book: paper back or hard back what do your like

[RandyS]

Paperback. Smaller and lighter.

And cheaper, and easier to handle.

 

[Aurian]

I like also that paperbacks fit so nicely into a handbag. And most of the time around here you can buy paperbacks at a great discount such as 3 for the price of 2..

 

[J.T.B.]

I only buy books I plan to keep long-term, mostly non-fiction and reference, so I go for hardcover so they last. Most of them are second-hand, or from online discount sellers. Current events and most fiction I get from the library, but if I think I'm going to want to keep re-reading it in future years I get a second-hand hardcover.

--Justin

 

[Jan]

I prefer paperbacks for the lightness factor as well as being able to fit them into my purse. I just got a Kindle2 for my birthday, though, and I've fallen completely in love with it. So far the *only* downside to it is that not all of my 'old friend' books are available for it yet.

Jan

 

[Miss Chicken]

I prefer paperbacks for the lightness factor as well as being able to fit them into my purse. I just got a Kindle2 for my birthday, though, and I've fallen completely in love with it. So far the *only* downside to it is that not all of my 'old friend' books are available for it yet.

Jan

I am desparately waiting for Kindle to be available in Australia but I think it be quite a while before it is.

 

[kissthestar]

Hardback pleases the senses: the smell of the paper, binding paste, leather or cloth. The feel of the cover, whether leather or cloth. Sometimes there's a built in silky ribbon for marking the page. Hardback is handsomer, ages better, wears well. Dropped on a table or desk, hardback has the good, solid clomp.

 

[RJDiogenes]

I do get hardcovers whenever possible, but I buy a lot of small press books-- reprints of very old stuff, usually, pulps and other works from decades or centuries ago-- and most of it is only available in paperback. So most of the books I own are paperbacks.

 

[BigFoot]

I definitely prefer trade PBs.

 

[Kommander]

Mass-market paperbacks, for all the reasons mentioned.

However, once I become a published novelist (any decade now, I keep telling myself), everyone should buy the hard cover because the royalties are higher.

 

[Bloodwhiner]

Hardback, I just like the larger, more substantial feel in my hands when I read. That said all my recent books have either been audible for in the car or Kindle format to read on my iPod touch.

 

[TheSeeker]

Put me down as hard cover. They look much better on the bookshelf and the books last a lot longer.

 

[C. Cole-Chakotay]

I prefer hardback books. I have got some very good deals on Amazon buying used books.

 

[Commander Rabbit]

I like the look and feel of hard back, but I mostly buy paper backs for the same reasons everyone else is giving. I tend to buy mostly non-fiction and get fiction from the library. Occasionally I buy fiction in hard back if it's used and/or a favorite.

 

[teya]

If I want to read it, I prefer paperback. If I want to collect it (i.e., it's a classic or part of a series of books) I prefer hardback.

Pretty much the way I am. Although I do read all my classics, too.

I prefer cookbooks in hardcover for some reason, though. And I absolutely loathe the dust jacket things on hardcover books. If it's my book and I've bought it, that thing goes straight away into the trash.

If it's a collectible book (for example, a first edition, signed) and you've tossed the dust jacket, you've lowered its value considerably.

 

[Kestra]

If it's a collectible book (for example, a first edition, signed) and you've tossed the dust jacket, you've lowered its value considerably.

But without the dust jacket, it increases in value to me. I'd never dream of parting with any of my books.

 

[Spaceman Spiff]

I used to prefer hardbacks because they look so nice on the shelf. Gradually, I started to shift to trade paperbacks for a lot of the reasons mentioned here. Now I'll buy them however I find them.

If they're available for the Kindle, though, I'll usually buy them that way. If I decide it's so great that I need it on the shelf, I'll look for a bargain.

 

[teya]

If it's a collectible book (for example, a first edition, signed) and you've tossed the dust jacket, you've lowered its value considerably.

But without the dust jacket, it increases in value to me. I'd never dream of parting with any of my books.

That's fair.

I just remember the book I bought at a yard sale for 50 cents. I'd wanted to read it and the price was certainly right. When I got it home, I discovered that it was a first edition, signed by the author. And since the author won a major first book prize for it, the sucker was worth $600.

I'll never part with it, but when I die, whichever niece ends up with it could end up with something for it.

 

[Michael Chris]

I much prefer paper backs.

 

[Jadzia]

I prefer paperbacks mostly.

Hardbacks are awkward to look at anywhere but on a flat table, so are more reference oriented, imo. So things like dictionary and thesaurus I do prefer in hardback.

I do look after books (as I look after most of the things I own). I'm careful not to spoil or dog-ear any pages. So most of my books look like new except for the unavoidable creases in the spine.

Whenever I take books out of doors I put them into self-seal bag so that they don't get worn and torn by being tossed about with all my other clutter, or if I get caught in the rain or whatever. I remember one of my school teachers commenting when I did this with a book he lent to me. He thought it was very respectful as most people wouldn't care if they returned a book to its owner in a damaged condition.

 

[RJDiogenes]

^^ Or at all sometimes.