i'm confused. in what way is this a response to the article?
the article laments the sidelining of physical exhibits, in favor of software. you respond that the screens probably have an arduous and expensive procurement process.
I don’t see the value in condescending here. I think the person you’re responding to highlighted an interesting question/point of confusion of whether digital exhibits are on average more or less expensive than physical exhibits in both the short and long term.
the article laments the sidelining of physical exhibits, in favor of software. you respond that the screens probably have an arduous and expensive procurement process.
what's going on here?