SciFi and Fantasy Book Club discussion

I believe page numbers correspond to the print edition. If I remember correctly it was so that people in book groups or classes could correctly reference the text in papers or discussions. Of course if a book has more then one print edition (which would be anything that has gone from hardback to paperback) I really don't see it being a help.

Re: Micah -- The 'real page numbers' in Kindle books (when available) seem to be taken from actual physical copies of books. In other words the portion of text that appeared on page 257 of the selected physical copy will be labeled as 'page 257' in the e-book. Amazon actually lists the ISBN the page numbers come from on the product page for the Kindle version. It's not that different from the idea of 'locations' that Amazon uses but encompasses more text, of an amount that will vary based on the physical source text. That's why increasing font size has no impact on the number of pages, and you're right that it's relative.

Silvana wrote: "Paper, definitely. I like the smell of (old/secondhand) books and flipping paper gives a unique sensation.
E-book is not reliable, it costs almost the same and you cannot trade/swap/give it as a gift. However, it does come in handy when you run out of books to read during holiday and are unable go to the book stores."

Oh, yes! All the way.
What is most upsetting about ebooks for me is that I can't share it. There is a codicil somewhere usually that says I can't give them away or resell them. I can do what I wish with a paper copy of a book I bought: give as a gift, sell to a second hand bookstore, leave on a book swap shelf in out community centre.

I love old school stuff....I love the newest technology....I love it all!!! I embrace any and everything that makes my life more enjoyable and allows me to live it to the fullest. They all have their time and place and I use them all, use them for the way it suits me and just love it.

I didn't hesitate to convert my photography business to digital and when I did so, I didn't look back. Same with going to ebooks....I have not looked back. I do audio books, hard/soft/paperbacks and my Kindles and for me they are all interchangeable. To each his/her own but for me....let me embrace them all.

I see the ebooks taking the place of printed material with the exception of special order or commemorative volumes of sorts but that is just my thoughts.

Great discussion here and it's all a part of what makes reading and sharing a wonderful experience!!

Just a comment regarding the non-enduring nature of today's media: There are many musical works that were lost because they never made the transition from vinyl records to tape to disk. Many old movies have crumbled to dust in Hollywood's vaults, having never been copied from film to tape to DVD or Blu-Ray.

Ebooks are great, convenient, etc. You can carry a whole library around with you, but... technology changes, and every time it does, something gets left behind. All you gamers out there, how many "classic" video games are no longer around because they never got updated to work with the newest game consoles?

According to Wikipedia, there are still 48 copies of the Gutenberg Bible in existence today, a book that was printed nearly 500 years ago. How many of today's ebooks will be around 500 years from now?

John wrote: "Just a comment regarding the non-enduring nature of today's media: There are many musical works that were lost because they never made the transition from vinyl records to tape to disk. Many old mo..."

I agree that formats change all the time these days, however ebooks are not – typically – the only form a book is published. Yes, there are many authors that have chosen to publish exclusively in the ebook format, but the majority of published material is still in print form, and I don’t see that changing any time soon. If an author chooses to put all their eggs in one basket, that’s their problem – if it’s even a problem – and I’m not going to judge a book on its format any more then I would its cover.

Also, updating a classic video game to work on a different console or OS may or may not be worth the time, effort, and cost involved, while an ebook can be converted to work with a different reader quite easily by the publisher or whoever handles that sort of thing.

But in the end, it’s whatever floats your boat.

I think it's a bit unfair to compare analog conversions (vinyl, movies, and even console games) to modern digital conversions. Many of those old formats required specialized equipment to transfer and were on mediums that degraded over time. Today anyone can copy a file from a dying drive to another drive, or keep multiple copies without any increased cost or specialized equipment. In all honesty the only thing I think has a serious chance of ruining a continuous updating would be an EMP. Hell we might reach a point where "the cloud" includes data storage on the moon or in orbit of Mars in case of planetary destruction.

I see a future where the cost of data storage is low enough that books will never be "out of print". Want to read Mike Mars (a children's sci-fi series from the 1950s about the space program), no problem. You won't be in my situation where I found my dad's old volumes and he was missing some and I had gaps in the story (predates internet and finding used volumes online).

P.S. Games might also be a relatively unfair comparison, since they are way more complicated then e-books which are essentially as simple as photos.

All this talk of legacy or archival integrity or whatever you call it is a bit out of place here anyway since the OP was about what format people prefer to use while consuming books, not what format they prefer for collecting works.

I mean, if you only read books from a library they won't be in your personal collection in 50 years either. And a lot of books from the 50s are no longer available in most libraries either even if they still physically exist in the world.

A lot of people aren't into collecting. They just want to read something and move to the next. eBooks make that a lot more convenient for them.

Again, I agrea with Lara Amber. Formats aside, the content is still basically a collection of text which all computer devices handle at a very basic level. It becomes a matter of changing the containers of that text data around. Plus, are you really going to read your 500+ year old book?

It is funny that I find myself getting annoyed with physical books now. They won't stay open by theirself and they can be heavy. I have even caught myself about to put my finger on the word when I am unsure of the meaning. :)

Know what you mean - tried to tap one of my paper books not so long ago...

On the last Writing Excuses podcast(Bill Schafer, co-publisher at Subterranean Press was the guest) they were discussing the future of publishing, and they said the mass market paperback market is essentially dead in the UK, supplanted by ebooks. However, hardbacks may get even nicer.

I almost exclusively read ebooks, all on my phone. I've used the Nook app for a long time (I've also used the Kindle app), and I'm starting to use Kobo.

Reading ebooks has enabled me to quadruple the number of novels I read. It's so much more convenient to always have my book in my pocket. I read when I have a free minute, literally, even if I'm just walking from my office to the other side of the building, waiting in line to order lunch, etc. It's just hard to squeeze reading into my busy lifestyle, and ebooks help me do it.

But I'm not worried about hardbacks. I still buy them to get author autographs with.

I've seen a few people mention that they buy hardbacks to get author autographs. We don't get that much here in SA and if we do I'm clearly not paying enough attention! As such this reason has never applied to me and I've always though hardbacks are just heavier and more expensive than paperbacks. The only hardbacks I own are books I was too impatient to read to wait for the paperback to come out.

I find it interesting that much of this conversation has shifted to a conversation about book collection. I can't imagine that I'd prefer listening to audiobooks if they were, for whatever imaginary reason, the best way to collect books. The two things aren't related at all in my mind.

That said I do understand that book storage can be considered a pro or con for either format.

I buy the hardback for authors to sign but I have been considering getting my kindle signed. I dont think I would use it afterwards but I need to upgrade anyway.

Maybe I'm getting off track with the "collection" topic, but I do think it's something that drives the decision to buy each format. BTW- when I don't have a book for an author to sign, and even if I do, I try to also get a picture with them. So, the photograph is my substitute for an autograph, and those are taken with my phone, where I read the books...

Another advantage of the Audible/Kindle combination - the two are now in sync. So, you can switch back and forth between the ebook and the audiobook and pick up where you left off on any device.

http://www.geeky-gadgets.com/amazon-m...

Joshua wrote: "I buy the hardback for authors to sign but I have been considering getting my kindle signed. I dont think I would use it afterwards but I need to upgrade anyway."

I have actually signed someone's kindle - the cover actually, and prior to being published, which was sort of weird - she was just overwhelmed (apparently!) at meeting anyone who'd actually written a book.

The thing is, you'd end up running out of room....

I love them all but do consume different books in different formats.

Ebooks I read the most of but they are for one off books that I probably won't read and don't care about a lot.

Print books I read if I think it might be something I want to reread someday, if it's a favorite author, a really good edition that I'm going to really enjoy the art or the cover or the print. I like print if it's hardcover or a large paperback (something where I can set it down and it won't close by itself)

Audio books I am always listening to at least one but some books don't lend themselves to audio the way I consume (the drive to work, the jog after work) which is that I don't want to concentrate all that much. The narrator has a lot to do with whether I'll listen or not (currently I am loving Wil Wheaton narrate "Ready Player One"

I think they all have their place. I'm sure I choose the different format in different ways than others and that's fine.

Scott wrote: "I love them all but do consume different books in different formats.

Ebooks I read the most of but they are for one off books that I probably won't read and don't care about a lot.

Print books I ..."

For the ebook section...what I meant was...books that I won't re-read

Leonie wrote: "I have actually signed someone's kindle - the cover actually...

The thing is, you'd end up running out of room.... "

I suppose you could always buy another cover. Probably cheaper than buying books if you get a bunch of authors to sign it. I just don't think it has the same connection to the story.

How great to have such a loyal fan from the beginning (even if it does seem unwarranted before you've even published - had she even read any of your work?). I definitely think a personal connection with an author, like a good experience meeting the author at a convention, makes me more tolerant of a story or section of story that I otherwise would have given up on.

Some authors are self-publishing ebooks only, and some only have short stories. Maybe the cover for a tablet makes the most sense for the signature of a writer like that.

Penny wrote: "We don't get that much here in SA..."

Fortunately, I live near Los Angeles, so I probably have more opportunity than most. I also work at one of the University of California campuses, and there is an annual SF event and occasional writers that come for talks. You might check and see if a university has a program that brings writers in for talks that the community might attend.

I'm able to travel to conventions some, too. I'm actually planning to go to London next summer for WorldCon, which I'm excited about. If you can arrange a big vacation like that to coincide with a trip to WorldCon (I have a friend that goes to WorldCon every year, no matter where it is), you can pack a bunch of hardbacks. I'm sure my wife is going to kill me when she sees all the hardbacks I'm going to pack next year!

I almost exclusively do audiobooks. I like to own paperback and hardback, but I also like to wait till they are "bargain books" before I buy them.

Actually, I like books in any of the formats.

Mostly, I like, and read, print books. It was my first love and, probably, will continue to be.

I like audio books for "reading" when I walk for exercise. Helps me to look forward to my next walk. Although, I think Joie, our dog, helps with that also. She loves to go with either myself or my wife. But, the book that I'm listening to also has it's hold on me.

Lately, I've been turned on to e-books. I don't have a Kindle, or any other of the similar products. However, my local library, in conjunction with several other library systems, has e-books for "check out." I have a Kindle for PC program, but, the library system has ePDF books that I simply link my browser to. It keeps track of where I am in the book and I can read it at any time that I'm near my laptop. Also, read my newspaper that way on the days they don't deliver the printed version of it.

So far, I love books in any format that I've found. I just haven't really tried any other form of e-book.

Years ago, my son gave me a program that was probably a precursor to e-books and I was reading Frankstein on it. He had given me a couple books that the program would read, and Frankstein was the 1st one that I wanted to read. Don't even remember what the others were. Unfortunately, the computer that all this was resident on, crashed. Hard drive gone. And, program and books gone. So, I didn't finish Frankstein and never got another copy of the program for any number of reasons.

I like paper books but convenience of ebooks is just too good for me to pass. Ideally I like to read book first and listen to audiobook -- sometimes over and over for difficult texts like Shakespeare and Kafka. I listen to audiobooks at work. Otherwise my workdays would be unbearable.

I still like paper books (paperbacks; hardcovers are just too big and heavy and expensive). But I love the convenience of my Kindle Fire, and I've been having tons of fun exploring affordable ebooks from independent authors in lots of different genres I normally wouldn't have tried. I don't re-read very many books, actually very few books go on my read-again list. So how long they last doesn't matter to me.

I don't do audio books. I'm just not an aural learner; when I listen to stuff it goes in one ear and out the other. I retain very little of what I hear. Plus I like imagining the characters' voices and accents and how they say things, and the other sounds, and hearing someone read a book takes that away from me. And I also like to be able to go back and re-read favorite passages or things I didn't get the first time.

I just read a fascinating article in Scientific American called Why the Brain Prefers Paper by Ferris Jabr. The full link may not work for everyone - I'm on campus which is why I have access, but the original link might.

The article gives a summary of some of the 100 plus studies that have explored the differences in how people read on paper and screens. The arguments put forth seem to focus on all technology excluding ebooks (when talking about backlit screens and scrolling and the like). As such I don't think it's 100% relevant to this conversation, but it's still fascinating.

The section about how the human brain interprets written language is particularly interesting. A recent study showed that 5 year olds brains were very active when writing letters, but not so when typing. He then goes on to talk about concentration level studies when reading on screens vs paper. At least now I know why I prefer printing scientific papers to reading them on my pc.

Very interesting read! I hope some of you might also have access to this article and will include your own takes on the content for those who don't.

This is such an interesting topic, Penny! I am definitely about to click to the Scientific American article. Today in MediaBistro's chats they asked "Which do you prefer: eBooks or old-school books?" The responses were very interesting: Here is the link: https://twitter.com/Mediabistro/statu...

Micah wrote: "Oh...vacation reading. I never have a trouble with real books and vacations. I generally bring one book (or 2 if I'm nearly finished my current read), but if I run out of reading material, I hunt d..."

Good point, Micah! When possible...I take a current book for the plane or train and then I like to scour the bookstores where I vacation to find a book about the local environs...

I prefer eBooks for the simple reason that I have arthritis in my hands and the readers are easier to hold than paper books. Having said that, I actually prefer the convenience of being able to read just about anywhere just about anytime simply by pulling out my phone and opening an app.

Ralph, that was the weird bit - she was the friend of a friend, someone I'd just met! And apparently overcome by meeting someone who'd written lots of words that were about to be published. Made me giggle for ages afterwards!

I also use audiobooks for exercise. They're a great distraction.

Soruy about the lack of "replying" to comments but the phone app won't allow it.

Oh here is a topic I could go on for ages about. For now, I will just state that I tend to buy hardback physical books because they have intrinsic value as a finite resource object, and because they can be passed on as heirlooms.

I feel that ebooks have little to no intrinsic value. You own a license to read a copy of digital text. It's infinitely reproducible. Your copy is not special and never will be. You will probably have some difficulty passing it on to your children. It can become corrupted, revoked, censored, and worse. Granted physical books decay and suffer the elements. But should you take care of yours, that only increases its value while the supply of like editions dwindles. I see ebook and audiobook as great tools of convenience but never a replacement for the physical book - just an augmented, freebie form that should come with it.

Kenneth wrote: "Oh here is a topic I could go on for ages about. For now, I will just state that I tend to buy hardback physical books because they have intrinsic value as a finite resource object, and because the..."

And I couldn't disagree more. It's about the words, not their physical packaging, which is why I love all three formats. My pleasure in reading/listening is not diminished by the format at all. Ebooks in particular, provide affordability for those who might otherwise never read a hardback (A hardback in Australia starts at around $35 on special!)

I personally prefer the physical book to the ebook for reasons other have already stated. The critical deciding factor for me is that when you purchase an ebook, all you really own is a text file... Not a lot of bang for your buck and you can't share it as easily with friends.

I actually find that I have rather specific preferences for my material books. I'll generally take a hardcover over a paperback if it's not unreasonably priced. I'll also try to grab a trade paperback before a mass market. I really have no rational justification for these preferences.

There are other factors too of course, I can't pass up a good deal regardless of format, and if I can't stand the cover of a particular edition I'll search for another. Of course I agree with other members here that the experience of reading the text itself does not change much from one format to the next, and the quality of the work does not change at all. Still, it's always nice to have a physical collection to peruse through when you've got some time to read.

I got through a terrible snow storm thanks to an audio book of Terry Prachett's Guards! Guards! Guards! I was laughing so hard, I didn't stress about driving in near white out conditions. Tony Robinson narrating it was perfect.

Penny wrote: "There are so many options now days when it comes to reading. What is your preference?

Is this a trick question? :p

Paper. Paper. Paper. I'm one of those who believe books (even paperbacks) are forms of art, and have life. They have texture, mass, smell, history.... Some books (not so much anymore) have artwork that flows from one cover to another. The old Edgar Rice Burroughs Mars covers by Gino D'Achille is a good example. Unfold all 11 books, place them side by side and you get one huge panorama. Some old books have hidden art on their edges if you fan the pages.

Ebooks are overpriced, lifeless, antiseptic digital conveniences. I'll buy paper books until they are not longer available. But I believe they will always be around.

One question for all of those who hate eBooks.

If you have a paper book without the words, what do you have left?

In general, I prefer paper books. I use audio books quite a bit during the week because I am visually handicapped that causes me to read slowly but effectively. I am religious so on the Sabbath I do not use electronic devices so I usually buy paper books in case I want to read them during the Sabbath. Also... in case there is an EMP attack... I'm set! :-)

I use Ebooks (without DRM) mostly to allow me to use my electronic reader to read them to me with the TextAloud reader and the AT&T Natural Voices. Also, I like the idea of having a convenient way to buy a book I want to read and have it delivered to me now, now, now. I also like the idea of having a library accessible from a small device I can carry with me.

Leonie wrote: "One question for all of those who hate eBooks.

If you have a paper book without the words, what do you have left?"

A blank book in which to write a great story. A physical object that still holds value.

Yes, Kenneth! Great answer! The paper itself still has value!

I prefer paper, although, I do use all 3 medias.

Been reading paper books since long before there was 3 medias! To me, it'll always be my favorite media.

I was 1st introduced to the library and it's mystic wonders somewhere in grade school. Don't know how old I was and don't remember who 1st told me of this wondrous building with all those books. But, I have had a library card for most of my life. Everywhere I've lived, I've sought out the library. Wonderous things happen to me when I browse through those stacks and stacks of shelves full of books. Always has, always will.

Now, mind you, I'm not saying anything against the other 2 medias. I just have a personal favorite. I "read" audiobooks, just not my favorite way of "reading." I exercise by walking and I "read" books on CD while I'm walking. Well, now I use books on CD. I used to use books on tape. But, mostly I listened to them on my commute to work. One place I worked at we had a books on tape reading group. We, or someone in the group, found a place where we could order a set of unabridged tapes of various books. It was relatively inexpensive and we could keep them for quite a time before any fine set in. So, we'd each rent a book and share it with others. Don't know how many books I "read" with this group, but, it was a goodly number. I was introduced to Tom Clancy's books through this "club", for lack of a better term. I also discovered the Horatio Hornblower series by C.S. Forester. The group eventually all went our separate ways, but, I knew I'd discovered another way to "read" books. I remember that from the group, but, there are only a couple of people that I remember from the club.

Eventually, I graduated to Books on CD. I still listened to them on the way to work, but, soon had to stop that. The last job I had, I had to commute via the local bus service. I probably could have continued to listen with a CD player, but, went back to reading paper books on the bus ride into town. It was about 45 minutes each way, so I was reveling in the ~90 minutes a day reading time. Well, now I'm retired, but, need some kind of exercise. Walking serves that purpose and Books on CD reenters my life. Since my cancer treatment, and recovery, I might add, I can't walk as far or for as long as I used to. But, that time is filled admirably by listening to Books on CD.

I don't have a Kindle, or any other kind of ebook reader, but, I have discovered, in the online portion of our local library system, something called PDF eBook that I can read in my browser. I have a laptop and wifi, so I can read in any room in the house, but, prefer to do it in my "den". Or, office, or whatever "my" room is called. I've read a few books that way, but, still in the browsing stage at this point.

Might feel different about eBooks if I did have a Kindle, or, whatever. I don't know. And, not really interested in paying out the couple hundred one would cost. My browser, my walking and my book reading work just fine for right now.

I was a somewhat late adopter of virtual books, but over time I started adding them to my reading experience here and there. But then I moved. After I moved to a place without a car, poor shipping (more getting the delivery people to actually leave the package), and difficult to get to bookstores, almost everything I read is virtual. Just easier to get.

I have had some bad / humorous experiences with audiobooks. To the point I don't try anymore. The humorous, to me, involved long road trips in the car & my mother trying to fill the time with new books from some of her favorite authors. All the choices ended up being rather ... poor family roadtrip choices. I think it was the Patricia Cornwall book that had the graphic explicit lesbian sex scenes. I believe I was 12 on that occasion.

My dabbling with audiobooks on my own consisted of bad narrators, or just too slow narrators. The bad Iincluded male narrator for book with female main character. And his high pitched whiny fake female voice.

I don't listen to audiobooks.

eBooks don't give you "bang for your buck" for the exact same story??? I'm paying for the author's time creating the story, not for the medium. To me that's like spending $3 on a gourmet cupcake and focusing on whether or not it comes in a cardboard box. No matter what it's still a Chai Latte cupcake! (Though to lose my metaphor that's making me hungry, I quite often get more "bang for my buck" because while you pay $8.00 for that physical book, I snagged it for $0.99 in a one day sale on Amazon.)

I don't really understand the whole "you only bought a license!" argument. I'm paying for the experience. I also don't leave the movie theater and go "I can't believe I spent $30 on two movie tickets and no one is standing here to hand me a BluRay copy on my way out!".

As you say, you don't understand the license concept.

At any time, the ebook provider service can "pull" your copy. AKA delete it. For whatever reason. You will probably get your money back if they do. But you don't have total control over that copy, nor do you have the unfettered ability to lend it to friends, pass it down to children, or find that your copy is suddenly worth lots of money because it's the last one in existence. You can't get the author to autograph it and you can't write some beautiful dedication when you gift it to a family member.

All you get is a license to read the text. It is valueless as a product. That is not to say that the story has no value or that the author can't make money on it. That's where your $.99 goes. Is it the right monetary model? I say no, it's not.

Your analogy is not quite correct. If you buy a Blu-Ray, most now come with a free instant download copy. That's your ebook, along with the physical Blu-Ray disc that you paid for. What you're doing is instead just paying a token fee for the download only, in a proprietary format, for a digital device, that in all likely hood will not be transferable to other media.

Um, no Blu-Ray disc was bought in the example. $30 was spent to see film in theater.

Kenneth wrote: "At any time, the ebook provider service can "pull" your copy. AKA delete it. For whatever reason. You will probably get your money back if they do."

I get tired of that one getting trotted out because it isn't the full story. They can't access my device unless I turn on the wireless. I can also keep a copy on my personal computer or other digital storage device, which they can't access. So the reality is the only place they can "pull" with 100% guarantee of it being gone is in their own cloud, which they own.

Kenneth wrote: "If you buy a Blu-Ray, most now come with a free instant download copy. "

Really? Because I've never seen this. I get a free DVD all the time and a couple times I've gotten a special deal as part of a promo, but no, the Blu-Ray plus digital copy normally costs extra.

Kenneth wrote: "What you're doing is instead just paying a token fee for the download only, in a proprietary format, for a digital device, that in all likely hood will not be transferable to other media."

Which is what they used to say about iTunes...

Lexxi: I was providing the proper analogy. Of course demanding an additional product would be ridiculous. It correlates to buying the ebook and expecting a physical copy as well.

Lara: So you'll never turn on wireless? I doubt that's the case. It's not convenient and you won't be able to get more titles, probably. DVD and Blu-Ray are different tiers. You said Blu-Ray, which of course costs more because it's higher quality. And they usually come with a download, unlike most DVDs.

As for iTunes, I still despise it and will never use it. Many will. I disagree with them, but they're free to use it as they choose. I buy LP music and occasionally CDs when that's not an option. I can enjoy the music in the format that I prefer, and as an added bonus the artwork is much larger, the bonus tracks are included that are not in the download or CD version, and the product increases in value significantly after pressing ceases. About 30% of my records are now worth triple what I paid for them, even opened and used.

Why would I buy the ebook then expect a physical book to suddenly appear?

I've seen physical books that included a digital copy but never the other way around.

Ah. You are in it for the money, eh? To each their own priorities. I've shelves and shelves of physical books. Too many to keep in one place and I doubt any are worth anything much. Got them to read. Many were already used when I got them. Some with large library discard stamps on them.

Kenneth wrote: "Lara: So you'll never turn on wireless? I doubt that's the case. It's not convenient and you won't be able to get more titles, probably. DVD and Blu-Ray are different tiers. You said Blu-Ray, which of course costs more because it's higher quality. And they usually come with a download, unlike most DVDs. "

Sure I turn on wireless because I'm not paranoid. But I could also keep a backup copy on my computer and it would be perfectly safe. Couldn't get more titles? Of course I can. Even if I never turned on wireless I could STILL transfer files TO my device using a USB cord with no problem, which is how people who are in areas without WiFi do it every day.

Yes DVD and BluRay are different products. I know that. I said BluRay and continue to say BluRay. Let me say it again. BluRay frequently comes with a FREE DVD it does NOT come with a FREE digital copy. I have no idea where the heck you are buying movies but I have NEVER once had a BluRay come with a digital copy for free (unless it was a special sale). There was always a price difference between BluRay + Digital Copy and BluRay by itself.

I am a big reader and also am a bit of an old-fashioned guy. A lot of my reading is done via the Internet, as I want to follow progress about a few things (astronomy, space technology,aircraft technology, military technology, geopolitics, history,etc), so I am accustomed to reading on a screen. I however do love paper books, especially when it comes to works of references or books full of interesting pictures that I then can share with someone else. I also own an e-reader (Kobo)that I use during my long night shifts as a security guard. I find it most practical because it can easily fit in a coat pocket and doesn't weigh much, plus has a long battery charge duration (3-4 weeks). Another advantage of my Kobo e-reader for me is that it will 'remember' on which page I am at in a book (at 58, my memory is not as good as in my youth). I thus use and appreciate both paper and electronic books and find advantages to both, depending on what you read and use them for. My own library shelves are full to bursting but I still buy paperback/hardcover books that catch my eyes, forcing me to do periodic culls of my shelves. I would say that an e-reader is a practical medium for casual books and reference articles/reports, while well-illustrated books and in-depth reference works are best kept on paper, thus easy to share.

I have found I still like my hard backs and paperbacks when it comes to non-fiction reading. For me, it's easier to do the cross referencing to verify facts. Now, when it comes to fiction I really enjoy the Kindle. I'm saving a lot of space but not having the actual book in hand, but then there are the rare exceptions when I find myself picking up the real thing. Nothing like the smell of fresh ink and paper. Ahhh.

Lexxi wrote:
Ah. You are in it for the money..."
Not in it for the money, but I like to spend my money on stuff that retains its value if I can. I've got shelves and shelves of physical books and love it.

I don't buy ebooks because they have no intrinsic value.

RE: the analogy thing, I tried (and failed it seems) to provide a more accurate analogy than the one Lara presented initially.

Kenneth - I thought the blu ray combo pack was an excellent analogy. I agree that the physical book is the way to go. I love having a physical bookshelf and I love passim books along to others - something not as easily done with ebooks. I think amazon recently realized that you don't actually buy much when you purchase an ebook so they launched matchbook. Now on a ( limited) number of titles you can purchase the ebook for a discount price after purchasing the book. Although I would argue you should get the title for free since it is after all only the license to a text file, but complaints aside this program resembles the blu ray analogy quite nicely.