> It's written to be read from one end to the other. But you wrote: > Finding content in it that wasn't a chapter title included going to a glossary with a t

> It's written to be read from one end to the other. But you wrote: > Finding content in it that wasn't a chapter title included going to a glossary with a ton of page numbers, and flipping back and forth constantly (see comment about sticky pages) to see if page N was the one I was looking for. So either you read it from one end to the other or you used it as reference material (which "(looking) to see if page N was the one I was looking for." strongly indicates). Frankly, I am not interested in trying to convince you of anything. There are substantial evidences that paper and e-books have different strengths and all you are saying is that the strength I wrote about are wrong because you don't feel like it and your 1200 page monster should be the only point of data to refute what you don't want to agree with. All the while asking for sources I gave in one of the first post, which tells me you take only what you want from the conversation. Not interested.