Re: Out-of-print math books: An Update
- From: Angus Rodgers <twirlip@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 06 Oct 2008 18:22:55 +0100
On 6 Oct 2008 17:14:35 GMT, Bart Goddard
<goddardbe@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Ben Pfaff <blp@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in
news:87y711y950.fsf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx:
herbzet <herbzet@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
Bill Dubuque wrote:
So, seriously, why do you prefer paper media, which lack all these
capabilities and many more?
1) Don't need batteries.
2) Won't break if dropped.
3) Recognizable from their cover.
4) Like the smell.
5) Much more convenient for reading in bed.
6) Don't take up valuable on-screen real estate.
7) Can snap shut with satisfying "whump" when idiot
won't quit interrupting you while you're trying to read.
8) Can "whump" idiot's head solidly when he doesn't get
the hint above.
9) Can read on airplane during take-off and landing
(unless idiot insists on talking to you.)
10) Often the mere sight of a _book_ will drive idiots off.
(It messes with their Ipods or something.)
11) Devoid of "OMG" and "UR" and other such idiot-speak.
12) I like leather.
13) There is space in the margins to write "I have a marvellous
proof of this theorem", and other useful annotations (in pencil,
of course).
--
Angus Rodgers
(twirlip@ eats spam; reply to angusrod@)
Contains mild peril
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Out-of-print math books: An Update
- From: Bill Dubuque
- Re: Out-of-print math books: An Update
- Prev by Date: Re: > Eigenvalue problem for sufficiently well-behaved functions
- Next by Date: Re: -- rational distances
- Previous by thread: Re: Out-of-print math books: An Update
- Next by thread: Re: Out-of-print math books: An Update
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
