What I foud curious in my brief browse there was (aside from the unnecessary duplication of lousybookcovers images) the amount of criticism of professionally produced book covers. That made for an interesting comparison I thought. Of course one difference is that professional covers do (mostly) at least look like book covers rather than a page left on the coffee table while the kids had their crayons out, but even so, it demonstrates how subjective some of this is. For example the resurrected pulp fiction covers were, I thought, highly appropriate as covers for the resurrected pulp fiction. The fact that this blogger thought they looked wrong on his modern ereader is surely just a matter of preference, and hardly worthy of comment except by someone holding themselves up as a paragon of good taste - for which I found no evidence.