Slashdot Mirror


Linux Journal Goes — Surprise! — Digital

Mr_Perl writes "Linux Journal sent out an email to subscribers today announcing that they are going 100% digital. Subscribers signed on for a paper version of the journal, and now have been switched to an electronic version, apparently at the exact same subscription rate. No news yet on why they did it, and no sign of any offers to reimburse unused subscriptions for subscribers who are disappointed."

117 of 184 comments (clear)

  1. No thanks. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I like having hard copies of journals, books, and magazines. I don't want to read stuff on a fucking tablet of some sort.

    People go on and on about how paper is fragile, but it's a lot more durable than the shitty Chinese-made devices that you have to use to read this "e-content". It gets worse when the publishers and vendors can arbitrarily delete material from your device, even after you've paid for it. Fuck that.

    Why the fuck would I pay the same amount of money and not get something physical in return? No thanks.

    1. Re:No thanks. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      And get the same finish as you had before.. I mean, glossy paper? for free? Because otherwise, that's a serious regression on the value of your subscription.

    2. Re:No thanks. by Cryacin · · Score: 1

      I don't print crap.

      --
      Science advances one funeral at a time- Max Planck
    3. Re:No thanks. by similar_name · · Score: 3, Funny

      I don't think we have the technology to print crap yet. I'm sure someone is working on it though.

    4. Re:No thanks. by Miamicanes · · Score: 2

      > I don't think we have the technology to print crap yet. I'm sure someone is working on it though.

      Your wish is their command -- http://www.makerbot.com/ :-)

    5. Re:No thanks. by wisnoskij · · Score: 5, Insightful

      And just on principal. The same price?
      It is free to make and distribute, how can the digital version be the same price?

      --
      Troll is not a replacement for I disagree.
    6. Re:No thanks. by drobety · · Score: 2

      I like having hard copies of journals, books, and magazines

      Me too. It makes me feel good about myself when I throw them in the recyclable bin.

    7. Re:No thanks. by Chris+Burke · · Score: 1

      Because you were getting the glossy print for free before? Oh wait, you weren't.

      No, you were getting it for the same price as you're paying now to not get it. So "print it yourself" only gives you the same thing you had before if printing is free. Get it? I know it was pretty subtle and complicated. I can maybe draw a diagram for you.

      --

      The enemies of Democracy are
    8. Re:No thanks. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      >Me too. It makes me feel good about myself when I throw them in the recyclable bin.

      Read it online and then recycle your computer. Then go buy a new PC and stimulate the economy. It's your patriotic duty.

    9. Re:No thanks. by Fnord666 · · Score: 1

      I can maybe draw a diagram for you.

      Sorry, this is slashdot. Can you maybe do a car analogy?

      --
      'The tyrant will always find pretext for his tyranny.' - Aesop's Fables
    10. Re:No thanks. by uniquegeek · · Score: 1

      I'm very disappointed because it was my bathtub reading material. The bottom corners can sometimes get soggy, but it's still good. Can't say the same about a digital device. I'm not into the iPad hype anyways.

      I have a couple of other small devices able to read pdfs, but frankly my day consists of get ready for work, rush to work, work, gym, drive home, collapse on couch for an hour, make something to eat, catch up on life (bills, personal email - maybe, quality time with spouse), maybe have a bath for "me" time (damn you LJ), go to bed. Repeat.

    11. Re:No thanks. by uniquegeek · · Score: 2

      They spend hours compiling the thing every month, and now their server's going to have a higher load (presuming people stay on). I'm not sure what they're using for desktop publishing, but I wouldn't be surprised if there were occasional costs involved (stock images, etc.). How do you figure it's free to make and distribute?

      I'm not saying charging the EXACT same price is reasonable, but asking for 0.49 or 0.99 per issue for digital might not be a reasonable thing for consumers to ask, either.

      What would be free distribution is a free torrent - but then you'd either have to have it all free software, free images, free time, no expenses for the magazine, and people donating their time. As soon as you try to restrict who has it, you'll need to cover charges - the mere act of covering charges incurs a charge.

      Curious what people would think a reasonable price would be. I don't know, myself.

    12. Re:No thanks. by hawguy · · Score: 3, Informative

      I'm very disappointed because it was my bathtub reading material. The bottom corners can sometimes get soggy, but it's still good. Can't say the same about a digital device. I'm not into the iPad hype anyways.

      Get a Kindle(*), put it in a 1 Quart ziplock baggy. Problem solved.

      I've done this in the bathtub, hot tub, and pool with no ill effects to my kindle. Which is more than I can say about some books and magazines I've accidentally dropped in the tub.

      * I'm sure other e-book readers would also work, but my Kindle fits perfectly in a cheap baggy, and the next-page prev-page buttons are easy to press while in the baggy -- probably not the case if it were a touchscreen device (like the Nook Color)

    13. Re:No thanks. by hedwards · · Score: 2

      Durability typically. Also the pictures tend to be more vibrant.

    14. Re:No thanks. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Ditto...totally agree with you. LJ will be yet another "print magazine gone digital" that will loose me as a subscriber.

    15. Re:No thanks. by ArsonSmith · · Score: 2

      Only a true nerd has LJ near the toilet with the pages stuck together.

      --
      Paying taxes to buy civilization is like paying a hooker to buy love.
    16. Re:No thanks. by marcello_dl · · Score: 1

      There are also shipping costs to take into account. I'd have simply prolonged the subscription period of the customers who received the physical magazine, even at a small loss, because losing a customer is worse in the long run.

      --
      ---- MISSING MISCELLANEOUS DATA SEGMENT --- [sigdash] trolololol
    17. Re:No thanks. by AchilleTalon · · Score: 2
      From the LJ's letter:

      (...) We realize that you may have paid more than our new subscription rate ($29.50 USD), so your current subscription term will be extended based on the remaining value of your subscription. For example, if your current remaining subscription value is $20.00 USD, the term will be extended by 8 issues based on the issue value of $2.56.

      --
      Achille Talon
      Hop!
    18. Re:No thanks. by jms1 · · Score: 1

      Actually, I've been a digital-only subscriber for some time. The downloads are DRM-free PDF files that I can read, and search, on several devices running a variety of platforms, including Linux (of course), Mac OSX, and iPad. Plus the download area has old issues going back several years (I want to say 2004 but wouldn't swear to it) and I'm able to download all of those as well. Just the thing when I get a new project and need to look up something I vaguely remember seeing in a past issue, but don't know which issue had it.

      It's like ebooks, especially the O'Reilly books... it's much easier to carry around an iPad with 300+ EPUB and PDF files than trying to guess which ones I might need on any given day, or even worse trying to carry all of them with me.

    19. Re:No thanks. by kenh · · Score: 1

      $2.56/copy? LJ can layoff/fire anyone involved with either new subscriptions and/or renewal order processing.

      As readership drops (this makes it harder to read the magazine and eliminates newstand purchases entirely) advertising rates will drop, as ad revenue drops, content will suffer. As content suffers, readership drops further, forcing ad rates even lower, and so on...

      Pity this is happening now, just as Linux is ready to breakout and become the dominant desktop OS - it's got about 1/6th the marketshare of Windows Vista...

      --
      Ken
    20. Re:No thanks. by stephanruby · · Score: 1

      Inflation? My local daily newspaper used be a quarter, now it's one dollar. And don't get me started on postage rates, postage-dependent subscriptions keep on getting squeezed every single time there is an unplanned US Postage hike.

    21. Re:No thanks. by Have+Brain+Will+Rent · · Score: 1

      How do you figure it's free to make and distribute?

      By make I think he means manufacture the physical copy - not produce the issue which has to be done for both digital and hard copy editions - but the digital edition is free to manufacture because there is in fact no manufacture. The only way it wouldn't be free is if the layout etc. was different for the digital edition otherwise the digital can use the same publishing files as the physical. However also eliminating the physical edition does put the whole produciton cost up to the stage of being able to print onto the digital edition so in that case, yes, it is not free to produce the digital edition.

      Similarly compare the cost of digital distribution to sticking a mailing label on, maybe a plastic bag, cost of postage, personnel to actually get the stuff down to the loading dock and into the mail system. Ok for the digital edition there may be some increased load on servers etc. but compared to physical distribution it is so much cheaper it is virtually free and that remains true even if you terminate the physical edition altogether.

      --
      The tyrant will always find a pretext for his tyranny - Aesop
    22. Re:No thanks. by siriuskase · · Score: 1

      Cost and price aren't the same thing. Price should exceed cost, otherwise, they wouldn't make any money,

      Apparently, their cost has gone down, but the savings aren't being used to lower the price. That's greedy. If they want to sell a less useful product, they should lower the price. The content may be the same, but the higher cost format has a higher value.

      Ideally, Cost of production = price = value to user.

      Otherwise, someone is getting a raw deal and will probably go away.

      --
      If you must moderate, please moderate as irrelevent, not something bad, because I'm sure someone will find this interest
  2. big mistake by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I just started buying this magazine at the news stand to take with me places I can't bring electronics. Now I guess I'll stop reading it.

    1. Re:big mistake by xtracto · · Score: 2

      You touch a very good point. For all the magazines I have bought and the ones I have subscribed to, I first saw them in a random news stand that I passed by and then, after briefly skimming through the magazine I decided to buy it.

      I did it about 20 years ago with PC Format. I did it later with Game Dev magazine (that shit was expensive to buy in Mexico), I did it with some *very* low print quality (black text on grey newspaper quality) magazine which had excellent content, also Linux Mag (for which I subscribed with an Alaska address and a cousin took the magazines to Mexico every 6 months. Then in the UK I used to buy the odd Linux or PC magazine (5 years ago).

      Now there is no way I will do such impulse buy. A lot of those magazines I just bought to read one or two articles which seemed interesting (or for the Jazz Jackrabbit demo floppy, or the Linux distro CD). Now I have to go to the internet to *look for* whatever I need... and the "discovery" (or pushed content as I like to call it) is minimum (well, hackernews is OK, but the editorial quality of blogs is terrible compared to any magazine).

      The problem with being "internet only" is that the only advertisement the magazine has is word-of-mouth. And the other problem is that buying only one magazine is really cumbersome (got to go into the webpage, use my credit card and... forget it) compared to passing by a random newsstand, seeing *that magazine that my friend told me about* and paying some change for it (after you quickly skimmed it).

      --
      Ubuntu is an African word meaning 'I can't configure Debian'
  3. I don't like digital-only periodical subs by mysidia · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If you let a paper subscription lapse, you don't have to return the books that you paid for under the subscription. It might be hard to find articles or search them, but you can keep a copy for as long as your copy survives! With reasonable treatment and storage conditions, that's upwards of 50 years.

    If you have a digital version... they have the ability to pull the old issues at any time; e.g. 10 years from now they might decide to "archive old articles", so you can no longer find them. Also if you let your subscription lapse, when your web account is disabled, you lose access to ALL issues, even ones put out last month when you had a subscription to the periodical.

    Also, if they go out of business and their website goes away, you lose access to all the articles you got under the subscription, and will have to pay more if you ever want to see them again, probably exorbitant fees to a database service or other archival service.

    Loss of articles may hurt you if you remember/kept a tab of it, and want to use the info. either to help you, to show someone else, or for research/paper writing purposes

    1. Re:I don't like digital-only periodical subs by MacTO · · Score: 5, Informative

      TFA notes that you can download a PDF version of the periodical, which means that you can keep the issues indefinitely.

      So what it really comes down to is a business decision, and they think that they'd be better off in an all digital format. And I think that the only people who have the right to complain about that are the ones who are going to end up with their remaining print subscriptions transitioned to digital (because that sure ain't what they asked for).

    2. Re:I don't like digital-only periodical subs by erice · · Score: 2, Interesting

      ... it also means you can print it if you so desire, so all the "whaaa give me paper" assholes can be happy too.

      You have a printer that will produce a full color, bound magazine that doesn't smuge for cheap? All I have is a crappy inkjet that smudges and cost a fortune to print in full color. Or I can get a color lazer printer that doesn't smudge and cost less per page but the images are garbage. In both I still end up with a bunch of pages that I have to hold together by stapling the corners. It looks and handles nothing like a published magazine.

    3. Re:I don't like digital-only periodical subs by uniquegeek · · Score: 4, Informative

      Keep them indefinitely? You mean continually backing them up to different mediums and hoping the medium doesn't die, converting the pdf to something else if pdf comes to a point of dying, hoping for backwards compatibility of readers (and ideally testing many of the pdfs each time the version or software package changes)...

      The effort involved with keeping magazines, in most instances, is carting the box around if you move. That, and keeping a pet bird away from it, if you happen to have one.

    4. Re:I don't like digital-only periodical subs by blackraven14250 · · Score: 1

      That would be the exact reason they decided to stop publishing the print version; it's damned expensive to do so, even in bulk.

    5. Re:I don't like digital-only periodical subs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      That would be the exact reason they decided to stop publishing the print version; it's damned expensive to do so, even in bulk.

      Great! With all those saved expenses, subscription prices can be cut in half!

    6. Re:I don't like digital-only periodical subs by X0563511 · · Score: 1

      I haven't seen a color laser that shitty in years. Most I've seen are at minimum 600DPI. You don't need to bind it either, at least not if you get something like these if it's really important to you. That said, why do you need it to be pretty for long? Print it, read it, and go recycle it. If you want to keep it around for reference, then a magazine isn't the proper media anyway.

      --
      For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
    7. Re:I don't like digital-only periodical subs by drinkypoo · · Score: 2

      Get yourself some archival optical media and you're done. Verbatim has some very nice stuff. It's stable at a broader range of temperatures besides the other benefits (in that it's actually designed to have longevity, unlike any normal media.)

      PDF is here to stay because ghostscript can handle it. Provided they're spitting out PDFs that you can render with gs, that is.

      The benefit, of course, is making a lossless copy and putting it in your safety deposit box or equivalent... that and not having to carry it around, or kill trees.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    8. Re:I don't like digital-only periodical subs by faedle · · Score: 3, Informative

      Point by point, you realize, every argument you bring up is a red herring.

      Backing them up to different medium? A lot easier than making a photocopy of a magazine. I have EVERY DAMN TEXT FILE I'VE EVER WRITTEN dating back to the Commodore 64 days. Why? Because "backing up" is a simple process that's highly automate-able.

      Converting from PDF? See above: I have every damn text file I've ever written dating back to the Commodore 64 days. And I can read them all, too. Because (surprise!) there are emulators for running C-64 software, so I can fire up my old C-64 BBS any time I want. PDF compatibility is likely to be a non-issue, especially given that there are open-source PDF viewers even today, and given the quantity of stuff in that format it isn't going anywhere. I have early PDFs I created going back at least 10 years, all load up fine in modern PDF viewers, both open-source and Adobe's plugins and Apple's Preview.

      Digital copies are more survivable precisely because the ease and cost of copying is near zero. Copying and storing paper copies doesn't scale, and is costly.

    9. Re:I don't like digital-only periodical subs by MacTO · · Score: 1

      To add what others have said: people will lose PDFs for the exact same reason that they lose print magazines. They are too lazy to maintain them. In the case of PDFs, it will be backing them up. In the case of physical magazines, it will be moving them or storing them.

      That isn't to say that I would buy a PDF magazine. Even though I love reading novels on an ereader, the heavy formatting and different flow of reading a magazine means that I love print versions. Then again, I never read this rag so my opinion doesn't count. ;)

    10. Re:I don't like digital-only periodical subs by sconeu · · Score: 1

      I'm a print subscriber. I'll probably not renew my subscription.

      I *LIKE* dead trees. You don't need an internet connection, and you don't need power.

      --
      General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
    11. Re:I don't like digital-only periodical subs by Chatterton · · Score: 1

      Magazine is the proper media for archival. I have found back a bunch of articles i have cut from magazines 20 years ago in my father house. They are all on good shape and i have keep some of them to archive them again in my house and disposed of the others to start a bbq some days ago. Try to store some of yours e-crap on any media floppy disk, cd, hdd, ssd) store it in a basement for 20 years. Then try to retrieve the datas again. You will not even be able to start your bbq with them if they are not anymore of some use.

    12. Re:I don't like digital-only periodical subs by dotgain · · Score: 1

      And I hope not.

    13. Re:I don't like digital-only periodical subs by WarwickRyan · · Score: 1

      +1

    14. Re:I don't like digital-only periodical subs by xtracto · · Score: 1

      Or maybe they could even make a profit!

      --
      Ubuntu is an African word meaning 'I can't configure Debian'
    15. Re:I don't like digital-only periodical subs by X0563511 · · Score: 1

      I don't need to. I can print it out on acid-free paper if I want to keep it that long, and it stays just as well as yours.

      (and no, please for the love of $DEITY don't bitch about inkjets. Don't use them.)

      --
      For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
  4. It probably had something to do by bugs2squash · · Score: 1

    with Borders closing.

    --
    Nullius in verba
    1. Re:It probably had something to do by bmo · · Score: 2

      While that sounds like a coincidence, it's probably the truth.

      Borders carried all of the computer rags that mattered. Now it's just down to Waldenbooks and Barnes&Noble and the odd "super-mega-newsstand" (that is getting rarer than hen's teeth) for retail dead tree geek mags.

      --
      BMO

    2. Re:It probably had something to do by Desler · · Score: 1

      Now it's just down to Waldenbooks

      No, Waldenbooks was owned by Borders and Borders shut down all those stores.

  5. Marginal Cost Of Production v. Reader Demographic by cmholm · · Score: 2

    Of any periodicals, I think Linux-oriented rags are excellent candidates to go all digital. I think I'm pretty safe in assuming that the readership is on-line enough that getting their subscription material on-line is a natural step. They are probably more likely to have a tablet of some sort, even the rumored (gasp) non-Apple tablets.

    On the flip side: even if they increase their subscriber base, advertisers may lose eyeballs that would have flipped through an issue on the newsstand, or on a friend's coffee table/desk. Advertisers LOVE newsstand sales because the readers typically consume more of the content. Finally, I'm not surprised, but not pleased, that the subscription rate doesn't reflect the fact that major expenses will be eliminated: the post-layout printing and distribution costs.

    --
    Luke, help me take this mask off ... Just for once, let me butterfly kiss you with my own eyes.
  6. Re:No thanks.: Ditto by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    When I sit down with a dead tree version of anything, I read it with as much full attention as I can muster. I don't know why, but I really have to make a conscious effort not to get distracted when reading online and I want to skim. And then there's the read an article, see what's on /., read part of an article, go to Fark, read some more ....etc ....

    It's annoying but I find that my bad habits from online reading are moving over to the "real" world - I'm skimming more. I'm getting lazy with my reading habits. If the point isn't made in the first paragraph, I loose interest.

    The whole World is becoming tl;dr

  7. What wouldn't make it not so bay by BlueCoder · · Score: 1

    A license printed in the book that allows if your the owner to have a copy printed. If most magazines did this it would be wonderful. A cottage industry would then appear for local printers for print copies. More expensive for those that want all printed copies but I think great in the long run for those that want to archive. Print and keep around six months of copies and recycle after that. Have another copy printed if you really want/need a printed copy later. Also have your copies made in the best quality your willing to pay for.

    1. Re:What wouldn't make it not so bay by kenh · · Score: 1

      I can get a 100 page magazine delivered to my door for $1/issue (or less), how will a local vendor compete?

      First, they'll charge sales tax
      Second, Postage will not be bulk mail rates
      Third, the paper costs alone will exceed the target ($1/issue)

      Smaller printers are more expensive per page, paper is cheaper by the ton, and bulk rate postage is a huge discount.

      --
      Ken
  8. We're paying for a paper copy, dumbass. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Yeah, we could print it ourselves. But that's not what we want. Doing so would be a costly pain the arse. That's why we're buying paper copies in the first place!

    When we buy paper newspapers and magazines, part of the cost covers the creation of the content, and the rest covers the creation and delivery of the physical product.

    Like the GP says, why would we want to pay the same price, but only get a fraction of what we want? We aren't Apple users here. We won't waste perfectly good money on some inferior electronic product. We want the real deal, and we'd rather go without than pay for something that isn't exactly what we want.

    1. Re:We're paying for a paper copy, dumbass. by aztracker1 · · Score: 1

      My largest issues are as follows, LJ subscriber for 5+ years now... I don't own a tablet, and don't like reading on a desktop/laptop... I've been waiting for a good enough tablet that doesn't seem like gouging. I might do a rooted nook color though. For the most part I'm disappointed, but not surprised. I may not renew, will need to see an issue or two, see how they work (bu commentary) for various devices... if they're formatted well for on-screen, will see.

      --
      Michael J. Ryan - tracker1.info
    2. Re:We're paying for a paper copy, dumbass. by Pluribus · · Score: 1

      My largest issues are as follows, LJ subscriber for 5+ years now... I don't own a tablet, and don't like reading on a desktop/laptop... I've been waiting for a good enough tablet that doesn't seem like gouging. I might do a rooted nook color though. For the most part I'm disappointed, but not surprised. I may not renew, will need to see an issue or two, see how they work (bu commentary) for various devices... if they're formatted well for on-screen, will see.

      I can't agree more. I have been a subscriber since issue #6. I renewed my subscription for another 100 PRINT issues just 8 months ago. At the time, the digital only subscription was cheaper (This new pricing brings the digital subscription issue price to the same as the previous print subscription price as confirmed by the contents page of the latest print copy) I paid extra to ALSO get the digital copies for the occasional research of an article. I love the print copies and so I paid a premium for them over the digital version. This to me is nothing but a bait-and-switch.

  9. From the Editor by David89 · · Score: 1

    Doc Searls writes: "Ever since I discovered HTML, it’s been my preferred format for writing. Every word of mine that’s gone into Linux Journal, since I started in 1996, has been written and delivered in HTML. That’s because my writing has been normalized to hypertext, and to pixels rather than print. What’s different for me this time is that I’m not paying attention to my monthly 900-word limit (or less if images are involved). While a word limit does impose the discipline of brevity, the fact remains that brevity is not the only virtue of good writing. Yes, it’s a good one to have when your column appears on the last page of a print magazine. But when that magazine is no longer confined by the dimensions of printed pages, you’re free to go longer—or shorter, as the case may be. My case this month is for the all-digital version of Linux Journal. Yes, we lose a lot, but we stand to gain much more. Let me explain. We’ve fought to stay in print ever since the dot-com crash nearly killed us, 11 years ago. Before that crash, we were fat with ads from well-funded startups. When the bust hit, many advertisers vanished without a trace, owing us literally $millions we never collected. After that crash, getting and keeping advertisers for a print trade publication was much harder. The costs of printing and mailing also went up, and continued to go up. Meanwhile, Linux succeeded in the marketplace and is now the most widely used operating system. Yet, while Linux continues to spread, the population of pure-Linux geeks—the kind who subscribe to Linux Journal—has remained a core that has grown very little. We continue to serve that core. That’s our mission, and we’re sticking to it. The question is, what’s the best way? Today, it’s hard to say print is that best way, especially with more and more people spending more and more time reading glowing rectangles rather than paper. But, we are by nature and practice a print magazine, and we have done our best to remain one, even as the world has changed around us. So I want to congratulate the publishing side of our house for keeping our print operation going, against stupendous odds, and for never selling out. (And believe me, there were many offers, mostly from entities that are now gone.) Our team did the impossible for as long as it could. Yet, consider this. We also always have been a digital publication, starting with the first CD digest of issues in 1994. And, digital publishing has done nothing but grow from the beginning. So has advertising in the digital realm, which is inherently limitless. Something else also has started to happen in digital publishing. It has become easier, and more acceptable, for people to pay for goods that also are available for free. There has been much experimentation here, and we are among the many doing the experimenting. One advantage for us is that we’ve always had paying subscribers. Maybe it’s crazy to think they’ll stick with us after we go all-digital. But, I don’t think so. I’m a big believer in the willingness of people to pay for value, provided the means are there. We have some means today, and we will have better ones tomorrow, especially if you help us think those through—while also helping us improve our editorial methods and materials. Every magazine has a periodical heartbeat. Ours always has been monthly. That won’t change. What will change is how much time passes between what we write and when it appears. A production cycle that took several months will now take just weeks. (So for this issue, I am writing this on August 1st for a September publication date.) Much more of our stuff will be current, or as close to now as we can get. We always will remain a print publica- tion at heart (and in that respect, we will be no different from the rest of journalism), but we won’t remain contained by the print medium. That medium, where nearly all of our contributors grew up, has legacy values (fairness, trans

    --
    Track IP - Remotely track the IP address of a machine via email or MySQL.
    1. Re:From the Editor by PCM2 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Ever since I discovered HTML, it’s been my preferred format for writing. Every word of mine that’s gone into Linux Journal, since I started in 1996, has been written and delivered in HTML.

      Hahaha, totally typical. When I edited Randall Schwartz's column for Web Techniques magazine, he delivered his manuscripts in Perldoc format. (Note: This was neither cute nor geeky, it was just a pain in the ass.)

      What’s different for me this time is that I’m not paying attention to my monthly 900-word limit (or less if images are involved). While a word limit does impose the discipline of brevity, the fact remains that brevity is not the only virtue of good writing. Yes, it’s a good one to have when your column appears on the last page of a print magazine. But when that magazine is no longer confined by the dimensions of printed pages, you’re free to go longer—or shorter, as the case may be.

      It's my belief that this is precisely what is wrong with a lot of online-only writing. Nobody is bothering to edit it anymore. Writers are free to ramble on for as long as they choose, and most readers end up tuning out after the first page (or not reading TFA at all). When an editor pretends that an online brain-dump is actually better than a well-edited article, watch out: the publication is about to take a nosedive.

      Linux Journal always has been a publi- cation for the Linux Community. Linux Journal will now be a publication by the Linux Community as well.

      Oh, so no editing, and no actual writing either? Where's my checkbook?

      --
      Breakfast served all day!
    2. Re:From the Editor by afabbro · · Score: 2

      "Ever since I discovered HTML, it’s been my preferred format for writing. Every word of mine that’s gone into Linux Journal, since I started in 1996, has been written and delivered in HTML

      Um, Doc, the Linux Journal Author's Guide says "Articles must be sent as plain ASCII text".

      --
      Advice: on VPS providers
    3. Re:From the Editor by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 2

      Oh, wow, I enjoyed Web Techniques back in the day. Thanks for that.

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    4. Re:From the Editor by PCM2 · · Score: 2

      Oh, wow, I enjoyed Web Techniques back in the day. Thanks for that.

      You're welcome, though I can't take a lot of credit.

      I was hired at Web Techniques as Senior Technology Editor. It was the first full-time editorial position I'd ever held. After they hired me I asked them why me out of all the other candidates. The editor-in-chief told me that out of all of the candidates he interviewed, I was the only one who gave an acceptable answer to the question "what is the relationship between Java and JavaScript?" He said every other candidate gave an entirely different answer, and he had never heard so much made-up bullshit in his life.

      Unfortunately, on the first week of my job, when I hadn't even really finished arranging things on my desk, I got called into the publisher's office for a meeting. He explained that they were going to be relaunching the magazine with more of an enterprise focus, and he was real sorry about that, but he couldn't tell me before I was hired because it was all confidential. I don't remember how many issues of Web Techniques I contributed to before the relaunch actually happened; it might have been a year's worth, but maybe less. I gave my 100 percent for the relaunched magazine, too (it was called New Architect), but I think it was a better magazine in its original format. Unfortunately, it was really difficult to sell ads against a magazine full of code listings at that time, and I don't think it's gotten any easier. So I do feel for the Linux Journal in that respect.

      --
      Breakfast served all day!
  10. Re:You can't wipe your ass with an e-reader. by similar_name · · Score: 3, Funny

    At least I can wipe my ass with it after I take a big shit. I'm not even joking. Magazines and newspapers make great toilet paper substitutes.

    I disagree. Glossy paper just smears the shit around and newspaper gets ink all over your ass. You're better off with a sock.

  11. Been done already... by jedidiah · · Score: 1

    ...that whole "digital magazine" thing has been done already.

    It's called the Linux Gazette.

    While it's been nice to have PDFs of the LJ, I am not happy to see the hard copy go away.

    --
    A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    1. Re:Been done already... by tomhudson · · Score: 3, Interesting

      ...that whole "digital magazine" thing has been done already.

      It's called the Linux Gazette.

      linuxjournal is squatting linuxgazette.com. You may want to try the net domain for the real thing.

      I stopped buying linux journal when the articles became too predictable - rehashes of the same articles from the same month the previous year. Boring!

    2. Re:Been done already... by mysidia · · Score: 1

      linuxjournal is squatting linuxgazette.com

      Sounds like a trademark lawsuit or UDRP dispute waiting to happen....

      Come to think of it... didn't Linus own the trademark to Linux and assign it to the Linux Trademark Institute with a mind towards prohibiting chicanery like that?

  12. Stall reading ... by NetKonig · · Score: 1

    I guess need to find something else to read when in the "library" at work..

  13. Bad for the non-computer users by blendergasket · · Score: 3, Funny

    That really sucks for the subscribers who either don't have access to or don't know how to use a computer.

    1. Re:Bad for the non-computer users by healyp · · Score: 2

      No, they're probably reading PCWorld

    2. Re:Bad for the non-computer users by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Or "Sarcasm For Dummies"

    3. Re:Bad for the non-computer users by kenh · · Score: 1

      I don't think that represents a significant portion of LJ readership...

      --
      Ken
  14. Re:You can't wipe your ass with an e-reader. by wisnoskij · · Score: 1

    I completely agree, a e-reader would probably make better toilet paper then the glossy stuff they use for mags.

    --
    Troll is not a replacement for I disagree.
  15. Digital journal? What's the problem? by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 1

    It's all command-line anyway; how much resolution do you really need?

    --
    #DeleteChrome
    1. Re:Digital journal? What's the problem? by mysidia · · Score: 1

      It's all command-line anyway; how much resolution do you really need?

      You never heard of Xorg, Freedesktop, or KDE?

    2. Re:Digital journal? What's the problem? by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 1

      #!/bin/bash

      echo "Woosh"
      exit 0

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    3. Re:Digital journal? What's the problem? by dotgain · · Score: 1

      Whoosh is for jokes that aren't noticed by respondents. It's not a way to tell people you're merely trolling and acting more ignorant that you are in reality.

  16. So much for visibility by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    One of the nice things about printed magazines, is they add literal visibility of Linux being popular. One of the reasons I subscribed.

  17. Won't be renewing by Vyse+of+Arcadia · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I subscribed to Linux Journal because I wanted to support a Linux publication. I can get everything I cared about from Linux Journal from a variety of blogs that I already subscribe to, for free, via RSS.

  18. Re:Marginal Cost Of Production v. Reader Demograph by uniquegeek · · Score: 1

    Agree - this makes me think maybe the reason the price isn't changing is because they know ad sales are going to plummet.

    The email I received started me thinking - they are implementing an additional system to one pdf. I hope it's more user-friendly than a magazine being available through EBSCO at your library, where you have to click on 70 links to get the whole magazine.

    Part of the problem I have with the one-pdf is some of the ads have a crapload of image and text boxes - unvectorized, unrasterized. They take too long to load. I can't nicely split the pdf into 4-6 easy-to-load sections unless I want to run Acrobat Professional...

  19. here is the email text by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    The August 2011 issue marks our last print run for Linux Journal, but it is not our last edition. We will continue publishing our monthly magazine in digital form, in fact greatly building upon it, while continuing to present fresh material every day on the Web.

    Many of you have been with us since Linux Journal began, in 1994. Ever since our first issue, Linux Journal has been the premier Linux monthly, showing up on newsstands all over the world, as well as in your mailboxes. But, we now consume information vastly differently from the way we did 17 years ago, and it's time to embrace the fact that Linux Journal needs to adapt and conform to you, our readers, with formats and platforms that best fit into your digital, online and mobile lives.

    We understand that many readers still prefer hard-copy magazines. But, we also have seen many long-standing, excellent publications either come to an end or grow very thin due to drastic increases in printing costs and decreases in print advertising budgets. We don't want either of those things to happen to Linux Journal, and we are making this change so we can continue delivering the quality content our readers enjoy. We have a core readership that has stuck with us -- and stuck with Linux -- for a generation. You, our readers, are at the very heart of Linux, and always have been. We want to keep that heart beating.

    Beginning with the September 2011 edition of Linux Journal, issue number 209, all subscribers will be offered Linux Journal Digital Edition.

    Our editorial coverage will not change, only the format. You'll enjoy the same, familiar experience as thumbing through a print magazine, dwelling over stories, and following the flow of the magazine's layout with these added benefits:

    * Timely delivery: each issue will arrive in your e-mail inbox automatically on the first day of every month.
    * Off-line reading: you can download one article or the entire magazine and conveniently take with you. You also can print any pages you want.
    * Easy navigation: the live table of contents, embedded page links, and phrase search and highlighting make it quick and easy to go to the articles you want to read most.
    * Save, clip, share: clip pages and save them, or even forward them to friends and colleagues to share ideas and information.
    * Interactivity: we'll be incorporating rich media in future issues so you can look forward to reading a product review and watching our editors introduce the product hands-on in a video.

    As our current subscriber, we will send you the PDF edition every month. We also have a new format-- an Enhanced Digital Edition. Starting with the October issue, if you would like to receive the Enhanced Digital Edition, we need you to visit linuxjournal.com/updateaccount and select Enhanced Digital Edition as the format you wish to receive. We realize that you may have paid more than our new subscription rate ($29.50 USD), so your current subscription term will be extended based on the remaining value of your subscription. For example, if your current remaining subscription value is $20.00 USD, the term will be extended by 8 issues based on the issue value of $2.56.

    Coming in September, you'll also be able to access Linux Journal through iPhone, iPad and Android mobile applications. Now anywhere you go, Linux Journal will go with you. We'll notify our paid subscribers of the application availability come September.

    We welcome your input and participation in making Linux Journal the magazine you want it to be. We have set up a forum for conversation with subscribers. If you have other questions regarding your subscription, please reply to this email and include your Subscription ID XXXXXXXX within the message. To help in that direction, visit our FAQ at linuxjournal.com/digital-faq.

    Linux Journal is your magazine. You're the ones who pay for it, and you're the ones

  20. My PC doesn't fit in my bathroom by oldfrog · · Score: 1

    How am i supposed to read the journal, when I can't take it with me?

    1. Re:My PC doesn't fit in my bathroom by wdef · · Score: 1

      I have bought the occasional paper periodical of this ilk in the past and read these while defecating. I find such reading matter helps me enjoy a goodly shit. Some may say that is an appropriate response to the content. Nevertheless, I dislike the idea of balancing my expensive new tablet on my knees while clenching my teeth, grunting loudly and holding on to solid fixtures in the bathroom for physical support.

  21. Re:Marginal Cost Of Production v. Reader Demograph by mysidia · · Score: 1

    Of any periodicals, I think Linux-oriented rags are excellent candidates to go all digital. I think I'm pretty safe in assuming that the readership is on-line enough that getting their subscription material on-line is a natural step.

    Maybe... but the next natural step when they're on-line enough, is to get their 'article fix' from free sources such as blogs, and skip on the pay subscriptions.

  22. Doesn't matter... by zenyu · · Score: 1

    How many people actually read it since Doc Searls decided to make the magazine articles more shallow and "approachable" ?

    Like Dr. Dobbs Journal, it was really already gone when it went "100% Digital". Same as BYTE Magazine, by the time it was "100% Digital" all that was left was single mildly entertaining column.

    1. Re:Doesn't matter... by wdef · · Score: 1

      Yes I miss the more techy articles. If it's not in your field you occasionally pick up something or are encouraged to find out more.

  23. I paid for a paper magazine by agoliveira · · Score: 1

    and, as I live in Brazil, paid extra for international shipping.
    I wouldn't mind (much) the change if they honor my current subscription and send me the magazines I already paid for! I just sent an email demanding a refund and cancelation.

    --
    Scientia est Potentia
  24. not another one by renegade600 · · Score: 2

    the rate everything is going digital, pretty soon I won't have anything to read when on the porcelain throne.

    1. Re:not another one by AchilleTalon · · Score: 1

      You should be glad, your hemorrhoids will go digital as well. No more pain in the ass my friend.

      --
      Achille Talon
      Hop!
  25. Re:Car Analogy by TaoPhoenix · · Score: 1

    Hello.

    Your Car of the Decade Club used to entitle you to a Camry. However, management has decided it only entitles you to Corolla now.

    Best Wishes,

    --Toyota

    --
    My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
  26. Marginal cost of production by mckwant · · Score: 1

    Sorry, I'm tired of this. Marginal cost of production, that is, the cost incurred to make one copy of the magazine is NOT equivalent to the actual cost of creating that copy. There is a fixed cost involved with making the master copy. Granted, that cost is fixed, and because it is fixed, as the number of issues produced increases, the contribution of the fixed cost goes to zero.

    But asymptotic to zero isn't the same thing as zero. There are costs to be recouped, ROI to be realized, and salaries to be paid. I'm not about to argue that Linux magazine is correct in charging the same amount for print issues as digital, but "free to make and distribute" is ridiculous.

    --
    ceci n'est pas un sig.
    1. Re:Marginal cost of production by wisnoskij · · Score: 1

      when I said free to make and distribute I meant a single copy is free to make and distribute (basically free, as a few cpu cycles and a few megs of bandwidth is under a cent).

      Now of course there are fixed costs, but I would not be surprised if nice glossy paper + tons of ink + storage and handling + shipping = a huge percentage of the previously printed mags cost.

      --
      Troll is not a replacement for I disagree.
  27. Eventually I Will Have No Magazine Subsciptions by rally2xs · · Score: 2

    PC Mag went digital, subscription is up, I didn't renew. That's the way I intend to treat each magazine every time that happens. I pay money for a magazine, not a download. Do not enjoy reading on a monitor.

    1. Re:Eventually I Will Have No Magazine Subsciptions by Astronomerguy · · Score: 1

      You have the right to vote with your wallet, but I don't have to agree with your decision. Personally, I initially had a hard time getting used to e-copies of mags, but I adapted. The publishing world is in rough shape right now, and as commercial entities, they have to be profitable. With the economy in the dumps, people aren't subscribing or buying as much off of the newsstands, and advertisers are guarding their cash carefully. Your choice: read free commentary on the 'net with no guarantee of quality or accuracy, or "suck it up buttercup" and read e-version written by professionals and edited by professionals. I'd rather switch mediums than give up quality.

    2. Re:Eventually I Will Have No Magazine Subsciptions by rally2xs · · Score: 1

      I don't see why we can't have it both ways, you buy your digital edition, and I get paper.

      And if you're involved with the PC Magazine version, you'll notice something lacking. Advertisements. Want to see what the latest Dell or Gateway or whatever is without remembering to search for it on the net, or discover a brand new company that has just what you need by seeing an ad in PC Magazine? Not gonna happen.

  28. marginal production cost by mckwant · · Score: 1, Redundant

    Sorry, I'm tired of this. Marginal cost of production, that is, the cost incurred to make one copy of the magazine is NOT equivalent to the actual cost of creating that copy. There is a fixed cost involved with making the master copy. Granted, that cost is fixed, and because it is fixed, as the number of issues produced increases, the contribution of the fixed cost goes to zero.

    But asymptotic to zero isn't the same thing as zero. There are costs to be recouped, ROI to be realized, and salaries to be paid. I'm not about to argue that Linux magazine is correct in charging the same amount for print issues as digital, but "free to make and distribute" is ridiculous.

    --
    ceci n'est pas un sig.
  29. Re:Well they lost me then by rubycodez · · Score: 1

    you can put "click-tracked" URLs in a PDF, 1990s boy.

  30. Luddites: PFO by Astronomerguy · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    As a member of an organization that also has a publishing arm that includes a periodical (I'm on the Publishing Committee), I can tell you that the costs of publishing and distributing dead-tree copies is astronomical (pun intended), and unless your subscription fees are stupid-high or you have enough advertisers to off-set most of the costs, you will be drowning in a sea of red ink. We had to make the tough decisions to 1.) allow limited advertising, and 2.) go to all digital, with printed copies provided for an additional nominal fee for those that desired them. For those with their fingers in their ears chanting "na-na-na-can't-hear-you", good riddance. Commercial organizations have to pay writers, freelancers, printers, the postal service, utility bills, rents, taxes etc. I'm surprised that so many have survived this long. As a non-profit, we operate on a shoe-string budget. Those of you who begrudge commercial periodicals their meagre margins and who have made the tough decision to keep publishing and keep employing writers, fuck you. Fuck you to Heck. Get with the 21st century or go away. You won't be missed.

    1. Re:Luddites: PFO by Astronomerguy · · Score: 1

      To the person who modded me down: Are you willing to pay more to keep receiving your paper copy of your favourite magazine? If so. how much more? How much profit will you allow the publisher to make? Should the writers be allowed to make a living wage? I'm not being factitious - these are serious, germane questions. Unless we can answer these questions honestly, most periodicals cannot survive.

    2. Re:Luddites: PFO by base3 · · Score: 1

      I understand completely -- but they have no right to pull the rug out from under people who already paid in advance for issues of a real, paper magazine. That, and even if I were happy with having the rest of my subscription filled with something that has no value to me (I can read about Linux on a computer all day long on lots of websites without paying for a subscription to anything) there are enough people who are going to cancel or not subscribe to begin with that "going digital" is just the first droplets of the magazine circling the drain. It's the beginning of the end, because not enough people are willing to pay for what is made redundant by the web.

      --
      One CPU cycle wasted on digital restrictions management is ONE TOO MANY.
  31. Re:What a joke this is turning out to be anymore.. by ksd1337 · · Score: 1

    History repeats itself. Welcome to the '90s!

  32. A Matter Of Survival by Zirbert · · Score: 1

    I assume this was a matter of near-term survival, which LJ's message to subscribers hinted at but didn't state quite so bluntly (unless my skim-read overlooked it). From a practical perspective, LJ's subscribers probably had two choices: continue to receive a paper publication whose life expectancy was measured in months (at most), or receive a digital edition for hopefully somewhat longer.

    I also assume that going digital with no (or minimal, or easily removed) DRM will mean that LJ will be readily available on filesharing sites within minutes of the release of each issue. That may already be the case, though - I haven't checked.Hopefully the impact of piracy on LJ will be mitigated by the fact that most of their subscribers are probably motivated to pay them out of a wish to support their philosophy, not because they had no way of getting the same information elsewhere for free. I know virtually all of my media spending these days works that way. I'm paying for it because I want to support the creators, not because I can't get it for free.

    -Zirbert, Linux user since 2009

    1. Re:A Matter Of Survival by OFnow · · Score: 1

      I assume this was a matter of near-term survival, which LJ's message to subscribers hinted at but didn't state quite so bluntly

      Reading the magazine on a computer monitor is torture, it does not represent survival of the magazine.

      No computer monitor I can find has sufficient density of pixels, and any that might exist would certainly not be supported by current graphics cards and connectors.

  33. Re:What a joke this is turning out to be anymore.. by kvvbassboy · · Score: 1

    Just curious, how so?

  34. Re:No surprise by Ash-Fox · · Score: 1

    People here claim that print paper is obsolete and ugly. So come on go hi-tech until PDF is no longer supported or you lose all your files in an HDD crash. Enjoy!

    Why would I lose all my files in an HDD crash?

    --
    Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
  35. Electronic Mags by donb3 · · Score: 1

    I'm glad they're doing this. For a long while I wondered how to change over, now they did it already. Great News> PS My PC fits in the bathroom.....

  36. Oh no... by Fizzl · · Score: 1

    This is like the only magazine I would find interesting when browsing for something to read on a train trip.
    I used to be a subscriber, but it got a bit expensive with shipping to Finland. I will dearly miss this magazine and will now go and encase my hard copies in lucite.

  37. And nothing of value was lost by symbolset · · Score: 1

    I gave up reading it online six years ago when it became obvious the anti-Linux astroturfers in the comment threads were being deliberately recruited to be article authors and editors. It became the "Linux-suxxors Journal."

    Did they ever turn that around?

    --
    Help stamp out iliturcy.
  38. Re:Marginal Cost Of Production v. Reader Demograph by dltaylor · · Score: 1

    I have been using Linux since 1996, and a Linux Journal subscriber for a very long time.

    While I do have a Nook Color, I have no desire to read a magazine on it, nor on my desktop.

    If I have to go to the Web for something, it it will be a specific article or googled link, not to download a magazine as pdf.

    I want a refund.

  39. Re:No thanks.: Ditto by korpenkraxar · · Score: 1

    This

  40. Re:No thanks.: Ditto by rolfwind · · Score: 1

    Maybe it's not the devices themselves, but your brain coping with information overload.

    And I find myself skimming to get to the freaking point. Many writers are ****ing verbose.

    With that, I'll deposit this here:
    http://www.cla.wayne.edu/polisci/kdk/general/sources/zinsser.htm

  41. Subscription rate by JayHades · · Score: 1

    This will *not* be at the same rate. It was clear enough in the mail, people will get en extention of their current subscription in par with the remaining amount they subscribed at, now at a rate of 2.46$/copy. You mail -- read it.

  42. People that read while pooping... by gatkinso · · Score: 1

    ...are gross.

    Do your business then get out.

    Why you want to catch up on the latest build of OpenSSL while sitting in a cloud of feces stench is beyond me.

    --
    I am very small, utmostly microscopic.
  43. Re:What a joke this is turning out to be anymore.. by ksd1337 · · Score: 1

    Putting "e-" in front of everything. Although, to be more accurate, these days it's more of putting "i" in front of everything (I'm looking at a certain fruity electronics company.)

  44. Re:Just like DDJ by rally2xs · · Score: 1

    Oh, yeah, DDJ makes 2 of these that I haven't resubscribed to...

  45. From a paying subscriber's perspective by zuki · · Score: 1

    I just don't know how that's going to work out. For example I am getting a lot of free subscriptions to industry-specific magazines that used to be print, now digital-only. While I occasionally read an issue here and there, it certainly is far less than it used to be with the dead-tree edition.

    While I understand that they have to go with the times, it seems to me that going digital-only has its own set of challenges, and that very few publishers have really bridged the gap that will make their digital publication attractive, with features that make it easy to search, cross-reference and with the types of niceties that would make someone want to pay for it, like a bonus yearly archive or something of that sort.

    Honestly I am not sure that I will be renewing under those circumstances, just because I find that - for better or for worse - I tend to read less of those digital editions that I would if the same magazine was still in physical form.

    There are many areas of our lives that this digital revolution has been totally restructuring, but while the cost-cutting and efficiency measures do make a great deal of sense when looking at it from the standpoint of a publication's survival, the way the customers relate to this new product is sometimes profoundly less of a pleasurable experience.

    Another prime example of that is the tactile difference between holding a full LP sleeve in your hand, and looking at the .jpg image of it in iTunes. Yes, the information is there, but arguably it is much less of the immersive experience that it may have previously been; not that I am against digital, just pointing out that in the cost-cutting frenzy most haven't figured out how to replace the very experience provided by what they had with something that has the same impact (beyond the mere information contained in the article or just the song in the case of an LP). So for example in LJ's case, if they are in fact thinking that this is a good move, they should come up with innovative indexing features that allow the reader to have access to the information and browse articles a bit better than clunky .pdf files.

    All of this cost-saving is great, but I sort of deplore that what replaces it doesn't nearly have the same level of convenience and friendliness yet. The challenge is therefore for digital publishers to come up with new killer features and ways to organize the information they are presenting in a way that leverages the platform they are on rather than using it as a crutch, and which will ultimately motivate their readership to subscribe. Make it a compelling upgrade, not a letdown!

  46. Cancelled by medraut · · Score: 2

    I cancelled my subscription because of this. The irony is that I had just signed up - subscription to start Oct 01 :-)

    Personally I _want_ a magazine that can sit on the table in my lounge, *cough* or on top of the toilet cistern. I do wonder how many subscribers they're going to lose because of this. Im sure they did a survey and decided the benefit was worth it.

    Heh, LinuxJournal deathclock anyone?
    Medraut

       

  47. Re:Marginal Cost Of Production v. Reader Demograph by kenh · · Score: 1

    Newsstand purchases are verifiable and serve as an indication of reader interest in the magazine. A magazine with strong newsstand sales has high reader interest.

    --
    Ken
  48. Re:Marginal Cost Of Production v. Reader Demograph by kenh · · Score: 1

    They've decided to devolve to a premium website, just as accessible as a free website, but will their content support $2.56/month?

    And their content will update monthly?

    --
    Ken
  49. Damn by vinn · · Score: 1

    I stopped subscribing to Linux Journal about ten years ago.. then last year I resubscribed because I'm starting to get interested in Linux again.

    It's sad the publishing industry is jumping so hard and fast on the digital bandwagon. I suspect in the future we're going to see a reverse digital movement - companies who set up shop solely to take online content and put it print form. It'll be a novelty and a niche industry, similar to vinyl records. The headlines in 2030 could very well read something like "Printed books have best selling year since 2010."

    I like my words printed on dead trees.

    --
    ----- obSig
  50. Read it on my monitor. Not. by OFnow · · Score: 1

    They did not say anything about giving me a computer monitor with sufficient pixel density that the magazine reads as well as paper. Sadly, that means I won't be reading the magazine (I paid for a subscription, now the subscription is useless). For me, they just went out of business. Period.

  51. Ugh! A rip off. by HiThere · · Score: 1

    An electronic subscription is essentially worthless to me. This means I paid for something I'm not going to get, and I'm not real pleased about the thieves.

    I'll admit that I already didn't read all of it, but this way I'm not going to read any. Reading on a monitor is much more stressful than reading a book or a magazine, and not even worth it for fiction.

    Article reading is a quite different activity from "looking something up", which is something I do on a monitor. I don't, however, follow ANY on-line magazine. And I don't read on-line books. Or pdfs. If I try, all I get out of it is a headache. And as for those who say I should get a Kindel, you are just bat-shit crazy. I'm not going to invest in something where after I've bought something the vendor can yank it back without my consent. And I'm not about to consent. Because of that I'm not likely to ever find out if the claims that it's screen is clear enough that it won't cause eye-strain are correct. And without proof I'm not about to believe it. (Younger eyes tend to be more flexible, so what works for an average 20 year old can't reasonably be expected to be evidence that it would work for me.)

    --

    I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
  52. I love linux journal by seeker_1us · · Score: 1

    But I'll never read it again. Seriously. I like hardcopy.

  53. Re:Well they lost me then by rubycodez · · Score: 1

    Not true that click tracking avoidable just because javascript isn't on

    there are other ways the noscript to track clicking. In the dot-com boom, I worked for a company for which people voluntarily signed up to get e-mail deals from vendors in specific categories. You could, for instance, check "sporting goods" and get coupons from sports shoe makers; or check "automotive maintenance" and get coupons and deals for oil changes or brake jobs. Anyway, the users agreed to marketing tracking. We made each URL in emails unique, put in "beacon pixels" in both emails and web pages, correlated web logs, cookied, etc. etc. Some of those things didn't depend on javascript. we could even tell if someone forwarded email to someone else, who responded to "campaigns",.