The e-book Vs. Physical Book Debate

There seems to be three separate preferences here. There are those that are devoted e-book users, owning only a e-book, and reading only by e-book. Then there are the devoted physical book lovers, owning and reading only the physical thing. There is also the mix group, those who own and read both.

Which majority are you?

I am the devoted lover of the physical book. I have not, nor will I ever, own a e-book. I can see their usefulness, and why people use them, and like them. They are great for people that have a hard time reading due to eyesight, as you can increase the font format as much as is needed for you to be comfortable. They are awesome for traveling, as you can carry literally hundreds of books in one small, lightweight device. Free downloadable books are also available, especially the classics. But nothing, absolutely nothing, compares to the real thing in my opinion. I like to feel the weight of the book in my hands. A finely crafted book is a joy to handle, and you won't get that with a e-book. I also like to physically turn the pages, and a e-book can never replicate the smell of a real book. The feeling of a book, the smell of a book, you just won't have that with a e-book, and I find that sad. We have lost something with the invention of the e-book.

Now people will argue that e-books hold a advantage over the real deal. Real books require paper to exist, therefore trees being destroyed to create them, while e-books do not. Yessssss, but e-books require batteries and need to be charged ... they do also leave a footprint. And speaking of batteries, batteries die. Real books don't run on batteries. And yes, you can store literally hundreds of books on this device, download books cheaper then the physical book typically costs, and even get free downloadable books, but they aren't real. They don't actually exist other then on that device. And if the device crashes, or breaks, your books are gone.

Does you e-book look like this? I didn't think so ...