Though I won't subscribe to Murdoch's rag, I think Apple is just playing ball with whoever has the interest and motivation. If it is successful, more legitimate journals will come on board too. I hope.
That's a pretty good read (pun intended).
A while back there was a SJ preso showing featured new Podcasts -- The Rush Limbaugh Podcast was front and center.
I don't see how this would be better or even much different than say "The Times" newspaper app that I've had on my iPad since the end of May. Not sure if it's available in the US Apple store but the Times app has gone from strength to strength and only cost £8 a month for al of their daily editions (excluding the Sunday Times).
A while back there was a SJ preso showing featured new Podcasts -- The Rush Limbaugh Podcast was front and center.
Steve knows that intelligent and educated people are already buying Apple products. Putting Limbaugh front and center is Steve's attempt to lure the ignorant ones to the Apple way.
Wow, all you pol are obviously left wing. I'm not to get in political discussion with all of you because this isn't the place to post it. This is about apple tech, not politics. Yes I'm right wing but again, this isn't an open bashing forum.
Building a site that only works with Apple iPads is about as stupid an idea as building a highway on which only Lexus LS sedans can travel. It's going to be a tiny audience, at best. In the end it will contain only news slanted to what the site owners think that iPad owners want to read and will contain less and less information about the real world. Talk about living in a bubble ...
Building a site that only works with Apple iPads is about as stupid an idea as building a highway on which only Lexus LS sedans can travel. It's going to be a tiny audience, at best. In the end it will contain only news slanted to what the site owners think that iPad owners want to read and will contain less and less information about the real world. Talk about living in a bubble ...
Don't know about a highway for only Lexus LS sedans, but a city street for only Lexus LS sedans that can parallel park themselves sounds good. Maybe the daily newspaper for iPads only makes sense. Aren't there already 14,000,000 sold today, maybe half in big newspaper reading cities and another 45,000,000 to be sold in 2011? That's quite a few subscribers at 99¢ per week.
Wow, all you pol are obviously left wing. I'm not to get in political discussion with all of you because this isn't the place to post it. This is about apple tech, not politics. Yes I'm right wing but again, this isn't an open bashing forum.
When the two meet, what's wrong with discussing the implications of such a union?
I would never pay $1.00 a week to read Murdoch's trash, but I would pay $10.00 a week to read the NYT's, or The Washington Post, or another mainstream paper.
perhaps it will come with a pre-loaded glenn beck or palin screen-saver as well.- this is all about politics, now you cant escape this right wing crap. This is a sad day for apple.
perhaps it will come with a pre-loaded glenn beck or palin screen-saver as well.- this is all about politics, now you cant escape this right wing crap. This is a sad day for apple.
And a new app - Helicoptor Hunting with Sarah Palin. Different expansion packs for different species - wolves, moose, and her favourite: illegal aliens!
I don't see how this would be better or even much different than say "The Times" newspaper app that I've had on my iPad since the end of May. Not sure if it's available in the US Apple store but the Times app has gone from strength to strength and only cost £8 a month for al of their daily editions (excluding the Sunday Times).
No comment of the political issues, as I am not from the US. Just, we have big media moguls in most places of the world, even open censorship in some countries... this has not stopped people from seeking better information elsewhere. Even in places like China or Iran... you would be surprised to see how well informed a lot of people are. I also do not see, how an iPad-only paper would take any freedom away at all. We have hundreds of radio and TV stations that only people with enough money can enjoy... the price of an iPad is roughly equivalent to 6 months of cable TV in most places. I do not see a disaster here, the vast majority of articles consists of rewritten agency stuff and press releases, you can find exactly the same information in thousands of places.
If Apple really wants to make an iPad app for newspapers and magazines, they need newspaper and magazine know-how. They do not have that. Even if the NYT is SJs favorite paper, they are still somehow strapped to contracts with Amazon (resulting in the "Editor's Choice" mess that sent SJ right through the roof) and might not have the financial resources to dedicate ample staff to such a project. Other large publishers, like Conde Nast, are obviously in bed with Adobe and unwilling to look for alternative means... Long story short: Apple needed somebody with the know-how, the money and the dedication required. If the rumor is true at all, I consider it a practical and logical thing to do, not a political statement.
As per Eric Idle's suggestion... I have to go duck hunting with a judge now. Cheers.
No comment of the political issues, as I am not from the US. Just, we have big media moguls in most places of the world, even open censorship in some countries... this has not stopped people from seeking better information elsewhere. Even in places like China or Iran... you would be surprised to see how well informed a lot of people are. I also do not see, how an iPad-only paper would take any freedom away at all. We have hundreds of radio and TV stations that only people with enough money can enjoy... the price of an iPad is roughly equivalent to 6 months of cable TV in most places. I do not see a disaster here, the vast majority of articles consists of rewritten agency stuff and press releases, you can find exactly the same information in thousands of places.
If Apple really wants to make an iPad app for newspapers and magazines, they need newspaper and magazine know-how. They do not have that. Even if the NYT is SJs favorite paper, they are still somehow strapped to contracts with Amazon (resulting in the "Editor's Choice" mess that sent SJ right through the roof) and might not have the financial resources to dedicate ample staff to such a project. Other large publishers, like Conde Nast, are obviously in bed with Adobe and unwilling to look for alternative means... Long story short: Apple needed somebody with the know-how, the money and the dedication required. If the rumor is true at all, I consider it a practical and logical thing to do, not a political statement.
As per Eric Idle's suggestion... I have to go duck hunting with a judge now. Cheers.
Murdoch is relies on naivety and apathy, ignorance
Media giant News Corp may be working directly with Apple to build an all-new newspaper built specifically for the iPad, set to launch in the coming months at a cost of 99 cents per week.
This sort of exclusive, added-value service is a wonderful addition to both the iPad, and presumably, to Apple's bottom line.
Remember that Murdock also owns the Wall Street Journal. And who rights for the WSJ? Walt Mosberg. At this years Mossberg fest - D8, in which Jobs spoke and was interviewed, you could see Murdock conspicuously in attendance. I believe he even introduced Jobs as the main figure in the future of publishing.
I would assume Apple's part would be helping on HTML5 programing and perhaps some design stuff.
When there is money to be made, even the most diametrically opposed in the ideological realm will get together and form an alliance. We all know that opposites attract (although this one does seem like the most strange of bedfellows) and the potential for good to come out for both sides is big.
Does anyone think that Apple will dismiss or ignore the right-wing market base because people in that base think different from Jobs or most folks at Apple? Their money is as green as that of the most liberal technocrats in Silicon Valley or the high-browed academicians in Boston.
Apple's insistence on a squeaky clean image for its App Store and corporate governance in general is a good example of Apple courting the business of the conservative base with a zeal. This is a business. Corporations go to where the money is.
Jobs and Murdoch may view each other as "loons" privately, but they can't deny the success of each other either and probably do share great deal of mutual respect and admiration in their respective fields. Unlike our government with its endless partisan bickering, effective businesses hurdle together and get things done.
Well stated. Just don't buy the app - I know I won't.
I thought the App Store had strict rules regarding porn apps.
If this is indeed true, Apple is trying to make money, and with the popularity, however incomprehensible, of Faux News and the other products from Rupert Rags, Ink., they will make plenty with their 30% share. Money made helps all of us as they can then develop more great apps. It will also possibly be an excellent app that will show the other news orgs how to do it (because they haven't so far).
I would hope that there was some kind of new App Store rule that apps had to actually present truth, but then that would eliminate any apps from News corp.
Comments
Though I won't subscribe to Murdoch's rag, I think Apple is just playing ball with whoever has the interest and motivation. If it is successful, more legitimate journals will come on board too. I hope.
That's a pretty good read (pun intended).
A while back there was a SJ preso showing featured new Podcasts -- The Rush Limbaugh Podcast was front and center.
.
That's a pretty good read (pun intended).
A while back there was a SJ preso showing featured new Podcasts -- The Rush Limbaugh Podcast was front and center.
.
And that was a good catch. Now, if he was working with Rush on an iPad app, then I would be worried . . .
Competition is great but this is hardly new.
They could offer to PAY ME to read it, and I'd tell those right-wing jerkoffs to go pound sand!
Mark
A while back there was a SJ preso showing featured new Podcasts -- The Rush Limbaugh Podcast was front and center.
Steve knows that intelligent and educated people are already buying Apple products. Putting Limbaugh front and center is Steve's attempt to lure the ignorant ones to the Apple way.
Mark
Building a site that only works with Apple iPads is about as stupid an idea as building a highway on which only Lexus LS sedans can travel. It's going to be a tiny audience, at best. In the end it will contain only news slanted to what the site owners think that iPad owners want to read and will contain less and less information about the real world. Talk about living in a bubble ...
I agree.
Building a site that only works with Apple iPads is about as stupid an idea as building a highway on which only Lexus LS sedans can travel. It's going to be a tiny audience, at best. In the end it will contain only news slanted to what the site owners think that iPad owners want to read and will contain less and less information about the real world. Talk about living in a bubble ...
Don't know about a highway for only Lexus LS sedans, but a city street for only Lexus LS sedans that can parallel park themselves sounds good. Maybe the daily newspaper for iPads only makes sense. Aren't there already 14,000,000 sold today, maybe half in big newspaper reading cities and another 45,000,000 to be sold in 2011? That's quite a few subscribers at 99¢ per week.
Wow, all you pol are obviously left wing. I'm not to get in political discussion with all of you because this isn't the place to post it. This is about apple tech, not politics. Yes I'm right wing but again, this isn't an open bashing forum.
When the two meet, what's wrong with discussing the implications of such a union?
I would never pay $1.00 a week to read Murdoch's trash, but I would pay $10.00 a week to read the NYT's, or The Washington Post, or another mainstream paper.
perhaps it will come with a pre-loaded glenn beck or palin screen-saver as well.- this is all about politics, now you cant escape this right wing crap. This is a sad day for apple.
And a new app - Helicoptor Hunting with Sarah Palin. Different expansion packs for different species - wolves, moose, and her favourite: illegal aliens!
I don't see how this would be better or even much different than say "The Times" newspaper app that I've had on my iPad since the end of May. Not sure if it's available in the US Apple store but the Times app has gone from strength to strength and only cost £8 a month for al of their daily editions (excluding the Sunday Times).
Competition is great but this is hardly new.
Rupert also owns The Times.
Rupert also owns The Times.
wow! only 8 pounds a month - you get brainwashed and murdoch gets the revenue. a sweet deal.
If Apple really wants to make an iPad app for newspapers and magazines, they need newspaper and magazine know-how. They do not have that. Even if the NYT is SJs favorite paper, they are still somehow strapped to contracts with Amazon (resulting in the "Editor's Choice" mess that sent SJ right through the roof) and might not have the financial resources to dedicate ample staff to such a project. Other large publishers, like Conde Nast, are obviously in bed with Adobe and unwilling to look for alternative means... Long story short: Apple needed somebody with the know-how, the money and the dedication required. If the rumor is true at all, I consider it a practical and logical thing to do, not a political statement.
As per Eric Idle's suggestion... I have to go duck hunting with a judge now. Cheers.
No comment of the political issues, as I am not from the US. Just, we have big media moguls in most places of the world, even open censorship in some countries... this has not stopped people from seeking better information elsewhere. Even in places like China or Iran... you would be surprised to see how well informed a lot of people are. I also do not see, how an iPad-only paper would take any freedom away at all. We have hundreds of radio and TV stations that only people with enough money can enjoy... the price of an iPad is roughly equivalent to 6 months of cable TV in most places. I do not see a disaster here, the vast majority of articles consists of rewritten agency stuff and press releases, you can find exactly the same information in thousands of places.
If Apple really wants to make an iPad app for newspapers and magazines, they need newspaper and magazine know-how. They do not have that. Even if the NYT is SJs favorite paper, they are still somehow strapped to contracts with Amazon (resulting in the "Editor's Choice" mess that sent SJ right through the roof) and might not have the financial resources to dedicate ample staff to such a project. Other large publishers, like Conde Nast, are obviously in bed with Adobe and unwilling to look for alternative means... Long story short: Apple needed somebody with the know-how, the money and the dedication required. If the rumor is true at all, I consider it a practical and logical thing to do, not a political statement.
As per Eric Idle's suggestion... I have to go duck hunting with a judge now. Cheers.
Murdoch is relies on naivety and apathy, ignorance
Media giant News Corp may be working directly with Apple to build an all-new newspaper built specifically for the iPad, set to launch in the coming months at a cost of 99 cents per week.
This sort of exclusive, added-value service is a wonderful addition to both the iPad, and presumably, to Apple's bottom line.
Kudos!
I would assume Apple's part would be helping on HTML5 programing and perhaps some design stuff.
When there is money to be made, even the most diametrically opposed in the ideological realm will get together and form an alliance. We all know that opposites attract (although this one does seem like the most strange of bedfellows) and the potential for good to come out for both sides is big.
Does anyone think that Apple will dismiss or ignore the right-wing market base because people in that base think different from Jobs or most folks at Apple? Their money is as green as that of the most liberal technocrats in Silicon Valley or the high-browed academicians in Boston.
Apple's insistence on a squeaky clean image for its App Store and corporate governance in general is a good example of Apple courting the business of the conservative base with a zeal. This is a business. Corporations go to where the money is.
Jobs and Murdoch may view each other as "loons" privately, but they can't deny the success of each other either and probably do share great deal of mutual respect and admiration in their respective fields. Unlike our government with its endless partisan bickering, effective businesses hurdle together and get things done.
Well stated. Just don't buy the app - I know I won't.
If this is indeed true, Apple is trying to make money, and with the popularity, however incomprehensible, of Faux News and the other products from Rupert Rags, Ink., they will make plenty with their 30% share. Money made helps all of us as they can then develop more great apps. It will also possibly be an excellent app that will show the other news orgs how to do it (because they haven't so far).
I would hope that there was some kind of new App Store rule that apps had to actually present truth, but then that would eliminate any apps from News corp.