I prefer cans. My glass recycling box will only hold 20-30 bottles whereas my general recycling bin could hold hundreds of cans!
I’ll second what MrSquishy said, if you can’t smell it you’re not getting the full taste. Use a glass when possible.
That’s because Lucas makes your refrigerators. 
I knew I guy who liked ‘beer cans with benefits’. He cut himself very badly.
Former brewery Quality Assurance Manager checking in.
The main enemy of packaged beer isn’t light, it’s oxygen. Oxygen causes oxidation, it doesn’t taste good and it gets worse over time. Purging bottles of air before, during, and after filling is less effective at removing oxygen than the canning process.
I’ve run the tests on dissolved oxygen levels and cans beat bottles every time. The fact that cans also keep out 100% of beer’s second enemy, light, makes them even more attractive from a quality standpoint.
Most event venues (concerts, sports, conventions) will not serve beer in glass bottles because they don’t want the liability of broken glass. There’s some serious money to be made in those venues. And people will buy them. For $11 (I’m looking at you, Formula One racing).
For that subset of beer drinkers who smash the empties on their forehead - bottles are too painful.
Yeah, not funny at all, but thanks.
Funny to me, and everyone I know. But thanks, you make this MB awesome, or something…
Meh… come back when you’ve lost someone to a drunk driver and tell us how awesome it is, or something…
This is an excellent answer but I still prefer drinking out of a bottle than a can if not in a glass. Main driver of can vs bottle is if the beer I am buying is packaged one way or the other. Most do bottles.
You win , no jokes ever again. Nothing is ever funny. Someone died.
Aren’t we in GQ?
Exactly.
And the GQ aspect has been answered moderately well.
The UV issue seems to be of theoretical relevance but reality is that amber glass (which filters UV light pretty damn well), the cardboard box, being stacked behind other cases and inside crates, and only indoor lighting exposure, non-intense at that, makes it a fairly bullshit claim.
The oxygen issue seems to be more plausible. It likely matters how long it is being stored and what type of beer. Some are meant to have some oxidation (see “old ales”). For most others I highly doubt too many are keeping their beers around long enough for it be a major issue even to the most discriminating taste palate, which I highly doubt many who post here have. Aesthetics matter to some also. Looking for blinded taste tests I find mixed results. Which tastes better is a matter of YMMV.
Cans vs bottles seems to be more of hipster pretentious posturing than any real impact.
Moderator Note
I’m not going to bother quoting all of the off-topic posts here, but it should be pretty obvious. This is in GQ, so let’s stick to the factual aspects of the topic, please.
When it comes to consumer preferences perception is reality.
They usually are, but that’s not insulation it’s low emissivity.
You are partially right, if that’s where the beer was consumed - in the store or bar. But it isn’t. The beer gets treated abysmally by the consumer, who then blames the brewer for the skunkiness, etc. Amber glass is good, but there are numerous beers packaged in green bottles. On a sunny day at the beach those beers can skunk in your hand*. We won’t even mention Corona, which I swear is brewed skunked.
-
- Unless you drink them properly, which is in one big gulp!