What medium do you primarily use to consume books?

[The Big Peat]

Curse you Bick and Montero - I was going to make those jokes.

I do about 80% of my reading on my laptop.

 

[Teresa Edgerton]

For a long time I hated the thought of ebooks. But as I have mentioned elsewhere what won me over was when my husband mentioned that reading on his Kindle and increasing the font size was easier on his eyes. I had just reached a point where reading printed books was giving me eyestrain and headaches if I spent too much time with my nose in a book. As an avid reader, this was becoming increasingly distressing. Reading glasses didn't help much. Large print editions don't offer a wide enough selection.

So, kicking and screaming, I was dragged into the digital age.

 

[Alex The G and T]

Just a few years ago, i would have hollered, "Blasphemy!" over anything other than Hands-on print books.

Ah, well, with the aged eyes fading, the Kindle is looking better. As others have noted, ability to enlarge fonts and ability to increase the contrast between text and background. I find that I do most of my fiction reading in bed. The backlighting makes it easier on the eyes in the dark.

It's rather easier to manage, say, Dozois' The Year's Best... door stop in bed, on the kindle, than the 4 kilo print version.

I have never, ever, indulged in an audio book. I'm a total text snob. There's something deep in me about the connection between the printed prose and the mind.

I listen to music when I'm on the go. I was done "being-read-to" at about age 4.

 

[Robert Zwilling]

No audio books. Used to use the Kindle a lot (great for skimming), laptop occasionally, the phone once and that was that, but have now exclusively gone back to physical books.

 

[Montero]

I have never, ever, indulged in an audio book. I'm a total text snob. There's something deep in me about the connection between the printed prose and the mind.

When decorating for days on end, I can have enough music and I need a book to have something to think about. I owe audio medium a small thanks as I'd tried Lyndsey Davis's first Falco book and just bounced off it. The audiobook supply at the library was limited and I borrowed a copy of the first Falco and was won over to the series, as the actor had a voice and approach reading that eased me into the style and character, and once that had happened, I could engage with the print books. It might also have been a first book problem, but I was pleased by that. I find that it has to be a fairly straightforward and not too fast book to be able to paint at the same time. I've also been listening to free audio books produced by a not for profit with volunteers reading from out of copyright books. Librivox is their name.

 

[Teresa Edgerton]

I think of all those Victorian era novels where young family members (usually the girls) were delegated to entertain grumpy old aunts and grandmothers by reading to them for hours every day.

In my youth, I used to pity those girls, but now that I'm the grumpy old lady with failing eyesight, I sympathize with the aunts and grandmothers. Except that I have a Kindle, and don't need to impose on my relations.

 

[Elentarri]

I prefer physical books (especially for history and science books), but I also read about the same amount on my Kobo (usually mostly fiction). I also listen to audiobooks on occasion, when the narrator works for me.

PS: You did not put an option for multiple formats. So I didn't vote on your poll. I would have to choose both physical and ebooks.

 

[ablackenedrose]

Physical books all the way.

I can see why the Kindle and Nook would be excellent for many, but for me there's just something irreplaceable about the feeling of physically holding a paper novel that adds so much to my experience. It's hard to put into words why, but I've never been able to sit down and read a Kindle for hours the way I can with a physical book.

 

[Teresa Edgerton]

for me there's just something irreplaceable about the feeling of physically holding a paper novel that adds so much to my experience.

I think many of us know exactly what you mean, having experienced it ourselves not so long ago that we've forgotten it.

But when reading causes your eyes to burn and your head to ache after only a short time, then you have to find a new way to do it, even if that means giving up the tactile pleasures of holding a physical book.

(Also, I will say, at least for me, though reading on a Kindle was a bit distracting at first, I eventually got used to it, and it no longer bothered me. I was able once more to become absorbed in the book and read for many hours. Not that I am saying that others whose eyes are still keen should take the time to get used to it. What would be the point, if you don't need to? But maybe someday when you are a bleary-eyed old wreck, like some of us, it may be reassuring to know that one does adjust.)

 

[Berlyn]

when my husband mentioned that reading on his Kindle and increasing the font size was easier on his eyes

This is my primary reason for using a Kobo. I actually have pretty good eyesight (no glasses or anything), but I love being able to adjust the font face or the size on a whim.

 

[THX1138]

Paper back for me. I like the feel and the fact that I can make notes in it if need be.

Many here know of my dyslexia and how LCD screen and the likes bring havoc with it. So, a tangible book or magazine is a welcome relief but in a different way. Still need to wear my yellow filters over my specs to tame the lexia beasty!

 

[ColGray]

I almost exclusively consume via audiobook at this point. I'm not sure when the switch happened, but, the last time i read for pleasure on my kindle or via physical book was... years ago. I listen while walking the dog, working in my woodshop, doing yardwork, cleaning, etc. I've got some solid ADHD and music was always what i used to maintain focus (give my brain something to focus on not-focusing-on) (yep, i know) and books give me that same outlet.

Libby and Hoopla (through my local library) have given me access to everything I could want while being affordable and still paying the author.

 

[Orcadian]

My eyesight is very poor now and (with the exception of the occasional very short story) I consume only by listening to unabridged audiobooks. I do this mostly at my desktop when I'm 'confined to quarters' e.g. by weather, mobility issues, supervising a long, slow curry. I sometimes try to listen as an aid to sleeping but that just leads to having to repeat missed sections - and the momentum of the story is easily lost.

 

[Cosmic Geoff]

It varies - I consume library books, print books I have bought or acquired, ebooks (cheaper and space-saving), and occasionally audiobooks (to which I can listen while working in the kitchen)

However, this does instil in me a large degree of self loathing for lining Bezos pockets and not giving the author as much money for a physical book.

As a self-published author I can inform you that print costs and fees consume a large part of the price of a print-on-demand paperback, and the author may be making more royalty on the ebooks, despite a lower selling price.

 

[BAYLOR]

Paper books.

 

[paranoid marvin]

For as long as I can, I will withhold from reading ebooks.

Until a year or so ago I had not bothered with audiobooks, but having taken the plunge, selected reading from selected narrators helps to enhance the experience; when the narrator is also the author, this is doubly beneficial. Then they can help convey to the listener their horror/incredulity etc, which is more difficult with the written word.

Having said that, the majority that I have listened to have been either non-fiction (usually historical) or designed specifically for audio/radio (BBC Hobbit and Lord of the Rings, HHGTTG etc).

 

[BAYLOR]

It varies - I consume library books, print books I have bought or acquired, ebooks (cheaper and space-saving), and occasionally audiobooks (to which I can listen while working in the kitchen)

As a self-published author I can inform you that print costs and fees consume a large part of the price of a print-on-demand paperback, and the author may be making more royalty on the ebooks, despite a lower selling price.

Im not a fan of E Books , When I read book , I want ot hold it my hands and turn actual paper pages.

 

[paranoid marvin]

Im not a fan of E Books , When I read book , I want ot hold it my hands and turn actual paper pages.

What annoys me with ebooks is that they often cost more than the physical hardback. When you consider the costs that go into manufacturing a 400 page novel, combined with the transport costs and the percentage taken by the retailer, the electronic version should cost less, and certainly not more.

As an example the latest Stephen King hardback on Amazon is very reasonably priced at £12.49. Kindle is £12.99.

 

[Cosmic Geoff]

What annoys me with ebooks is that they often cost more than the physical hardback.

Define 'often'. Major publishers may set the prices of popular ebooks high, because they can, but I am acustomed to see the ebook priced far lower than the paperback. For instance, with the first random example I picked, 'Assassin' by one Andy Peloquin, the ebook is £4 and the paperback £20.01

 

[paranoid marvin]

Define 'often'. Major publishers may set the prices of popular ebooks high, because they can, but I am acustomed to see the ebook priced far lower than the paperback. For instance, with the first random example I picked, 'Assassin' by one Andy Peloquin, the ebook is £4 and the paperback £20.01

I meant newly released books. A quick look shows Patrick Stewart's new book is 50p more in hardback than ebook, Arnie's new book is 1p more in Kindle than paper.

This isn't just to do with books though. One of the reasons why it was claimed computer/video games were so expensive was because of the cost to create the media (disc/cassette/cartridge), transportation and then the percentage taken by the retailer. When they became downloadable... the price didn't come down.

I may be old fashioned, but it makes no sense to me that a large hardback book should cost the same - or more - than a digital download, that has no tangible value or re-saleability. Add to that price of the medium used to play the download, and the disparity becomes wider.