Makes little sense for them to have a working iPad. Their app could be tested on the iPad simulator in the SDK. Any ideas why they need a prototype?
Outside of a few technical issues the simulator can't account for they can check performance of the app. I'm thinking Apple has loaned a dozens of these so that by launch date the App Store has some quality 3rd-party apps designed for the iPad already developed.
It's amazing that some media companies can see the success of the iTunes store with 99¢ songs and expect that they can get $10 to $30 a month for a subscription to something as basic as a newspaper.
I'll go 99¢ a month for a basic paper, maybe $1.99 for a month of some of the ones I look at these days on a computer.
$10 a month? Not for unlimited access of e everyone of the papers I follow.
And if I need to find new papers to follow there is thepaperboy.com - a great tool for those who like varied news sources.
I know I'm probably being unrealistic, but this still pisses me off: WSJ gets to play but the other devs who have built the 100K iPhone apps and made the platform what it is today have to wait in line like any other consumer. At least with the Intel switch it was possible to BUY testing hardware. Now we have to blindly launch apps that have only been tested in the simulator.
It's amazing that some media companies can see the success of the iTunes store with 99¢ songs and expect that they can get $10 to $30 a month for a subscription to something as basic as a newspaper.
That's because a subscription to something as basic as a newspaper typically costs around $40 a month.
It's amazing that some media companies can see the success of the iTunes store with 99¢ songs and expect that they can get $10 to $30 a month for a subscription to something as basic as a newspaper.
I'll go 99¢ a month for a basic paper, maybe $1.99 for a month of some of the ones I look at these days on a computer.
$10 a month? Not for unlimited access of e everyone of the papers I follow.
And if I need to find new papers to follow there is thepaperboy.com - a great tool for those who like varied news sources.
Exactly. $30/mo are they smoking crack? $1.99/mo MAX.
Interactive comics. Imagine having a Burns Effect in certain panels or a very simple animation adding to the story. The trick will be to keep it subtle so it adds to the story without taking it over.
That's because a subscription to something as basic as a newspaper typically costs around $40 a month.
On a related note: my aunt and uncle who are both 20+ year veterans of their local newspaper are both looking for jobs in another industry, because their 100+ year old paper can't keep the doors open much longer. I would humbly and politely suggest to the fine folks making the decisions about how much to charge for their newspaper-replacement online content that they NOT get greedy.
Also, word to the guy who pointed out the obvious transposition in the Murdoch quote. Mad props, sir.
On a related note: my aunt and uncle who are both 20+ year veterans of their local newspaper are both looking for jobs in another industry, because their 100+ year old paper can't keep the doors open much longer. I would humbly and politely suggest to the fine folks making the decisions about how much to charge for their newspaper-replacement online content that they NOT get greedy.
Translation: They should not charge enough to keep the door open. You might have a word with the people who wouldn't pay more than $1.99 a month, because that could not keep people like your aunt and uncle gainfully employed in the newspaper business.
I'd like to know about this lock box more than the iPad. Sounds like it might be an interesting unit.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kozchris
I bet this is going to open a whole new world to comic and comic book publishers. Can't wait to see what happens. To have the complete Calvin and Hobbs collection on an iPad would be nice.
The C&H collection is pretty big & heavy. That's probably why I haven't read beyond the first few pages yet.
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism
Interactive comics. Imagine having a Burns Effect in certain panels or a very simple animation adding to the story. The trick will be to keep it subtle so it adds to the story without taking it over.
Interactive maybe, but I can just as easily imagine nausea while imagining seeing the Burns Effect. Yuck.
Interactive maybe, but I can just as easily imagine nausea while imagining seeing the Burns Effect. Yuck.
Yeah, interactive, not just constantly playing video. For instance, if you turn on that feature, there will be some indicator of what panels are interactive. Then you'd simply touch the panel and see the short animation. One type could be Burns Effect, another could be an aspect ratio change, another could be a colour change, and another with simple dialogue bubbles could be a timed event where events in a large panel would simulate simple event happening one after another, to name a few. Again, anything that is excessive will cheapen the experience, but sparingly used it should enhance it without just being a gimmick.
I'm almost warming up to the idea to pay $10/month or $100/year for the WSJ on the iPad. A penny more and I don't think it is worth it. I used to subscribe to the print version, but got sick of their bias. Lately, I've gotten a few good stories from them on GoogleNews though, so I might give it a chance.
But, for $10/month, it had better be the news source to end all news sources! LA Times would only be worth $1/month to me, tops.
Translation: They should not charge enough to keep the door open. You might have a word with the people who wouldn't pay more than $1.99 a month, because that could not keep people like your aunt and uncle gainfully employed in the newspaper business.
That's not a translation of what I said. Don't put words in my mouth, that's my job.
If they have to charge $40/month to keep the doors open, going digital won't save them. Not enough people are paying $40/month as it is, and you can't wrap a fish, start a fire, or wipe your ass with an online edition (insert iPad joke here). I don't know enough about their cost structure to know how much real savings can be achieved by eliminating the actual physical printing and distribution process, but if the publishers decide to get greedy like the music industry did and charge as much or more for reduced-quality content with lower distribution costs their paper will be taking that long dirt nap sooner than later. For all I know, they CAN get by on $1.99 per month per sub.
But here's the thing: I won't spend $40/month to get a newspaper in any format. I won't spend $30/month - hell, I've never subscribed to a print newspaper and I'm 40. The value received does not equal the cost, for me. However, I would be perfectly content to pay (using other people's numbers) $1.99 a month for my local paper, and possibly even the same to get my aunt and uncle's paper in my hometown. If those dailies decide to charge $40, they don't get any money from me. If they charge $1.99, they do. Apologies for the 1st-grade economics discussion, but this is basic supply and demand. Charge too much, not enough people buy, go broke. Charge too little, get plenty of customers, lose money on each one, go broke. Success may or may not lie in between, but we already know disaster awaits at the extremes.
I'm not asking for sympathy for the aunt and uncle; the writing has been on the wall for a while now, and they were offered a buyout/early retirement last year and again more vigorously this year. If they want to go down with the ship, that's their problem. The point is that the newspaper industry REALLY needs to take a lesson from the music industry, and recognize that the economics of digital distribution are different than those of physical media and consumers are often hesitant to accept cost equity between the two. Perhaps the smart move would be to segment the offering, much like the music biz was forced to sell individual songs instead of a CD with one or two songs and a half-hour of filler.
"Apple's general paranoia about news coverage is truly extraordinary."
Clearly this guy is not tapped into the Apple centric mediasphere. He should try looking at one day's accumulated coverage at MacSurfer.com. Then see who's paranoid.
Interactive comics. Imagine having a Burns Effect in certain panels or a very simple animation adding to the story. The trick will be to keep it subtle so it adds to the story without taking it over.
...At at 50+ even I'd be tempted to d/l a few SuperMan comics
That's not a translation of what I said. Don't put words in my mouth, that's my job.
If they have to charge $40/month to keep the doors open, going digital won't save them. .........
Charging $40/month for the daily paper doesn't even come close to keeping the doors open. They are dependent on advertising revenue to break even or profit. It simply won't work the same way with digital distribution. They'll have to find a new way to cover costs or find something else to do for a living. The music industry never depended on ad revenue in albums or songs, so they may not be able to learn much from them.
Comments
Makes little sense for them to have a working iPad. Their app could be tested on the iPad simulator in the SDK. Any ideas why they need a prototype?
Outside of a few technical issues the simulator can't account for they can check performance of the app. I'm thinking Apple has loaned a dozens of these so that by launch date the App Store has some quality 3rd-party apps designed for the iPad already developed.
I'll go 99¢ a month for a basic paper, maybe $1.99 for a month of some of the ones I look at these days on a computer.
$10 a month? Not for unlimited access of e everyone of the papers I follow.
And if I need to find new papers to follow there is thepaperboy.com - a great tool for those who like varied news sources.
WSJ has pre-release iPad kept 'under padlock and key' by Apple
That would be an 'iPadlock'.
I wonder if Stephen Colbert still has the iPad he was showing off at the Grammy Awards.
I saw in an interview that they gave it to him backstage and he had to hand it back when he was done.
It's amazing that some media companies can see the success of the iTunes store with 99¢ songs and expect that they can get $10 to $30 a month for a subscription to something as basic as a newspaper.
That's because a subscription to something as basic as a newspaper typically costs around $40 a month.
It's amazing that some media companies can see the success of the iTunes store with 99¢ songs and expect that they can get $10 to $30 a month for a subscription to something as basic as a newspaper.
I'll go 99¢ a month for a basic paper, maybe $1.99 for a month of some of the ones I look at these days on a computer.
$10 a month? Not for unlimited access of e everyone of the papers I follow.
And if I need to find new papers to follow there is thepaperboy.com - a great tool for those who like varied news sources.
Exactly. $30/mo are they smoking crack? $1.99/mo MAX.
Interactive comics. Imagine having a Burns Effect in certain panels or a very simple animation adding to the story. The trick will be to keep it subtle so it adds to the story without taking it over.
I like your idea.
That's because a subscription to something as basic as a newspaper typically costs around $40 a month.
On a related note: my aunt and uncle who are both 20+ year veterans of their local newspaper are both looking for jobs in another industry, because their 100+ year old paper can't keep the doors open much longer. I would humbly and politely suggest to the fine folks making the decisions about how much to charge for their newspaper-replacement online content that they NOT get greedy.
Also, word to the guy who pointed out the obvious transposition in the Murdoch quote. Mad props, sir.
On a related note: my aunt and uncle who are both 20+ year veterans of their local newspaper are both looking for jobs in another industry, because their 100+ year old paper can't keep the doors open much longer. I would humbly and politely suggest to the fine folks making the decisions about how much to charge for their newspaper-replacement online content that they NOT get greedy.
Translation: They should not charge enough to keep the door open. You might have a word with the people who wouldn't pay more than $1.99 a month, because that could not keep people like your aunt and uncle gainfully employed in the newspaper business.
I bet this is going to open a whole new world to comic and comic book publishers. Can't wait to see what happens. To have the complete Calvin and Hobbs collection on an iPad would be nice.
The C&H collection is pretty big & heavy. That's probably why I haven't read beyond the first few pages yet.
Interactive comics. Imagine having a Burns Effect in certain panels or a very simple animation adding to the story. The trick will be to keep it subtle so it adds to the story without taking it over.
Interactive maybe, but I can just as easily imagine nausea while imagining seeing the Burns Effect. Yuck.
Interactive maybe, but I can just as easily imagine nausea while imagining seeing the Burns Effect. Yuck.
Yeah, interactive, not just constantly playing video. For instance, if you turn on that feature, there will be some indicator of what panels are interactive. Then you'd simply touch the panel and see the short animation. One type could be Burns Effect, another could be an aspect ratio change, another could be a colour change, and another with simple dialogue bubbles could be a timed event where events in a large panel would simulate simple event happening one after another, to name a few. Again, anything that is excessive will cheapen the experience, but sparingly used it should enhance it without just being a gimmick.
But, for $10/month, it had better be the news source to end all news sources! LA Times would only be worth $1/month to me, tops.
Translation: They should not charge enough to keep the door open. You might have a word with the people who wouldn't pay more than $1.99 a month, because that could not keep people like your aunt and uncle gainfully employed in the newspaper business.
That's not a translation of what I said. Don't put words in my mouth, that's my job.
If they have to charge $40/month to keep the doors open, going digital won't save them. Not enough people are paying $40/month as it is, and you can't wrap a fish, start a fire, or wipe your ass with an online edition (insert iPad joke here). I don't know enough about their cost structure to know how much real savings can be achieved by eliminating the actual physical printing and distribution process, but if the publishers decide to get greedy like the music industry did and charge as much or more for reduced-quality content with lower distribution costs their paper will be taking that long dirt nap sooner than later. For all I know, they CAN get by on $1.99 per month per sub.
But here's the thing: I won't spend $40/month to get a newspaper in any format. I won't spend $30/month - hell, I've never subscribed to a print newspaper and I'm 40. The value received does not equal the cost, for me. However, I would be perfectly content to pay (using other people's numbers) $1.99 a month for my local paper, and possibly even the same to get my aunt and uncle's paper in my hometown. If those dailies decide to charge $40, they don't get any money from me. If they charge $1.99, they do. Apologies for the 1st-grade economics discussion, but this is basic supply and demand. Charge too much, not enough people buy, go broke. Charge too little, get plenty of customers, lose money on each one, go broke. Success may or may not lie in between, but we already know disaster awaits at the extremes.
I'm not asking for sympathy for the aunt and uncle; the writing has been on the wall for a while now, and they were offered a buyout/early retirement last year and again more vigorously this year. If they want to go down with the ship, that's their problem. The point is that the newspaper industry REALLY needs to take a lesson from the music industry, and recognize that the economics of digital distribution are different than those of physical media and consumers are often hesitant to accept cost equity between the two. Perhaps the smart move would be to segment the offering, much like the music biz was forced to sell individual songs instead of a CD with one or two songs and a half-hour of filler.
Clearly this guy is not tapped into the Apple centric mediasphere. He should try looking at one day's accumulated coverage at MacSurfer.com. Then see who's paranoid.
Surely that quote should read "cheap journalism is not quality"? It is Murdoch speaking after all.
Absolutely right. AppleInsider need to change that.
Interactive comics. Imagine having a Burns Effect in certain panels or a very simple animation adding to the story. The trick will be to keep it subtle so it adds to the story without taking it over.
...At at 50+ even I'd be tempted to d/l a few SuperMan comics
That's not a translation of what I said. Don't put words in my mouth, that's my job.
If they have to charge $40/month to keep the doors open, going digital won't save them. .........
Charging $40/month for the daily paper doesn't even come close to keeping the doors open. They are dependent on advertising revenue to break even or profit. It simply won't work the same way with digital distribution. They'll have to find a new way to cover costs or find something else to do for a living. The music industry never depended on ad revenue in albums or songs, so they may not be able to learn much from them.