How many of us are reading exclusively in electronic format?

[Dopedangel]

I can no longer read a dead tree book. I tried felt it was to much of hassle if I can't find an book in ebook form I will not read it.

[simplyparticular]

I don't have time to shop at physical stores, and I always have an iDevice or Sony reader with me, so e has been my default for at least two years.

I've even begun buying children's ebooks, something I was pretty sure I wouldn't bother with. I blame Amazon's daily deals, combined with the iPad for displaying them.

[MrDoug]

Originally Posted by church mouse

I fell out of love with reading because I fell out of love with paper books.

My first e-reader was bought for me about 5 years ago in the hope it might re-kindle (no pun intended) my desire to read. It worked, I have never read so much as in these last five years.

Electronic only for me. I cannot bear paper books and have never even been tempted to read those which lie untouched on my library shelves.

I agree with you, my feeling are identical..
Doug

[JaneD]

I had to vote "no" because there are just some books I can't get as ebooks. But it would certainly be my preference to read only ebooks.

[Kevin8or]

This is a recurring question on the board. I shift more toward e-reader as time passes:

• fiction: electronic
• most non-fiction: electronic
• reference & how-to: paper
• news: both
• some non-fiction: paper (anything I want to modify with underlines, marginalia, and sticky bookmarks)
• some classics: if I ever get around to reading Homer or Gilgamesh, for example, I'll probably want paper

[twowheels]

Funny anecdote... subscribed to Time magazine (more like pamphlet these days) to prevent some airline miles from expired. Immediately signed up for the iPad version, which is free with the paper version. Anyhow... a few days ago I was sitting in the kitchen and saw the paper version sitting on the counter and was intrigued by the cover story. Wanting to read it I pondered getting up to get it, but decided instead to just grab my iPad (which was on the chair next to me) and just download it. Took about the same amount of time as walking across the room and was more appealing to me anyhow. :-) Now I wish there was a way that I could have subscribed to just the electronic version while still saving my airline miles. The paper version feels like such a waste of resources.

[Latinandgreek]

Originally Posted by twowheels

Funny anecdote... subscribed to Time magazine (more like pamphlet these days) to prevent some airline miles from expired. Immediately signed up for the iPad version, which is free with the paper version. Anyhow... a few days ago I was sitting in the kitchen and saw the paper version sitting on the counter and was intrigued by the cover story. Wanting to read it I pondered getting up to get it, but decided instead to just grab my iPad (which was on the chair next to me) and just download it. Took about the same amount of time as walking across the room and was more appealing to me anyhow. :-) Now I wish there was a way that I could have subscribed to just the electronic version while still saving my airline miles. The paper version feels like such a waste of resources.

I just subscribed to the electronic version of National Geographic (iPad version). It seemed like a good way to use my iTunes gift certificate. I hope that I am as happy with the electronic version as I was with the paper version. The electronic version is cheaper, and seems to have added functionality included (embedded multimedia). I really wish that I had a retina display on my iPad right now - perhaps this will give me the incentive to upgrade, my dad sure would like to inherit my iPad 2.

[SilverBear]

There are a number of angles to this issue, but the bottom line is that I have not nor never will forsake the printed page.
1] I've been around for several decades and have accumulated well over 1000 printed books. Some are novels by authors I love to re-read every 5-10 years [Heinlein, Lovecraft, Doyle, Koontz, etc, etc.] and some are reference books of various types that never have and may never be digitized. Why would I "not read them" just because I now ADDITIONALLY have the ability to acquire digital texts? Briefly: ebooks are an "and also" not an "instead of" printed books.
2] Under some conditions I would prefer a digital book to the same book in print for the same price. But it irks the crap out of me that publishers charge a similar price for ebooks, which cost next to nothing to reproduce, as they do for some printed books. I'm cranky, and I just refuse to submit to unreasonable profiteering via a new medium. If they're going to charge me the same [or similar] price, I'll take the paper version that I can BURN for heat if the power cuts off in mid-winter!
3] Unless one owns a large tablet-size ereader [I don't], there are some texts with diagrams/illustrations/tables that just don't render well on a 6" e-ink screen, so the print version is the only usable option.
4] Going back to one aspect I mentioned in #1: there are some printed books just not available in digital text form. For example, the snooty librarians at Miskatonic U. will not let me scan the Latin translation by Olaus Wormius of the Necronomicon. . .

But I do admit that I spend more time reading ebooks than printed ones!

[Latinandgreek]

Originally Posted by SilverBear

There are a number of angles to this issue, but the bottom line is that I have not nor never will forsake the printed page.
1] I've been around for several decades and have accumulated well over 1000 printed books. Some are novels by authors I love to re-read every 5-10 years [Heinlein, Lovecraft, Doyle, Koontz, etc, etc.] and some are reference books of various types that never have and may never be digitized. Why would I "not read them" just because I now ADDITIONALLY have the ability to acquire digital texts? Briefly: ebooks are an "and also" not an "instead of" printed books.
2] Under some conditions I would prefer a digital book to the same book in print for the same price. But it irks the crap out of me that publishers charge a similar price for ebooks, which cost next to nothing to reproduce, as they do for some printed books. I'm cranky, and I just refuse to submit to unreasonable profiteering via a new medium. If they're going to charge me the same [or similar] price, I'll take the paper version that I can BURN for heat if the power cuts off in mid-winter!
3] Unless one owns a large tablet-size ereader [I don't], there are some texts with diagrams/illustrations/tables that just don't render well on a 6" e-ink screen, so the print version is the only usable option.
4] Going back to one aspect I mentioned in #1: there are some printed books just not available in digital text form. For example, the snooty librarians at Miskatonic U. will not let me scan the Latin translation by Olaus Wormius of the Necronomicon. . .

But I do admit that I spend more time reading ebooks than printed ones!

I agree with everything that you've said. In fact, I find certain texts are not very pleasant to read even on a tablet-sized ebook reader.

P.s. I've found a PDF copy of the latin translation of the Necronomicon. The comments below it indicate that it may be a fake, though.

[voracious71]

I primarily use my ereaders but I still buy and read pbooks. Part of me thinks pbooks shouldn't go away completely, because what will we read after the zombie apocalypse comes and there is no more electricity, Internet etc?

[kennyc]

You can have my internet when you pry it from my cold dead fingers!

[Cataphonic]

Have been for 2 years. Still got a moving box full of gems. Don't get newspapers. That dead tree stuff, spare me.

[Gazella]

I just started to.

[captkjaneway]

For pleasure 100% electronic

(Reading that is)

[Sweetpea]

Originally Posted by afv011

Pretty much all my reading is now electronic, I haven't read a "classic" book in a long time.

The same here. And there are some books I want to read, but simply the fact that I can't find them electronically is stopping me from reading them (even though I have the books in my own library...)