>>11346572Depends on the size of the book, personally. Thin books (say, <200 pages) don't work too well in hardback. They're better as paperbacks.
Very large books (maybe >800 pages) really need to be a hardback, because a paperback that fat and heavy gets beat to shit very fast.
In the middle, either is fine.
A lot of hardbacks are also really, really shit quality nowadays, which is a factor sadly. Ordering Springer hardbacks from Amazon is pretty much just pissing money away since what you receive is a shiny plasticky print-on-demand piece of trash with an Elmer's glue binding that shatters as soon as you open it and literally falls apart in two weeks of use. The paperbacks are POD shit too but the quality isn't so intolerably bad.
>>11346854I hate myself a little for blowing so much money on books when logically speaking it's a waste since I can get them for free, but I can't help it. I don't enjoy studying from pdfs on a screen at all, and if I'm gonna spend 40 bucks and waste my time printing out and binding together a PDF I may as well just spend 70 and get a real version.
