I have limited shelf space so I'd rather buy paperbacks 'cause they will take up less space. Yes, my books are there for aesthetic reasons but above all, they'r

I have limited shelf space so I'd rather buy paperbacks 'cause they will take up less space. Yes, my books are there for aesthetic reasons but above all, they're in my shelves because I want to have access to them whenever I want to read them. The more I can cram my shelves, the better, presentation be damned. Paperbacks are also easier to just read. I don't manhandle my books but I often read in unconventional positions: while in a crowded bus, or while laying down on my back before I sleep. It's just difficult to handle hardbacks in these situations. The "give" of a paperback's cover makes it ergonomic. Being cheaper is a plus for my CS books too. Hardbound original versions are indeed prettier, maybe even easier to the eyes due to the paper. But for a book I would use in a semester and consult sparingly thereafter, the price of an original is unjustifiable. I'd make an exception for Biology books where color is often important to the diagram. But I don't really have strong feelings on this as I did not major in Biology. > Paperback are not suitable for repeated readings Paperbacks wear and tear faster than hardbounds but to say they are not suitable for repeated readings is just exaggeration. Heck, my local library stocks up on paperbacks. If any book experiences repeated readings, it's got to be those in the library. Also, from personal experience, wrapping your paperbacks in good enough plastic cover makes it last longer. I've "repaired" old paperbacks whose covers are all but ruined by reinforcing the weathered covers with index cards and thick plastic cover. > really high-quality paperback, if there was one, would be prisewise on par with a hardcover anyway Again, I disagree. For, say, a Harper Collins fiction the price difference between a paperback and a hardcover could range from anywhere to 40%-70% mark down. I specifically cite Harper Collins (and subsidiaries) because I'm really hard pressed to find a significant difference between their hardbounds and paperbacks. Obviously, the size and the binding differs (duh!) but other than that everything compares: the quality of the paper, the legibility of the print, the illustrations, etc.