If you're just sitting and eating a meal, I think a no-back stool is fine. If any longer than that, I prefer a back. We have backs on ours and I sit there all the time to eat or work on the computer. I wouldn't be able to sit there long without a back.

If you have a lot of people over and they are all standing around the island talking or drinking or whatever, chances are someone is going to pull out a stool anyway, so my vote is with the backs.

Yes, I recently donated my leather, like new ,swivel no back barstools to charity & replaced them with stools with backs. So much more comfortable.

What is the highest that the back can be and still slide under your counter? It's probably around 34-inches, but you'd have to know exactly.

IMO you almost always sit at a counter forward with elbows on the counter but I have Onda stoold from DWR that have a very small back and seems to be just right for a bit of support and they slide under my overhang

I have been considering this same thing. Another plus to being able to push them under is that we frequently use our island for buffets. However, I noticed at a friend's house the other day that unless your stools are very shallow they won't fit completely under, which makes me wonder how much difference a back makes. I still haven't decided...good luck with your decision.

I don't have bar stools, but my granddaughter does. She advocates stools with backs and no arms. She said it is much easier to get in and of the stools without arms.

depends on whom you ask. I'd really suffer with backless chairs. Now. I can't normally use them even for short period of time, and when our friends who have this very contemporary sleek style and backless chairs rounfd their big island, entertain, I sit there and really concentrate on continuing to sit vs falling, you know:) While I'm sure it's okay for them. But I bet they use their dining table w/normal chairs with backs when they alone or have just a couple guests. I know because I was such lone guest for a couple times. The chairs are still very sleek and modern but have backs.

Yes, to back, but no to island stools in general. I much prefer a table with a chair. Islands get less and less comfortable as one ages.

Absolutely agree with you Anglophilia. I have never seen the reason to have an "island" with a bar for eating. The table and chairs are much more civilized to my way of thinking.

Even if you don’t eat at the island, it’s nice to have stools. My husband will frequently sit at the island so we can chat while I’m cooking or vice versa.

All great comments! Yes, we eat at our dining room table every night and are looking forward to having people hang out around our new island when we entertain. I personally love to have coffee in the morning at an island and am looking forward to it. As I look for stools, I will definitely find some with a back.

I grew up using backless stools for quick family meals. We had a dining room used for dinner frequently, but breakfast, lunch and some quick dinners were at the counter. Some good friends have backless stools and we'll sit and chat in them for hours. I'm debating what to select for my own kitchen. I think a back would be more comfortable, but sometimes I find stools with backs a little difficult to get into properly since you can't as easily stand on the floor and scootch the stool up like you would a chair.