Comments on: Print? So what? http://www.buzzmachine.com/2006/07/26/print-so-what/ by Jeff Jarvis Wed, 03 Dec 2008 06:04:48 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1 By: KR Blog » Hamlet’s Blackberry http://www.buzzmachine.com/2006/07/26/print-so-what/#comment-385858 KR Blog » Hamlet’s Blackberry Thu, 20 Nov 2008 15:37:05 +0000 http://www.buzzmachine.com/index.php/2006/07/26/print-so-what/#comment-385858 [...] Miss Having a Newspaper in my Hands” (he still does), Scott Donaton’s column upon our sentimentality toward the printed word, Dan Okrent’s lecture “The Death of Print,” Paul Saffo’s “The [...] [...] Miss Having a Newspaper in my Hands” (he still does), Scott Donaton’s column upon our sentimentality toward the printed word, Dan Okrent’s lecture “The Death of Print,” Paul Saffo’s “The [...]

]]> By: Ken W http://www.buzzmachine.com/2006/07/26/print-so-what/#comment-97902 Ken W Fri, 28 Jul 2006 19:13:33 +0000 http://www.buzzmachine.com/index.php/2006/07/26/print-so-what/#comment-97902 Ronbo: Winding Road is a nice site. I have to say, the net will beat newspapers with images every time. [[Ken - thanks for your suggestion; I took the advice and deleted it then. Much appreciated - jeff]] Ronbo:
Winding Road is a nice site. I have to say, the net will beat newspapers with images every time.

[[Ken - thanks for your suggestion; I took the advice and deleted it then. Much appreciated - jeff]]

]]> By: ronbo http://www.buzzmachine.com/2006/07/26/print-so-what/#comment-97834 ronbo Fri, 28 Jul 2006 16:10:51 +0000 http://www.buzzmachine.com/index.php/2006/07/26/print-so-what/#comment-97834 Sometimes technology has to catch up to people and sometimes it's the other way around. In a sense, the iPod became inevitable the day the first transistor radio was sold, and Tivo was foreshadowed by the original VCR. But it took a long time for, say, personal computers and mobile phones to gain significant penetration. My hypothesis is that adoption of a technology will be slowed when <i>either</i> (a) the new technology doesn't meet a strong pre-existing demand or solve a serious pre-existing problem <i>or</i> (b) the new technology requires significant compromises. Mobiles are an example of case (a), since (i) we got along fine without them (ii) there were acceptable alternatives (from pay phones to CB radio) and (iii) they were expensive enough at first to discourage casual experimentation. Online-only newspapers are an example of case (b), as Johnny's comment makes clear. Digital filmmaking is in the same position: substantial advantages in speed and cost offset by legitimate concerns about picture quality. I suspect, however, that online-only "papers" is just a matter of time. I feel the way Johnny does about "the snap of the paper" but my kids might not. PS - check out <a href="http://www.windingroad.com">windingroad.com</a>, an online-only automotive magazine with editorial and advertising that is on a par with any major car book. Sometimes technology has to catch up to people and sometimes it’s the other way around.

In a sense, the iPod became inevitable the day the first transistor radio was sold, and Tivo was foreshadowed by the original VCR. But it took a long time for, say, personal computers and mobile phones to gain significant penetration.

My hypothesis is that adoption of a technology will be slowed when either (a) the new technology doesn’t meet a strong pre-existing demand or solve a serious pre-existing problem or (b) the new technology requires significant compromises.

Mobiles are an example of case (a), since (i) we got along fine without them (ii) there were acceptable alternatives (from pay phones to CB radio) and (iii) they were expensive enough at first to discourage casual experimentation.

Online-only newspapers are an example of case (b), as Johnny’s comment makes clear. Digital filmmaking is in the same position: substantial advantages in speed and cost offset by legitimate concerns about picture quality. I suspect, however, that online-only “papers” is just a matter of time. I feel the way Johnny does about “the snap of the paper” but my kids might not.

PS - check out windingroad.com, an online-only automotive magazine with editorial and advertising that is on a par with any major car book.

]]> By: Johnny http://www.buzzmachine.com/2006/07/26/print-so-what/#comment-97470 Johnny Thu, 27 Jul 2006 14:42:26 +0000 http://www.buzzmachine.com/index.php/2006/07/26/print-so-what/#comment-97470 Jeff, I'm a big fan of your blog, but the physicality of media also matters. I read the Wall Street Journal (and the loved/hated Gray Lady) almost upside down on my couch and I love the snap of the paper. The ergonomics and usability of media matters. There's nothing like a crisp Wall Street Journal paper waiting to be read and rumpled up. I read the articles in deeper detail. The web is nice for scanning and short reading. Paper has its place, particularly if papers begin publishing more reader feedback. Jeff, I’m a big fan of your blog, but the physicality of media also matters. I read the Wall Street Journal (and the loved/hated Gray Lady) almost upside down on my couch and I love the snap of the paper. The ergonomics and usability of media matters. There’s nothing like a crisp Wall Street Journal paper waiting to be read and rumpled up. I read the articles in deeper detail. The web is nice for scanning and short reading. Paper has its place, particularly if papers begin publishing more reader feedback.

]]> By: Ken W http://www.buzzmachine.com/2006/07/26/print-so-what/#comment-97316 Ken W Thu, 27 Jul 2006 04:23:02 +0000 http://www.buzzmachine.com/index.php/2006/07/26/print-so-what/#comment-97316 Agree with Mike on the WSJ's usability. Parts of it cost money, so none of it is worth visiting. That's always going to hold back online readership. It would be nice to see the daily print focus on opinion and analysis and leave the major events to online news sources, which we're more likely to have already seen on the web by the time we buy the paper, anyway. Agree with Mike on the WSJ’s usability. Parts of it cost money, so none of it is worth visiting. That’s always going to hold back online readership.

It would be nice to see the daily print focus on opinion and analysis and leave the major events to online news sources, which we’re more likely to have already seen on the web by the time we buy the paper, anyway.

]]> By: Mike G http://www.buzzmachine.com/2006/07/26/print-so-what/#comment-97309 Mike G Thu, 27 Jul 2006 04:08:40 +0000 http://www.buzzmachine.com/index.php/2006/07/26/print-so-what/#comment-97309 The WSJ's online version is about as user-friendly as any out there. Which means it's still well short of the paper edition in certain aspects. Maybe the paper WSJ is the model for the future-- a lean, focused, national niche-targeted paper paper, as opposed to the 12-section, tree-wasting behemoths that most city-based dailies are. The WSJ’s online version is about as user-friendly as any out there. Which means it’s still well short of the paper edition in certain aspects.

Maybe the paper WSJ is the model for the future– a lean, focused, national niche-targeted paper paper, as opposed to the 12-section, tree-wasting behemoths that most city-based dailies are.

]]>