The thing I find amazing is how people (and by people, I mean media/tech pundits) consistently buy into the hype cycle (and by buy into, I mean, write stories that feed it) and then are totally amazed/smug when their most extreme predictions don't eventuate. Stay tuned for the next part of the hype cycle when the self-same pundits who told us that e-books would soon replace ALL printed media begin proclaiming that ebooks are a stillborn technology that nobody really wanted anyway.
Technological innovations are so often presented as either/or propositions: either technology B will completely replace technology A, or technology A will see off the challenge of technology B and live on (and in most cases tech B is going to replace tech A so you'd be better be ready for it, buddy, or else BAD STUFF)
In reality, most times technology A and technology B fall into a relationship with each other that satisfies most people, forming a new hybrid which offers people the best of both worlds. The only time a new technology completely overshadows an existing technology is:
a) when the new technology offers exactly the same thing as the old tech, but also offers up some significant benefit over the old;
b) when the new technology is backed by a power with the ability to distort the market; and,
c) the combination of a and b.
So e-books will co-exist with printed books because there are strengths and weaknesses in each format that the other does not completely account for, and there is not a significant/powerful enough vested interest trying to make one displace the other.
But wait! I coud be wrong. After all, soon MOOCs [or insert other darling tech] will completely replace universities [or insert other established institution/tech/practice].