I have hard copy books and I have a Kindle. Which do you prefer: ebook or hard copy?
Kate wants to hear from you! The next question of the week, straight from Kate, is: I have hard copy books and I have a Kindle. Which do you prefer: ebook or hard copy? To get your voice heard, simply hit the Comment link and tell her what you think! No registration is necessary, and you can post anonymously if you want.
August 30, 2010 @ 8:18 am
e-what??
August 30, 2010 @ 8:29 am
Hard cover. No contest. I like holding a book in my hand, turning pages, the whole thing. It is a tactile experience that I much prefer.
August 30, 2010 @ 8:54 am
Kindle…simply because I can access several different titles when I am away without actually having to take the books with me. However, cuddling in front of the fire with a good “kindle” can’t replace the feel of an actual book in hand.
August 30, 2010 @ 10:13 am
I prefer kindle since I have allergies to dust…but I do miss the tactile feel of holding it and turning the pages.
August 30, 2010 @ 10:24 am
Well it was Kindle but how I get Kindle on my Ipad and that is much easier to tead.
August 30, 2010 @ 10:56 am
Hard copy, ALWAYS.. I have to be able to take notes in the margin – even if it’s fiction! 🙂
August 31, 2010 @ 5:18 am
E-book! After decluttering and downsizing my footprint-I can have all that I need
on one small tablet! I say embrace the technology! Try fitting 3500 “regular” books in your house!
August 31, 2010 @ 5:19 am
I much prefer hard copy over ebooks as I have no ebook reader and thus ebooks are much harder to read.
I actually resent the Kindle (there are other ebook options out there, the Kobo, the Nook, Sony has something) they are not all as format-locked as the Kindle.
I also am fortunate in that I am disabled and poor, so I don’t have commuting or business stuff to do, and am not afflicted with money so I get to buy used books for a quarter. (So far used ebooks are hard to find.)
I also resent the whole digital marketing of media. Like CDs. CDs cost less to manufacture than LPs but were priced higher because they could. THEN they went to digital downloads which cost NOTHING to “manufacture” and fractions of a penny to “distribute” but the price remained essentially the same.
Now same with books. No printing, no shipping, no stock, air conditioning, etc. Just a little blip of bandwidth. But yet they cost nearly as much as “real” books.
Are authors getting all of that extra money? If so, that would be cool. But somehow I doubt it. Someone else just found a larger pool to siphon off and it much easier to siphon.
Still, I am tempted by the newish Kindle 3, cheaper… mainly for those long, frequent (2-3 times a week it seems) medical waiting room stays. I just won’t be “buying ebooks” from Amazon.
Sorry for being verbose. I have nothing better to do, I have no life.
August 31, 2010 @ 5:49 am
there are pros & cons to both … i’ve never used a kindle (though i did fondle an iPad once).
i think there is a certain charm & bonding between people in swapping/borrowing/giving away books … & there’s nothing like a used book store.
August 31, 2010 @ 6:05 am
I love read books. I work on computers all day so when I want to read I prefer books. I love the smell and the feel.
August 31, 2010 @ 9:08 am
iPad when traveling, book at home.
August 31, 2010 @ 11:30 am
A book is not a book unless it’s a book. For me, e-readers are just that – electronic devices used for reading. Two different experiences entirely.
August 31, 2010 @ 1:22 pm
If I carry the Kindle…I might as well carry a book and have the tactile experience.
September 1, 2010 @ 1:40 am
Love both.
But the hard copy won’t crash or will not say “server is too busy, try again later”.
September 2, 2010 @ 6:44 pm
I love books but have primarily switched to the Kindle because (a) I am living overseas for 3 years and finding books in english is difficult (b) it saves storage space. However, whenever I get a chance to get to a LGBT bookstore I load up on lesbian fiction I can’t get anywhere else.