I don’t think that this is strictly a digital vs. traditional technical argument. I've been robbed and also lost equipment so I understand the feelings. To tell the truth, I’m worried about traditional photography because of all of the recent news (Kodak, Ilford, Agfa, etc.). It seems to me that within 10 years the only source for light-sensitive materials will be from small manufacturing plants in Eastern Europe or China.

The only piece of digital equipment that I own is an old Epson flat bed scanner. I don’t have any plans to convert to digital but if my equipment were lost and my insurance paid for it, I think that it would have to be a consideration. The current trend to digital is similar to the effects caused when simpler processes (push-button mentality) were introduced in the past. The only difference is that the earlier changes didn’t threaten the supply of materials for serious practitioners.

As to alternate processes, I think that one of the future uses for digital will be creating large negative transparences to be printed on hand-coated papers. Serious photography will always be done by those who are dedicated to the final product. The people who are satisfied with “push button to expose” then “push button to print“ are the same people that were satisfied with the nearest 1-Hour photo. To do good work in traditional or digital will constantly require dedication (hours in the darkroom or hours at the computer in Photoshop).