Quote:
Originally Posted by ThomasMc
I also read much more in e format. It takes me WEEKS to finish a paper book, but I've already read several books in the 9 days I've had my Nook. I have been using a Nokia 770 for years as an eReader (and my desktop PC for years before that), so the format isn't new to me. Also, I'm reading at times I couldn't with a paper book, like when I'm working out on my elliptical machine. Even if I could figure out how to clamp a paper book to it, the print would be too small, and turning the pages would be a nightmare. The Nook lays there perfectly (with just a large rubber band to secure it in place), I can pump up the font size to a comfortable level, and turning the pages requires just a light swipe of my finger. That's about 5 hours a week of reading I wouldn't get if I didn't have the Nook. And I much prefer reading to mindlessly watching TV, which is what I used to have to do when working out.
Given a choice, I much prefer eReading. We do have a hardbound copy of the book I'm reading for free on my Nook @ B&N, but I'd rather wait and read it there than deal with a heavy, clumsy book.
|
What I don't see is how this is at all relevant to the test that was posted. This sounds more like a bunch of people trying to high five each other for hanging together in the face of some kind of nefarious anti-ebook propaganda.
The test
did say that subjective enjoyment with tablets was higher. Was that the part of the test you're agreeing with? (while you dismiss the rest of course)