Posted: 9/24/2012 4:48:07 PM EDT
|
With the popularity of tablets, the Kindle, and the Nook, there has been an increase in the publications making a version available for these devices. I have read a few digital issues of magazines when I was deployed because it was easier for my friend to send a thumb drive with a variety of things than a box of magazines and DVD's. Now I love reading books on my Kindle, but I still enjoy having a hard copy. I cannot say the same for magazines, because I end up with a stack sitting in the end table collecting dust until I decide to recycle them.
So how many of you here would be interested in a magazine that only existed in digital form? Is that something you would like, or do you think it would be less appealing than a printed magazine? Poll inbound. |
|
Quoted:
Print only. I don't like paying for intangible objects. Plus I'd rather not bring a kindle in the throne room with me.  Even if the subscription was significantly cheaper? I personally have only one subscription and that is to Mother Earth News. (Laugh it up, but I am not a hippie!) I think if they offered a digital only sub and made it available, say $7.00 a year, I would be all over that! |
|
Quoted: I think if they offered a digital only sub and made it available, say $7.00 a year, I would be all over that!  You're in a dream world there. A lot of the companies are not discounting the digital subs AT ALL. It really sucks. And then consider the variety of delivery streams, and how the billing for each works - company-specific eBook readers(Kindle, Nook, etc...) are going to have their own system, the iPad basically has a different app for each magazine, then there are the big distribution companies like Zinio which at least allow you to access the magazines on multiple devices(PC/Mac, iOS, etc...). I would say the only digital magazine I'm really impressed with is Wired, lots of extra features in their iPad app. And the Zinio system has worked well to give an exact copy of the print magazine in digital form. The rest of it is pretty random, both in quality in price. |
|
I was reading earlier that for a magazine to even get on the iPad it had to go through the app store, and that Apple took a cut of the proceeds. The only way to side-step that limitation was to make it web content that you could view with a browser, but then you lose functionality like the Wired app you mentioned.
The price being the same for both versions I think is a bit antiquated. They are spending a substantially lower dollar amount on a digital only version, simply by eliminating the physical medium. The advertising dollar should be the same in regards to their profit, the adverts would still be there. I dunno, just been mulling this over a bit lately and wondered if I was alone with these thoughts. |