beaming a stronger signal just a hair over on the dial, you'll know what I mean.
First in response to D2 Pad, I am not pulling out my tablet on the subway to read the paper. Don't know where you live, but not in my town.
I am still mixed about music. I grew up with vinyl. Loved CDs because there was no pop and hiss that could be heard on vinyl, so many vinyl lovers became CD lovers. But digital music is cropped and manipulated. And, there is much music (outside of mainstream) that is lost because it was only printed on vinyl. It's hard to say. One thing I do miss are the BIG graphics that came with a vinyl, and also the old stereo systems had a great sound.
I stopped reading magazines over a decade ago. In the last year, I've picked up the habit again because I can get them on my iPad. For me, that means digital won, and so did the magazines that made the jump. They sure weren't getting my cash before they went digital.
We've had lots of problems with digital TV living in a sparsely populated area. We had a problem the cable company calls "plating", where the picture freezes and shows pixels with the OnDemand feature. When you only have two people on a street with a certain cable company it's near impossible to get the company's attention. It took another neighbor finally getting digital and complaining to fix our problem almost a year later. Now whenever there is plating, I hold my breath and hope it passes!
Also, digital cameras bug me sometimes. I don't remember ever taking a blurry photo with a regular camera. Very rarely anyway. Now it's hard to not get a few in the batch. And I don't have a crappy camera. It makes for a long day of trying to photograph items for online selling. Of course you don't have to wait for the film to be developed.
@EdmundD - Where do you live that it's dangerous to use a tablet on the subway? I'm in DC, and I use my nook all the time. I see iPads everywhere.
There's something about holding a book or magazine in your hands that's comforting and final. When you've read it cover to cover, it's done, completed, ended. The digital version is okay, but there's never the satisfaction of actually finishing it. As to 5 page fold-outs vs. pinch and spread, fold-outs win because they show the overall view. Imagine scrolling thru a National Geographic panoramic shot of the Himalayas. Compare that to seeing the entire sweep of the Himalayas on a fold out.
Music...hmm. While I don't like the tick tick pop on my vinyl, I absolutely shudder listening to music on MP3. Too much of the music is lost in compression. Vinyl, when properly cared for, played on reasonably good equipment, has a warmth that CDs don't quiet have. Modern pop, hip-hop, etc suffer from massive compression in the studio to get the highest overall volume on the recording, driving out nearly all sound quality and dynamic range.
Oh, I wish they had an affordable digital B&W camera. There's something about a good black and white shot that says "photograph". Yes, I know you can have the computer do it for you, but it doesn't hold a candle to a real BW print.
Hmm. I was hoping for some actual facts in these arguments. Like how sound itself is analog, therefore analog sound reproduction produces a more accurate waveform than digital.
This also seems like a pointless discussion when you purposefully omit issues like portability and convenience. While I appreciate having an actual book in my hands, I also like being able to read on the bus or at lunch, and the monstrous tome I'm reading right now is way too big and heavy to lug around.
Basically, I'd like to see this topic revisited with a little more thought and research than just subjective opinions about the mood and emotion of the varying formats.
I don't care for digital movies because they look like a rapid succession of still photographs instead of a filmed movie. It is quite disconcerting and while I still go to the movies, I'm not fond of their odd look.
absolutely and unlike vinyl vs cd, here in the UK FM radio is far better than digital due to the level of compression applied.