3 ms·
I would disagree strongly with this. :) The e-reader UI is generally so much better than paper, if a book is not available for kindle, I'll usually find somet
by haroldp 2y ago
I would disagree strongly with this. :)
The e-reader UI is generally so much better than paper, if a book is not available for kindle, I'll usually find something else to read. Pale Fire is a special case book where you want two have bookmarks where you are currently working. I read Chuck Palahniuk's Diary on paper, and an e-reader would definitely have ruined it.
Technical books with a lot of charts, diagrams, monospaced code examples, etc can highlight the weaknesses of e-readers. PDFs are almost always better on a tablet.
But for like, words-in-a-row novels that don't mind being re-wrapped, there is no comparison, for me. e-Reader every time.
- vundercind 2y agoYes, they are fine for books with no features but body text and no important formatting or layout, and that the reader progresses through entirely linearly. Those are the sorts of books they’re best-suited to.
- haroldp 2y ago> Those are the sorts of books they’re best-suited to. Which is 98% of novels. e-Readers are even great for books with lots of end notes or foot notes. It's great for flipping between those. I had no problem reading Infinite Jest, for example. I guess if my copy of Pale Fire had hyperlinked all the poem line mentions, I would have been fine. :) Now I'm wondering if I could write a quick script to annotate mine thusly...
- adammarples 2y agoIe. 99% of fiction books