a Hard back copy of the lord of the rings will kill a zombie....your argument is invalided.
Cyclops ad portas
I'm almost entirely digital, these days. It's just too convenient.
If I want an archival copy, I go hardback, but I don't have the space for many more physical items.
I am moving toward digital, reading a lot more in this format. Otherwise, it is usually used paperbacks or the rare hardback.
This signature will self-destruct in five seconds...
I am mostly digital but I prefer hardback books. My kindle is just much easier to take with me to places. For the books that I would like to re-read, I go ahead and buy them in hardback. That way if I have to go somewhere I can't take my kindle, I have a back up.
Whatever I can get cheapest. But since most of what I'm reading lately are paperback originals there's that.
Paperback books are more comfortable to deal with when I read.
I view hardbacks as something of a luxury (in a good sense), because they're usually more expensive and need more shelf space. But some titles just beg the best edition possible.
The decline and fall of the Roman empire in softcover? Nevah!
I tend to split superhero comics fans into "People who like Krypto" and "People who don't like Krypto."
Basically, if you miss the wonder of a dog flying around in a little Superman cape, you're in the wrong hobby.
I buy ebooks and paperbacks but when I really enjoy something I'll splurge for the hardcover upgrade. I also like to get the hardcover for series that I enjoy and when I cannot wait for the paperback version to be released.
I tend to go for paperbacks when possible because they're usually cheaper and take up less space. If I lived on the mansion on the hill with a library on the second floor in addition to my book-lined study I'd probably have all the hardcovers I could find.
The last few years I even find myself going for the pocket-size rather than trade paperback when there's a choice, again for reasons of space. Plus they're easier to carry around.