Bests & Worsts Reviews from Amazon

OK. First, I have to say I really like Popular Science magazine. It's lightweight, undemanding reading that's just good fun after a hard day (they call themselves "PopSci" for a reason - it's like pop music but for science topics - fun but contains little real substance), and I've subscribed to it for many years. I recently purchased a Kindle Fire so that I could read this and some other magazines (as well as other materials) during my long daily train commute without having to lug around the paper copies. Here's where I'm having some cognitive dissonance: An annual subscription to the paper version is a mere paltry $7. Great deal! The Kindle version is $1.99 an issue, or nearly $24 per year. This bears repeating - $7 for a year's worth of physical copies made of physical paper from physical trees (or wherever physical), physically mailed to my physical mailbox by a physical mail carrier via physical trucks, airplanes, cars, whatever - with physical mailing costs included, whereas the electronic version (no mailing, no trees, no physical anything) costs three and one half times that - for a string of electrons that costs virtually nothing to shoot over to my (digital) door. What am I missing here? It sounds like it's specifically designed to abuse people who want cool electronic versions of stuff just for the sake of having cool electronic versions of stuff, and Amazon/Popular Science has decided to capitalize on that - to the extreme. I like cool digital stuff just like the next guy. And although I actually PREFER the paper versions of magazines, I thought it might be a little more convenient (and cool) to travel with electrons vs. physical paper - and I'm certainly willing to pay a modest surcharge for the convenience of doing so (the key word here is "modest"). Well, not THAT much I'm not. I really like the basic functionality of the Kindle Fire and its potential, and certainly liked its very reasonable purchase price when compared to similar products out there. I've read that Amazon is selling them at a loss with the intent of making it back through content sales and I basically don't have a problem with that. It's good marketing. But am I alone thinking that this is a bit (read: a LOT) over the top? Maybe it's just me, but . . . this strikes me as just plain nuts! So, while I have been known to do nutty stuff, I'm not THIS nutty. Unfortunately, it seems I will have to continue to do my part to furthering the logging and paper industries and subsidizing the U.S. Postal Service. I can find no sane reason to go the digital route on this product. I give 4 stars for the magazine in general; 1 star for the truly absurdly abusive pricing of this digital version. Sheesh!