Apple rumored to announce newspaper subscription plan for iPad

2

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 42
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Bancho View Post


    How do you qualify "looooonnnnngggggg".



    "Well prior to the release of the iPad" is what I meant.
  • Reply 22 of 42
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Newtron View Post


    Anything for a buck, eh?



    And if *I* had a buck for every useless post you make...
  • Reply 23 of 42
    Well they don't need to use iAd. The other 30% cut is a good deal when it includes distribution, but for in-app purchases, the periodical needs to handle their own distribution. It would make sense to do a slight discount for that. The hard part is making it so developers don't take advantage of such a discount.
  • Reply 24 of 42
    Good to see you guys can bicker without me.



    I'm curious what kind of experience I might have reading the paper on the iPad. What will be the difference? The iPad has to offer something more to be truly magical and revolutionary. Otherwise I'm doing the same thing I always have without killing a tree, which isn't a bad thing.
  • Reply 25 of 42
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Bancho View Post


    I like this approach better. I don't want a separate app for each subscription to a newspaper (or magazine for that matter).



    Where are you getting that?
  • Reply 26 of 42
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by lazy-i.com View Post


    This is going to sound weird, but when I page through my copy of the Sunday NYT, I'm as interested in the advertising as I am in the articles (in some cases, moreso). I'm curious if the model for iPad newspapers will better integrate the advertising for freaks like me?



    Why would that sound weird? People get paid a lot of money to make you interested in their ads.
  • Reply 27 of 42
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post


    I don't think ePub is up to this task. Either Apple needs a new, more feature rich ebook format, or textbooks are going to be released as apps, like the Algebra textbook that's either out or coming out soon.



    I would have thought so, but they are building atop it nicely. Apple has added quite a few multimedia and annotation enhancements to iBooks since its unveiling.



    Who knows, maybe this new rumoured app in iLife X is a way of making your own ePUB based texts with that multimedia flare that is right up Apple?s alley, and will help secure their iBookstore as the premier eBook store on the market.
  • Reply 28 of 42
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by solipsism View Post


    I would have thought so, but they are building atop it nicely. Apple has added quite a few multimedia and annotation enhancements to iBooks since its unveiling.



    Who knows, maybe this new rumoured app in iLife X is a way of making your own ePUB based texts with that multimedia flare that is right up Apple?s alley, and will help secure their iBookstore as the premier eBook store on the market.



    Well, then it's not ePub, it's some new format, ePub+, if you will.



    On the other hand, some textbooks might be better off as a standalone app. For example the HMH Fuse: Algebra 1 app, which apparently includes calculators, scratchpads, etc. For paper textbook content in ebook format, it's probably OK, but ebook formats will probably always limit the possibilities of what can be done with textbooks.



    BTW, they've already added ePub support to Pages, so I doubt they'll create a whole new app for that, just extend what Pages can do with ePub documents.
  • Reply 29 of 42
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by melgross View Post


    The paper subscription of the NY Times, including the Sunday edition is $600 a year. What do you think the same content as a digital subscription is worth, giving that about 35% is printing and distribution?



    Actually I think my problem is with the fact that you have to subscribe (my initial comment was not very clear on this matter).



    I used to take The Times during the week only if I was taking a train journey, and I'd take the Saturday Times most weeks and the Sunday Times occasionally. When I look at what I was spending and looking at the $17 per month the app is, it actually doesn't seem that bad, given I would have been spending about GBP5 per week (so about $7.50 per week). That said, the app doesn't include the Sunday edition.



    I guess really it becomes a mindset issue for me. Even though it would probably cost me more, I'm happier with the idea of being able to buy the newspaper for a fair daily rate, and given electronically they don't have print and distribution costs and they should be able to provide much more targeted (and hence more lucrative ads), I'd like to see the option to be able to buy the daily paper for $1 per issue and the weekend editions for $2.



    I know my issues aren't consistent, since the subscription actually works out a lot cheaper than that, but as I say, it's a mindset I'm going to struggle to overcome.
  • Reply 30 of 42
    banchobancho Posts: 1,517member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Porchland View Post


    Where are you getting that?



    From the article:

    "They had hoped to offer app editions as part of subscription bundles that include print versions of the paper," the report said. "Instead, they must use Apple as an intermediary with subscribers."



    I assume they all wanted to offer a separate app for their specific product. Having to have separate apps for each newspaper/magazine I want to subscribe to offers a poor experience and excessive clutter. I'm hoping that with Apple as an intermediary, the user experience can be improved/standardized.



    If I'm misreading this then I apologize.
  • Reply 31 of 42
    Why buy a subscription when a lot of newspapers have their content for free on their site?
  • Reply 32 of 42
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 31,981member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Bancho View Post


    From the article:

    "They had hoped to offer app editions as part of subscription bundles that include print versions of the paper," the report said. "Instead, they must use Apple as an intermediary with subscribers."



    I assume they all wanted to offer a separate app for their specific product. Having to have separate apps for each newspaper/magazine I want to subscribe to offers a poor experience and excessive clutter. I'm hoping that with Apple as an intermediary, the user experience can be improved/standardized.



    If I'm misreading this then I apologize.



    I have no problem with separate apps per journal. I have a lot now, and it works out fine. When we get folders in November, it will be easy to put all the new related apps inside. We will still have access to many of the news sites through the browser as well, so it seems fine to me.



    The problem with it all being in one app is that they will likely all look the same. While that may seem to be a good idea, it isn't. The only way we'll see advances in the way these are presented, is if they all do what they think is best, and over time, as what happened to the internet itself, it will settle out. Competition will ensure an evolution rather quickly.



    We saw this with internet stores. The early ones were very bad. but over time, they became very good. Now there is a rare site that doesn't work pretty well. But if at the beginning, one format and methodology was decided upon for all, it would still be pretty bad, as everyone would squabble over the slightest change.
  • Reply 33 of 42
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 31,981member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by majortom1981 View Post


    Why buy a subscription when a lot of newspapers have their content for free on their site?



    A lot don't, and more are talking about going the subscription way. The WSJ has done it for years, and the NY Times will be doing it soon. Others have also said that they are working on it.



    It's a matter of whether you will want them or not. Some will, and some won't.
  • Reply 34 of 42
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post


    Well, then it's not ePub, it's some new format, ePub+, if you will.



    Maybe i wasn?t clear. Apple used EPUB for the base of iBooks, but they added to it, have continually added to it. Not to EPUB, but to their own format that is built atop EPUB.
  • Reply 35 of 42
    banchobancho Posts: 1,517member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by melgross View Post


    I have no problem with separate apps per journal. I have a lot now, and it works out fine. When we get folders in November, it will be easy to put all the new related apps inside. We will still have access to many of the news sites through the browser as well, so it seems fine to me.



    The problem with it all being in one app is that they will likely all look the same. While that may seem to be a good idea, it isn't. The only way we'll see advances in the way these are presented, is if they all do what they think is best, and over time, as what happened to the internet itself, it will settle out. Competition will ensure an evolution rather quickly.



    We saw this with internet stores. The early ones were very bad. but over time, they became very good. Now there is a rare site that doesn't work pretty well. But if at the beginning, one format and methodology was decided upon for all, it would still be pretty bad, as everyone would squabble over the slightest change.



    I guess it depends. I'm used to using news reader apps now and I like what they offer. A single purpose app for delivering content from a single source will need to be really well done to lure me in.
  • Reply 36 of 42
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by PaulMJohnson View Post


    Actually I think my problem is with the fact that you have to subscribe (my initial comment was not very clear on this matter).



    I used to take The Times during the week only if I was taking a train journey, and I'd take the Saturday Times most weeks and the Sunday Times occasionally. When I look at what I was spending and looking at the $17 per month the app is, it actually doesn't seem that bad, given I would have been spending about GBP5 per week (so about $7.50 per week). That said, the app doesn't include the Sunday edition.



    I guess really it becomes a mindset issue for me. Even though it would probably cost me more, I'm happier with the idea of being able to buy the newspaper for a fair daily rate, and given electronically they don't have print and distribution costs and they should be able to provide much more targeted (and hence more lucrative ads), I'd like to see the option to be able to buy the daily paper for $1 per issue and the weekend editions for $2.



    I know my issues aren't consistent, since the subscription actually works out a lot cheaper than that, but as I say, it's a mindset I'm going to struggle to overcome.



    No printing and little distribution costs, true, but transaction costs for certain. The newspapers aren't going to want to pay the banking costs for millions of tiny transactions every day (yes, I realize Apple does this in the iTMS). The newsstand price of my daily paper is $0.75 ($24.00 a month delivered). The e-edition should arguably be significantly less expensive or risk not being very appealing.
  • Reply 37 of 42
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 31,981member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Dr Millmoss View Post


    No printing and little distribution costs, true, but transaction costs for certain. The newspapers aren't going to want to pay the banking costs for millions of tiny transactions every day (yes, I realize Apple does this in the iTMS). The newsstand price of my daily paper is $0.75 ($24.00 a month delivered). The e-edition should arguably be significantly less expensive or risk not being very appealing.



    The problem for the papers is that so far, the digital editions have far advertising as well. The biggest source of Ads come from local stores, want ads, and co-op ads. That's all missing. That's got to be paid for. With Apple demanding 40% of the Ad money, it's going to be tough.
  • Reply 38 of 42
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by solipsism View Post


    Maybe i wasn?t clear. Apple used EPUB for the base of iBooks, but they added to it, have continually added to it. Not to EPUB, but to their own format that is built atop EPUB.



    Yeah, they can always build on the format to add new things, but there will still be cases where a textbook is better as an app, I think, because then you are free to add features that go beyond whatever the format is. If it's just convert this textbook to an ebook, ePub is fine, but, if you want to make it more than that, I'm not so sure.
  • Reply 39 of 42
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by melgross View Post


    The problem for the papers is that so far, the digital editions have far advertising as well. The biggest source of Ads come from local stores, want ads, and co-op ads. That's all missing. That's got to be paid for. With Apple demanding 40% of the Ad money, it's going to be tough.



    That's the rate through iAd, correct? I don't see iAd working for newspapers, for the reasons you state. Frankly I'd be pretty happy with a PDF facsimile of the print edition, ads and all, and I'd imagine that the newspapers would be happy delivering this as well.
  • Reply 40 of 42
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 31,981member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Dr Millmoss View Post


    That's the rate through iAd, correct? I don't see iAd working for newspapers, for the reasons you state. Frankly I'd be pretty happy with a PDF facsimile of the print edition, ads and all, and I'd imagine that the newspapers would be happy delivering this as well.



    There should be some way to do this without Apple stuffing so much of the pie down their throat. I don't like the idea that they are trying to monetize EVERYTHING. I really don't blame magazine and newspaper publishers for being wary.
Sign In or Register to comment.