alt Hacker NewsPersonally I do like these marks. But I buy books to read, not as an investment. I recently bought a book on "How to survive being gassed" published in 1934. It had a typed A4 sheet of paper in it with a poem about how to identify the different types of gas. Humourous and probably useless but real and very alive.
I also take umberidge with the idea that digital books are more convenient. A physical book is more engaging, more beautiful, more real and more present than a digital book. All things that I find convenient when I want to interact with knowledge and art. Horses for courses I assume.
Replies
*umbrage (I like when people tell me, so hoping that isn't taken the wrong way).
Otherwise, very much in agreement!
Umbrage.
The thing is, I've had a number of instances where the paper copy of a book was so poorly typeset (usually overly long lines on too-wide pages, e.g., _The Inklings and King Arthur: J. R. R. Tolkien, Charles Williams, C. S. Lewis, and Owen Barfield on the Matter of Britain_ edited by Sørina Higgins) that I actually purchased the e-book version so as to be able to read it comfortably.
I'm guessing you don't (yet) need large type to read comfortably. When that time comes, you may gain an appreciation for the accessibility features of a good ereader.
The UI of paper books is better in most ways. Ebooks don’t need separate large print editions, and have full text search. Basically every other point goes to paper books. I don’t bother to defend the aesthetics of books, because their actual utility is high, too.
They’re damn bulky, though, especially when there’s an alternative that weighs nothing. Damn bulky.