SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
On what medium do you read most?
| 17% | 66 votes |
| 11% | 43 votes |
| 16% | 62 votes |
| 47% | 181 votes |
| 2% | 9 votes |
| 3% | 15 votes |
| 1% | 7 votes |
[ Voting Booth | Other Polls | Back Home ]
- Don't complain about lack of options. You've got to pick a few when you do multiple choice. Those are the breaks.
- Feel free to suggest poll ideas if you're feeling creative. I'd strongly suggest reading the past polls first.
- This whole thing is wildly inaccurate. Rounding errors, ballot stuffers, dynamic IPs, firewalls. If you're using these numbers to do anything important, you're insane.
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
sillema sillema nika su
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Thursday September 08 2016, @01:56PM
Does looking at the pictures count as reading?
Is it necessary to comprehend those strange symbols?
The lower I set my standards the more accomplishments I have.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 08 2016, @05:15PM
Is it necessary to comprehend those strange symbols?
理解しないと「読む」とは言えないわよ (。-`ω-)ンー
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 12 2016, @04:01AM
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
(Score: 2) by mcgrew on Tuesday September 27 2016, @03:39PM
No, watching videos is not "reading".
mcgrewbooks.com mcgrew.info nooze.org
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Tuesday September 27 2016, @07:45PM
Sorry for any confusion. I was referring to still pictures, which are easier to comprehend than video.
The lower I set my standards the more accomplishments I have.
(Score: 2) by mcgrew on Wednesday September 28 2016, @03:26PM
Looking at pictures is not reading, either, unless by "read" you mean "interpret".
read
rēd/
verb
verb: read; 3rd person present: reads; past tense: read; past participle: read; gerund or present participle: reading
1.
look at and comprehend the meaning of (written or printed matter) by mentally interpreting the characters or symbols of which it is composed.
"it's the best novel I've ever read"
synonyms: peruse, study, scrutinize, look through; More
pore over, be absorbed in;
run one's eye over, cast an eye over, leaf through, scan, flick through, skim through, thumb through
"Nadine and Ian were reading the paper by the fireplace"
decipher, make out, make sense of, interpret, understand
"I can't read my own writing"
speak (the written or printed matter that one is reading) aloud, typically to another person.
"the charges against him were read out"
synonyms: read out/aloud, recite, declaim
"he read a passage of the letter"
have the ability to look at and comprehend the meaning of written or printed matter.
"only three of the girls could read and none could write"
habitually read (a particular newspaper or journal).
discover (information) by reading it in a written or printed source.
"he was arrested yesterday—I read it in the paper"
discern (a fact, emotion, or quality) in someone's eyes or expression.
"she looked down, terrified that he would read fear on her face"
understand or interpret the nature or significance of.
"he didn't dare look away, in case this was read as a sign of weakness"
synonyms: interpret, take, take to mean, construe, see, understand
"her remark could be read as a criticism"
(of a piece of writing) convey a specified impression to the reader.
"the brief note read like a cry for help"
(of a passage, text, or sign) contain or consist of specified words; have a certain wording.
"the placard read “We want justice.”"
used to indicate that a particular word in a text or passage is incorrect and that another should be substituted for it.
"for madam read madman"
(of an actor) audition for (a part in a play or film).
(of a device) obtain data from (light or other input).
2.
inspect and record the figure indicated on (a measuring instrument).
"I've come to read the gas meter"
(of a measuring instrument) indicate a specified measurement or figure.
"the thermometer read 0° C"
synonyms: indicate, register, record, display, show
"the dial read 70 mph"
3.
British
study (an academic subject) at a university.
"I'm reading English at Cambridge"
4.
(of a computer) copy, transfer, or interpret (data).
enter or extract (data) in an electronic storage device.
"the most common way of reading a file into the system"
5.
hear and understand the words of (someone speaking on a radio transmitter).
"“Do you read me? Over.”"
noun
noun: read; plural noun: reads
1.
US
a person's interpretation of something.
"their read on the national situation may be correct"
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Wednesday September 28 2016, @04:03PM
I take your point that looking at the pictures doesn't count as reading.
But thanks for the idea about videos. If I am unable to read and comprehend, as well as to concisely articulate my own ideas in written form, then videos are probably a better use of my time than looking at still pictures.
As as for the poll question, I found it limiting to be unable to select multiple choices. Like phone, tablet, desktop PC, etc.
Oh, and I liked "I can't read my own writing" in the first definition of read you provided. I really almost can't. Because I've been using a keyboard for too long. :-)
The lower I set my standards the more accomplishments I have.
(Score: 2) by mcgrew on Thursday September 29 2016, @04:41PM
My handwriting is abysmal as well. And getting worse.
mcgrewbooks.com mcgrew.info nooze.org
(Score: 2) by t-3 on Thursday September 08 2016, @05:56PM
When I'm out and about, my phone, because it's with me. When I'm at home, my computer, kindle, or a real book, mostly depending on what I have (mobi on the kindle/kindle app on phone, epub/djvu on computer, books for anything I have in paper form). I don't have a proper e-paper ebook-reader, so I don't know how those compare to paper books, but I like reading on paper the most, except for the when the form factor is inconvenient.
(Score: 3, Funny) by sendafiolorkar on Thursday September 08 2016, @06:39PM
Javascript, freaking Javascript...
(Score: 5, Funny) by richtopia on Thursday September 08 2016, @09:29PM
Stone tablets, to be more exact.
Slightly inconvenient form factor, but people take you seriously when you convey instructions to them from something written in stone.
(Score: 2) by edIII on Sunday September 11 2016, @12:40AM
I would. Especially since stone tablets don't have auto-corrected spelling, after-the-fact grammatical suggestions, or anything remotely resembling white-out. I don't even think they attempted that when portraying Bedrock.
If you gave me something set in stone, written with no errors (that I'm able to see), and numbered instructions? Yes, I would be convinced that *you* took it very seriously :) As well as being impressed that you could make it in the first place given the state of our educamacational systems and reliance on technology.
The only way you could make it better, is if you delivered the instructions 10 at a time while rocking a long grizzled beard.
Technically, lunchtime is at any moment. It's just a wave function.
(Score: 2) by mhajicek on Saturday October 08 2016, @06:02AM
JB Weld.
The spacelike surfaces of time foliations can have a cusp at the surface of discontinuity. - P. Hajicek
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 12 2016, @04:02AM
Thanks a lot, Moses.
(Score: 1) by driven on Friday September 16 2016, @06:19AM
I read a comment on Cracked this week that said if civilization today were destroyed, people in the year 3000 would know more about the year 1 than the year 2016 due to everything being electronic. It got me to to thinking that maybe certain critical information _should_ be written on stone tablets. What do you think?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 28 2016, @02:36PM
I wrote my thesis on this. Printed it out. Got a good mark. Burnt a copy to cd.
My thesis was on display for future generations. At some point in the last decade or so it went missing.
The CD is now a coaster.
Too much irony.
(Score: 2) by butthurt on Monday October 03 2016, @03:07AM
No, thank you. In my opinion, stone-based file-stores are obsolete. Just run your debugger while copying a file. You'll see that cp(1) spends most of its time in chisel(3). I upgraded long ago to clay, which offers significant performance advantages in real-world use. With clay storage, copying is implemented as impress(3) followed by fire(3), then a second round impress(3) followed by fire(3) agian. It sounds cumbersome, doesn't it? Yet these operations are, for typical flie-sizes, far less processor-intensive than the simple chisel(3) operation.
Moreover, the first impress-fire round generates a reversed copy of the data, what we clay users call a mould. From the mould, only a single impress-fire round is needed to generate an additional copy of the data. In effect, it's a backup copy. Speaking of backups, clay really shines when doing a full backup and restore, each of which requires just a single impress-fire run over one's entire file-system. Yes, clay is the way of the future.
(Score: 2) by richtopia on Monday October 03 2016, @10:25PM
Yes, the case of why fix what isn't broken?
If you aren't familiar with ancient writing, clay inscriptions are typically considered an earlier development to stone, as you can write in mud with a reed and let it dry. Also, it resulted in a lot more inscriptions; hieroglyphs in Ancient Egypt were painstaking to make so they are in important places like tombs. Sumerian Cuneiform could be written anywhere, particularly when your house is made of mud you have a lot of places to write.
(Score: 1) by Crash on Wednesday October 05 2016, @08:17PM
And when they don't take you seriously, You can chant, "Pie lesu domine Dona eis requiem" and smack them upside the head.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 09 2016, @12:59AM
I suppose if I were to measure it, I do most of my reading on a computer screen.
Reading for fun, though, that's paper all the way. No batteries needed. Works in broad daylight. Vast array of compatible add-ons to get paper to work in the dark. Taller than wide making it easy for the eyes to move from one line to the next. Typesetting instead of "justified" or ragged right. More add-on technologies for annotations and keeping multiple bookmarks. Possibly to quickly compare and cross-reference upwards of 4 or 5 (or more with creativity) passages from different sections of the work at once. Usually lightweight so it doesn't strain the arms. Flexible form factor allows some wiggle room when getting comfortable.
For some inexplicable reason, always cheaper than the crappier electronic version.
And, of course, the best part: I own it 100%. When I'm finished with it I can swap with friends and relatives or sell it or flat out give it away unless I really want to keep a copy around in the "private library."
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 09 2016, @12:49PM
You forgot: Takes a lot of abuse before it breaks to the point of getting unusable.
(Score: 2) by Webweasel on Friday September 09 2016, @02:14PM
Not when you drop them in the bath.
Ach, my mum almost killed me when I dropped her copy of Lord of the Rings in the bath when I was 11.
Priyom.org Number stations, Russian Military radio. "You are a bad, bad man. Do you have any other virtues?"-Runaway1956
(Score: 2) by mcgrew on Tuesday September 27 2016, @03:43PM
My daughter dropped my copy of "Dune" in the bath when she was ten. I was pretty mad about that.
mcgrewbooks.com mcgrew.info nooze.org
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 17 2016, @08:31AM
Scissors beat Paper
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 07 2016, @11:24PM
See tablet discussion up there.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 19 2016, @05:25PM
Reading for fun, though, that's paper all the way. No batteries needed. Works in broad daylight. Vast array of compatible add-ons to get paper to work in the dark. Taller than wide making it easy for the eyes to move from one line to the next. Typesetting instead of "justified" or ragged right. More add-on technologies for annotations and keeping multiple bookmarks. Possibly to quickly compare and cross-reference upwards of 4 or 5 (or more with creativity) passages from different sections of the work at once. Usually lightweight so it doesn't strain the arms. Flexible form factor allows some wiggle room when getting comfortable.
Reading for fun, that's FBreader all the way. Runs on the devices I'm already keeping the battery charged on. Works in broad daylight (on my phone, YMMV). Works in the dark (on my phone, YMMV) with no add-ons needed. Taller than wide; of course if I'm using my laptop's landscape display, it magically splits into a two-page spread with each page, again, taller than wide. I don't even know the difference between 'typesetting' and '"justified"', because I'm here to read words, not whitespace. Multiple bookmarks doesn't need add-on technologies, though I rarely use them, and never do any annotation. Paper totally wins for cross-referencing more than 2-3 things, but my pleasure reading doesn't involve that, YMMV. If my phone strained my arms, or was incompatible with comfortable lounging, I'd have already got a different phone (or more likely, a better pair of arms!).
And when I'm comfortably lounging with my phone in my unstrained arms, and I come to the end of one book, I don't have to get up or even rummage in my bag for the next one -- it's right there.
FWIW, we seem to read in very different ways, or perhaps just very different types of books. I'd go nuts if I had to make notes, compare multiple passages side-by-side, and generally make work out of reading -- it's supposed to be fun! Yeah, I know I miss some details from some books on a linear read-through; I know because I catch them when I reread the book. And if the book's not worth rereading, it's certainly not worth making a chore out of the first read just to be sure I notice everything. Clearly you don't see it the same way -- and while intellectually, I know your approach is no wronger than mine, it just strikes me as bizarre.
For some inexplicable reason, always cheaper than the crappier electronic version.
That's not inexplicable at all. As ebooks usually sell about 20% off the paper version (both new), it sounds like you're buying paper books used, but refuse to consider used ebooks.
I get most of my ebooks used. Sure, the publisher (and thus, if you believe in fairy tales, the author) doesn't make any money, but they don't with used paper books either. And unlike used paper books, used ebooks have (next to) no scarcity, and thus have (next to) no economic value -- they're too cheap to meter.
And, of course, the best part: I own it 100%. When I'm finished with it I can swap with friends and relatives or sell it or flat out give it away unless I really want to keep a copy around in the "private library."
And the best part: I own it 100%. When I'm finished with it I can swap with friends and relatives or flat out give it away, and I still get to keep a copy around in the "private library."
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 24 2016, @10:55AM
..Reading for fun, though, that's paper all the way. No batteries needed. Works in broad daylight. Vast array of compatible add-ons to get paper to work in the dark. Taller than wide making it easy for the eyes to move from one line to the next.
ebook, apart from the battery bit, works in broad daylight etc.
..Typesetting instead of "justified" or ragged right.
Now this I will give you, they do need to work on that for ebooks.
More add-on technologies for annotations and keeping multiple bookmarks. Possibly to quickly compare and cross-reference upwards of 4 or 5 (or more with creativity) passages from different sections of the work at once.
Bookmarks...ah, I had an expensively bad habit of using banknotes for bookmarks
..Usually lightweight so it doesn't strain the arms. Flexible form factor allows some wiggle room when getting comfortable.
7.48 oz (212 g) ebook reader, c/w 14,500 ebooks on SD card, admittedly only a 6 inch display and 1 1/2 months between recharges..
Don't get me wrong, still have a massive paper book library (several thousand, mostly hardbacks) but in most circumstances now I'll opt for the ebook reader..
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 01 2016, @05:06AM
Correct! To "read" is curl up with a good book. The rest just work. I do not "read" for work, I am not an editor. I am computer guy that used an GUI/CUI to figure out what is wrong and fix it.
Then again Knuth's 3rd book, "Sorting and Searching". Now, that is good read! A page turner that one!
(Score: 2) by WizardFusion on Friday September 09 2016, @04:29PM
If I am reading a book, then an E-Reader or my phone
If it's a technical document then my laptop screen
The material determines the device for me
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Friday September 09 2016, @04:35PM
I no longer read dead tree books, simply because I have a hard time seeing the print. When I need to look at prints, I carry them to the table with a big magnifying glass.
On the computer, I set my text size, full screen the page, and I'm good to go. If I want to zoom on something, I zoom just as far as I need. Doesn't much matter what kind of digital media it is, Caliber opens almost everything.
That big beautiful screen is better than any pair of glasses, magnifying glass, or whatever. I just love it.
(Score: 1) by shanen on Monday September 19 2016, @07:08PM
I'm in a similar boat, though I still do most of my reading on paper, but I have separate glasses for computer screens. In terms of important and informative reading, it's mostly paper for me, though in terms of time, I'm certainly in front of the computer screen more. However, a lot of that time is writing or just looking without reading, so I think the total quantity read is also on the dead tree side.
For me the Kindle is out because Amazon is a terrible company. I stopped doing business with them more than a decade ago when I discovered how they were abusing my personal information. My most recent involvement with them involved an imposter account using my name and one of my other email addresses. After more than a year of "consultations" with their so-called support staff, they suddenly fixed it? I was never able to figure out what is going on, but right now my theory is that the sordid reality may have been something like this Wells Fargo scam. Retail identity theft is much less profitable than wholesale, but of course I can't prove anything. The last escalation went all the way to the top and I'm sure that any interesting or incriminating information has disappeared by now.
#1 Freedom = (Meaningful - Coerced) Choice{5} ≠ (Beer^4 | Speech) and your negative mods prove you are a narrow prick.
(Score: 2) by mcgrew on Tuesday September 27 2016, @03:55PM
They can cure your age-related farsightedness (as well as nearsightedness, astigmatism, and cataracts) with an implant the FDA approved in 2003, for $7,000 per eye. Far better than any glasses, magnifying glass, or screen. Ask your eye doctor about the CrystaLens. Wait seven years and there will be generic versions.
I have one implanted in my left eye. I was very nearsighted all my life, then was also farsighted in middle age, and got a cataract from steroid eyedrops that had been prescribed for an infection. Insurance paid all but a thousand bucks and my sight in that eye is now better than 20/20 at all distances in that eye, and I'm 64 years old. After wearing thick glasses since I was seven, I no longer need any kind of corrective lens.
Best money I ever spent.
mcgrewbooks.com mcgrew.info nooze.org
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Tuesday September 27 2016, @06:02PM
I hear ya, McGrew - but I'm fearful of putting myself in the hands of an eye doctor. About 15 years ago, I let a doctor talk me into bifocals. I was driving truck at the time, and I flung those things across the cab of the truck the first time something wasn't where it appeared to be. That kind of thing can cause people to assume ambient temperature! From there, things went from bad to worse.
Four visits in a row, I got glasses that simply didn't do the job. I just can't SEE through them. I stopped wearing glasses.
Now - the really weird part? I had to get glasses when I was 15 years old, to pass my driver's license eye exam. (near sighted, then) My vision stayed pretty much the same for the next 25 to 27 years, with just minor changes now and then. So, at about age 45 or so, I hadn't been wearing glasses for anything except driving. Then, only when I thought a cop might see me.
I went down to get my driver's license, and I passed the test WITHOUT any glasses!
Has my vision improved, or have the standards for the test been reduced, or WTF?
So, I'm kinda scared to let the eye doctors give me a lifetime prescription. Either my eyes are changing, or the eye doctors have become less competent, or, maybe I'm just a weird sumbitch.
And, I'm also reminded of Lasik eye surgery. It did wonders for a lot of people, but some people, it destroyed their night vision. They meet an oncoming car at night, and they are dazzled by the headlights.
At least part of my problem is, I can't find an eye doctor who will LISTEN to me, like my family doctor will listen. It's difficult to explain what I see, and what I don't see. But, I do know that after paying a couple hundred bucks for a pair of prescription glasses, and I can't see through them, I am very pissed. Very very pissed, ya know?
(Score: 2) by mcgrew on Wednesday September 28 2016, @03:42PM
The thought of any kind of surgery is scary. The biggest fear is that you'll choose the wrong doctor. I got lucky, Dr. Yea was excellent. My ex-wife, who had a different surgeon, wasn't so lucky. She had the surgery and still has to wear bifocals.
The fact that your doctor won't listen would lead me to find a different, better doctor. However, your distance vision getting better in middle age is normal, according to an eye doctor I had when I was in my twenties. My eyes had gotten worse every year since I was first diagnosed, and he told me that would continue until middle age and at that time my vision might improve slightly.
I have two things against LASIC. One is, as you and my doctor decades ago said, vision changes over time until middle age. More importantly, if you're severely nearsighted like I was (you're not), you'll still need corrective lenses after surgery.
LASIC can't do anything about age-related farsightedness. It's caused by the eye's focusing lens becoming hard, so the focusing muscles can no longer stretch it. The lens I had implanted (it replaces the eye's natural lens) is on struts, so I can focus again.
mcgrewbooks.com mcgrew.info nooze.org
(Score: 2) by takyon on Friday September 09 2016, @05:24PM
Laptop for everything, including ebooks.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by shortscreen on Friday September 09 2016, @07:01PM
I have no nostalgia for paper. It's constantly in danger of falling over, folding up, or blowing away. And then there is this weird thing where you'll be reading along and it stops abruptly... "continued on page 5." WTF?
Much easier to read something on my laptop. Then I can eat my cereal at the same time, with only the occasional interruption for scrolling (it's nice to have PgDn as an independent key rather than a combination, sadly I haven't had this since my Dell Latitude L400). And if I actually want to hold it in my hand, I can do that too. My old laptop only weighs 3 pounds, this one is slightly heavier but has a strap underneath as well.
(Score: 3, Touché) by tonyPick on Wednesday September 14 2016, @08:50AM
Oh yeah, because when I'm reading electronically I never see a sudden Click here to Subscribe to the Journal of Random Crap and read the full article!....
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday September 18 2016, @12:33PM
3:2 Chromebook pixel was great for vertical space in its day.
Today I use the 12" iPad Pro for portability. 4:3 ratio, IPS display. Extra points since it has an option for a mechanical keyboard case, but that will be a Christmas time purchase
(Score: 2) by bob_super on Wednesday September 21 2016, @04:24PM
> "continued on page 5."
In my limited experience, that's mostly a US feature, at least the part where that shows up mid-sentence. Pisses me off every time.
In every other country in which I touched a newspaper, journalists finish a paragraphs at the end of the page, even when there's more text to come.
Probably made easier by the fact that ads don't take over a third of the paper.
Between the TV and the paper, it must be a shock to traveling Americans, when they are expected to have an actual adult attention span.
(Score: 2) by Celestial on Saturday September 10 2016, @12:19AM
For fiction, e-readers like the Amazon Kindle Voyager or the Kobo Aura One are the only way to go. They're simply superior to paper... for fiction. You can store hundreds or thousands of eBooks on a small e-reader, you can change the font, you can change the font size, and you can change the word spacing. For reference books (whether it be a study Bible, a tabletop role-playing game rulebook, or a book of BSD commands), I prefer paper. I find it easier to use when I need to find something. I think it's at least partly the tactile feeling. For comic books and graphic novels, I prefer tablets. A desktop or notebook computer will do for reading comic books and graphic novels, but reading them on a tablet is just a nicer experience, IMO.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 22 2016, @01:16AM
You actually have the Aura One? It's been out of stock forever and Kobo's ridiculously cumbersome online order processing has been broken for three weeks now. I ordered once, got billed but then Kobo lost any record of my order. It took sending them my credit card statement for them to give a refund. The second attempt to purchase failed miserably in the same manner. Pray tell, where did you purchase it?
The broken nature of Kobos website and customer support make me sadly think it is a sinking ship.
(Score: 2) by mendax on Saturday September 10 2016, @08:25AM
I am currently reading Les Miserables, and the edition I am reading is a leather-bound hard cover I picked up a Costco last year. I wouldn't have it any other way. A book is not a book if it's not on paper. Now, if I were a globetrotter and had hours of time to kill on planes, I would consider bringing a large tablet.
It should be noted that in the Star Trek universe, people usually read paper books, even when they have the literature of the galaxy at hand through a computer. It was established early on that a person could read books through the ship's library computer, yet everyone has paper books. I think this was an unconscious realization at the time that people given a choice would prefer to read a traditional book than a computer screen if they have a choice.
It's really quite a simple choice: Life, Death, or Los Angeles.
(Score: 2) by Gaaark on Saturday September 10 2016, @04:05PM
I like paper books, except for when they become 1000blah pages long, in paperback: can't lay it down and read properly because the crease in the middle hides some of the words or you risk breaking the stupid glued-spine while spreading it so that you can read the middle.
Or, you read it while holding it up, and the pressure needed to spread the middle wide enough to read is hard on the fingers (maybe because of all the freaking kids on my damn lawn: "Hey, you kids! Get the F off my lawn!").
'Smaller' books are nice: beyond that, i'll have to go electronic. :(
--- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. ---Gaaark 2.0 ---
(Score: 1) by Ethanol-fueled on Saturday September 10 2016, @11:03PM
You can break even a small paper book if you read it enough. The pages start falling out of the spine, and you shuffle them back in and not always in the proper order.
Makes that interesting book a little more interesting.
(Score: 2) by mcgrew on Tuesday September 27 2016, @04:00PM
My copies of the "Foundation" books are like that, but then, they're over forty years old. I wonder if an e-book you download today will still work in forty years?
mcgrewbooks.com mcgrew.info nooze.org
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 28 2016, @03:27AM
It will if it's not filled with DRM and you can and do make backups of it on a number of devices. I don't read DRM-infested e-books.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by mendax on Saturday September 10 2016, @11:43PM
Indeed, and this is why I prefer hardcover books. My tome of Les Miz may be huge (1300 pages) and heavy, I can manage it easily enough. Incidentally, when the book was first published, it was published as a multi-volume book, making the book easier to read. This was once a common practice because books were quite expensive. By being able to buy it in volumes, the cost can be spread out over multiple pay periods. Furthermore, if the reader finds that he doesn't like the book, he doesn't have to buy the next volume.
It's really quite a simple choice: Life, Death, or Los Angeles.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 12 2016, @09:43AM
Actually it also meant better feedback for the producer. You cannot distinguish between a book that was bought, but then put away after reading maybe a tenth of it, and a book that was read from end to end. But if you have several volumes, someone buying the second volume is a good indication that he completely read and liked the first.
(Score: 2) by darnkitten on Monday September 19 2016, @12:54AM
Excepting that most of the hardcover books you find in the market today are actually paperbacks glued into a cardboard cover with a lamination that looks like cloth or leather. This fake binding actually ends up making the spines in a hardcover weaker than in a trade paperback. As a librarian, I now buy far more trade paperbacks than hardcovers, because the hardcovers fall apart faster, often within 2-3 checkouts. The St. Martins imprint is particularly bad.
To tell if you have a fake hardcover, tug on the band (the cloth strip to which the signatures are supposed to be stitched--between the spine and the pages). The bands just pull out, top and bottom--some of the publishers don't even bother to glue them in!
Naturally, there are a few publishers that still bind quality hardcovers, but industry standard is to sell a trade in a fake hardcover for half-again to double the price.
(Score: 2) by mendax on Monday September 19 2016, @01:43AM
I'm aware of these books. I actually do know something about bookbinding. I've been impressed at the quality of some hardcover books I've seen, while I'm been astounded at at the shit some publishers palm off on readers. My only concern is that the book holds up well when I read it, and nearly all of them do. If you want to find a shitty binding, get a print-on-demand book. God, some of those are terrible, but that is no surprise given how they are produced.
It's really quite a simple choice: Life, Death, or Los Angeles.
(Score: 2) by darnkitten on Monday September 19 2016, @02:18AM
Tell me about it--bindings and print quality. Unfortunately, no one will pay for the quality re-issue of many worthwhile out-of-print books, due to the existence of these "meh, good enough" copies.
That is one of my main concerns as well, though mine have to hold up through multiple readings by a variety of users, where, on the average, hardcovers don't last as well. As you say, there ARE well-bound hardcovers, but I'm constantly frustrated at the shoddy construction (I almost wrote "craftsmanship," but stopped myself in time) of hardcover popular books in particular, which, of course, is my main trade, if I want to keep my patrons happy.
-
My entirely cynical instinct is that certain publishers want their hardcovers to fall apart by the time a paperback edition is released, on the idea that the fans would buy a replacement copy that would last longer, and the others wouldn't have bought it anyway...
(Score: 2) by mendax on Monday September 19 2016, @07:31AM
I agree with you here, more or less, although I suspect it may be more to prevent the book from being sold in the used book trade. When I'm looking for a book, I always first look for a used copy before buying a new one. Paperbacks don't last long. Look at the paperbacks in public libraries. Geez! They're often quite worn out, but then there is nothing that warms the cockles of my heart more than seeing a well-loved (meaning read) book. Fortunately, most of the books I guy are produced by publishers that put better bindings on their books.
It's really quite a simple choice: Life, Death, or Los Angeles.
(Score: 2) by mcgrew on Tuesday September 27 2016, @04:05PM
Paperbacks don't last long.
Not if you loan them out, because people seldom return them. But I have paperbacks that are probably older than you are that are in fine shape, only two or three are falling apart out of many dozen.
mcgrewbooks.com mcgrew.info nooze.org
(Score: 2) by mendax on Tuesday September 27 2016, @06:36PM
Paperbacks tend to be printed on rotten acid paper that "burns" over time. The bindings may be good but the paper is not. I have some of those. And BTW I'm not exactly young anymore.
It's really quite a simple choice: Life, Death, or Los Angeles.
(Score: 2) by mcgrew on Wednesday September 28 2016, @03:45PM
Yes, I've read about that a lot and they talked about it back when I was in college. But like I said, I have paperbacks over forty years old that look like the paper is newsprint, but they're all readable. Maybe I just got lucky.
mcgrewbooks.com mcgrew.info nooze.org
(Score: 2) by darnkitten on Thursday October 06 2016, @03:27AM
I buy duplicates of my favourite loaners--I enjoy getting people to read books I love (or any book, for that matter). Probably why I am a satisfied book-pusher, errr, librarian...
(Score: 2) by VLM on Monday September 19 2016, @12:34PM
It should be noted that in the Star Trek universe
OK queue the Vivaldi here comes a star trek argument
I feel the need to point out that in cannon most star trek physical books tend to be deep emotional connection gifts like between bridge officers who've served together for years or family member gifts. Also they tend to be somewhat aspirational leather bound antique first editions not potboiler romance paperback picked up at the airport lounge.
I gave my son a (paperback) copy of the Hobbit and he likes it. So I'm all fist pump yes yes yes I did something right, now I gotta make sure he likes emacs instead of vi, else maybe he's the postman's kid who knows. Anyway there's a little feeling sorry that I got him the cheapest paperback version because for only $370 I could have gotten him the easton press leather bound gold highlighted hardcover edition, which I bet looks pretty freaking awesome.
They needed something fancy looking for the movie, of course. My most memorable paper books were most of a set of Harvard Classics of which I read them all as a kid and I don't even remember where exactly they came from or where they are now. I remember they were printed on yellowing acidic brittle paper and probably are sawdust now, decades later. Wouldn't mind buying a full new set today for the nostalgia although I have all of it and more in ebook form. That's the problem with buying the $370 edition of the Hobbit for myself (or for my kid) in that it would feel nostalgic and look cool and its not much money for an eternal work of art, but back to planet earth I'm more likely to actually read the story on my phablet and forget where on my bookshelves I filed the actual book.
Still as a movie scene you can't have Bones tell Kirk to download this awesome old ebook to his padd. So, logically Trek is full of books as gifts.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 19 2016, @05:44PM
an unconscious realization at the time that people given a choice would prefer to read a traditional book than a computer screen if they have a choice.
And yet, while some people, including you, would prefer that, some people, including me, would make the exact opposite choice.
Even if this "unconscious realization" thing made any sense in the first place (it doesn't -- SF* is notoriously bad at predicting the future, cf. Star Trek characters with a stack of PADDs on their desk, instead of flipping between different content on a single display, and it's more rational to chalk up the few successful predictions to blind luck than unconscious foofoo), this "realization" which does not, in actual fact, apply to all or even an overwhelming majority of people, is basically bullshit.
* "normal" SF, anyway. Some satirical and dystopic works seem alarmingly prescient.
(Score: 2) by Scruffy Beard 2 on Wednesday September 14 2016, @02:40AM
I suspect that many people who actually get outside once in a while probably read many signs.
Those are made from materials such as aluminium-backed reflective stickers, plastic/paper backed stickers, slate and chalk, or even LCD Televisions.
(Score: 2) by Bogsnoticus on Thursday September 15 2016, @06:38AM
Real men eat their steaks raw.
Skin it, gut it, wipe its arse, and throw it on the plate.
Genius by birth. Evil by choice.
(Score: 2) by Magic Oddball on Thursday September 15 2016, @01:34PM
I've actually just recently noticed an odd new dynamic in my reading habits, primarily since I switched to an e-reader (Kobo Glo HD) that I can easily send web articles/posts to via Pocket.
For fiction or high-quality non-fiction writing, I prefer reading on the Kobo or (if epub isn't an option) paper. If I could find a really good, in-depth Linux command reference, I'd gladly use it for that as well.
Here's the odd part: articles for the web that I'd be content to read on my computer LCD seem too pointless to hold my attention on the Kobo — but novels that are merely 'acceptable' quality on Kobo/paper can't hold my attention if read on the computer.
(Score: 2) by Absolutely.Geek on Tuesday September 20 2016, @11:55PM
At work all technical stuff is on a traditional computer screen.
At home when reading for fun my Kobo eReader is the go to device.
For casual news / propaganda often it is the cell phone screen.
For fun technical stuff at home it is my laptop screen.
It is not often that I fall back to dead tree media anymore, but it happens frequently enough that I still know what books look like :)
Don't trust the police or the government - Shihad: My mind's sedate.
(Score: 2) by Gaaark on Thursday September 22 2016, @04:28PM
Paper, rock, scissors.... Spock....
what have you?
--- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. ---Gaaark 2.0 ---
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 23 2016, @08:49AM
Screen reader on laptop for most daily stuff. Audio books professionally read for recreation.
(Score: 2) by mcgrew on Tuesday September 27 2016, @04:35PM
I almost always read books on paper, and spend time at the city library. Brought home a foot high stack of books from Worldcon. I'm in the middle of Nexus: Ascension right now.
However, I read the news "paper" (Google news, actually) on my big tablet every morning. I hardly ever turn the little tablet on unless I'm making sure my web sites don't suck too badly on various devices. If I can ever get a library e-book to work I may read the tablet more.
But I always have my phone on me, so I may do most of my reading on it.
But probably, this little Acer laptop, because I'm writing on it most of the day, and it's hard to write without reading.
But I prefer paper and don't really know why. I thought it was because I read only on paper for half my life so far, but when I handed my millennial daughter a copy of Nobots she said "My dad wrote a book! And it's a REAL book!" so it can't be the age thing,
mcgrewbooks.com mcgrew.info nooze.org
(Score: 1) by spaceman375 on Thursday September 29 2016, @11:08PM
Reading on my laptop or desktop screens for too long makes my eyes blurry. I do almost all my reading (and other computer work) on my 50" flat panel. I get to sit on the couch with a wireless keyboard and mouse, pump the audio thru a good stereo, and can read/program/etc. all day with no eye strain. Ah, comfort.
(Score: 2) by DutchUncle on Friday September 30 2016, @08:33PM
Of course I'm reading Soylent News on a computer, and lots of other stuff. A lot of my other reading is the paper version of magazines, particularly New Yorker's long pieces.
(Score: 2) by Some call me Tim on Saturday October 01 2016, @10:05PM
I read on an extra large you skinny bastiges! :-)
Questioning science is how you do science!
(Score: 2) by e_armadillo on Tuesday October 04 2016, @09:41PM
Cowboy Neal reads everything aloud for me . . .
"How are we gonna get out of here?" ... "We'll dig our way out!" ... "No, no, dig UP stupid!"