something that i find interesting about languages which use chinese characters is the way in which the advent of computers (and to a certain extent moveable type) has affected word formation. in alphabetic languages, new words can easily be coined by combining letters arbitrarily. new words can get coined using chinese characters by combining multiple characters, either combining their meanings to get a more specific meaning, or by ombining their pronunciations without regard to their meanings (which is used in chinese to represent foreign loanwords).
until recently, however, it was possible for speakers of these languages to coin entire new characters with new meanings. when writing by hand, you can simply combine existing characters and character parts to produce a novel character that has a meaning related to the meaning of the parts you've combined. for instance, some of the newest chinese characters to be adopted are those for chemical elements.
when using a computer, or a printing press, however, this becomes more difficult. a printer might be able to approximate a new character by combining multiple older glyphs, but a computer font can't do that. if there's no unicode codepoint for it, you can't represent it on a computer without overrwriting some other codepoint with an unintended use, which breaks cross-linguistic compatibility. the only way to write these new characters is by using an image, which effectively means they don't get adopted, even if people do create them, for instance in the lovely original kanji competition.
i've also thought about this with regards to the latin alphabet. for centuries, language changes were reflected in writing by the formation of new letters, which was possible because all writing was done by hand. with the advent of printing and later computers, the latin alphabet became more or less frozen in its current form. our keyboards can't type any other letters than the ones our language uses, our computers can't represent new shapes without a lengthy review process from the unicode consortium.
ultimately, i don't think this is a big problem in either alphabetic or logographic writing systems, but it's a strange way in which technology restricts possibilities.