[zippergz]

I find that an eInk Kindle is "close enough" to a paper book in terms of immersion for me. But reading on my iPad (or even worse, computer) definitely is not. I get notifications, there's always the temptation to jump out and "just check email," etc. With the Kindle there is no distraction, and for me that seems to be more important than the tactile experience of a printed book (though I do still enjoy printed books).

[eric_h]

Personally I've found that the loss of one spatial dimension in the transition from paper to ebook actually makes the book less engaging and more difficult to retain details.

I think (again, my personal experience) that reading while also having a tactile sense of where I am in the book (say ~20% of the way through) makes it easier to remember smaller details; perhaps the physical book helps my brain create a sort of "memory castle" that a little progress bar on an ebook does not.

One example: I read all but the latest Game of Thrones books in paperback (well before the HBO show was even announced). I devoured them and was able to keep track of all the families/storylines without a problem or a second thought. I tried to read the latest one as an ebook and I found I'd have forgotten details of various storylines between reading sessions. I ultimately never finished it and I'm just watching the TV show now :|

Now when I want to read a book, I buy a book - I just can't get into ebooks. Sure, it's not as convenient, but it also doesn't need to be plugged in, ever.

[eric_h]

I'd also add that ever since I figured this out I've wanted to invent an ebook reader that actually gave you a third dimension, multiple (say ~20) eink pages with perhaps an additional tactile slider on the binding as you progress through the book.

Maybe it'll become feasible as the price for flexible eink displays drops.

[zippergz]

That's a very interesting observation. It hadn't occurred to me before, but I do think there's some truth in that for me as well.