Softcover vrs HardCover

[Fe 26]

I hate softcover books. I hate how little they are, how the binding screws up so quick, how easily they are mested up and how they dry out my fingers.

[Jeremy]

I usually go with hardcover, since they're usually printed on larger-sized paper, which helps me see the text better.

[Critical Overdrive]

I agree with you IronPlanet, but I prefer softcover books because their smaller size makes it more convenient when you're on the move.

[icarusfall]

All about the hard-cover. I'm also a packaging whore so you have to factor that in as well. The point is: Hard-cover books don't get bent in half!

[Brisco Bold]

Same as above: Hardcover. Hardcover book's spines don't bend and they can take a beating (though I try to take excellent care of my books). The soft-cover spine for Mien Kempf is struggling now that I'm half-way through it.

[Fe 26]

I also like how the stacks of unread hardbacks make my room look. Stupid softcovers don't stack as well, and are easy to lose.

[Diff-chan]

Softcover costs less. So it wins.

However, in a library, I prefer hardcover. Not coincidentally, thats what most books are in the library.

[YellerDog]

Hardcover, for sure. I like keeping my books.

[Kidnemo]

I like 'em both I suppose.

The feeling of a nice, old, "worn in", softcover book is just good stuff.

[Omni]

I thought this thread said "Softcore vs. Hardcore."

My interest has all but faded.