PDA

View Full Version : Newsstand Publications Can Update Only Once Per Day




MacRumors
Sep 21, 2011, 02:31 PM
http://images.macrumors.com/im/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/09/21/newsstand-publications-can-update-only-once-per-day/)


http://images.macrumors.com/article-new/2011/09/ios_5_newsstand1.jpg


Publications participating in Apple's Newsstand feature (http://www.apple.com/ios/ios5/features.html#newsstand), coming this fall in iOS 5, will only be able to update their issues once per day, according to documents (http://appadvice.com/appnn/2011/09/everything-you-need-to-know-about-newsstand-revealed) obtained by AppAdvice.
The background downloading feature of Newsstand is interestingly handled by push notifications. That is, when new content is ready, the developer can, once a day, send a push notification to your device with special data, and your iDevice will then (if it's ready to do so, battery and connection-wise) start downloading new content in the background.The ability to only update once per day is a curious decision, as it seems publishers will not be able to automatically update their pubs to reflect breaking news or publish corrections as they currently can via a website or dedicated app.

This isn't a huge deal for weekly or monthly print publications which are used to having deadlines before closing the book on an edition. But for daily newspapers, who are getting into the habit of updating a newspaper webpage dozens of times a day, it may present some difficulties. Oddly, digital technologies like the iPad have pushed publications towards an "up-to-the-minute" news cycle, but Newsstand seems to be going back to a more traditional "once-a-day" publishing model.

As with all Apple's content efforts, getting publishers on board isn't going as smoothly as the company would hope. Eight French publications are banding together (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/09/21/french-newspapers-teaming-up-in-digital-content-negotiations-with-apple/) to negotiate with Apple regarding Newsstand access, with concerns over the 30% cut in revenue that Apple traditionally takes, and access to customer data.

Article Link: Newsstand Publications Can Update Only Once Per Day (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/09/21/newsstand-publications-can-update-only-once-per-day/)



rti92391
Sep 21, 2011, 02:36 PM
Has anyone else noticed a version of The Daily on the iPhone's Newsstand?

iPad 3
Sep 21, 2011, 02:37 PM
Apple really don't help themselves do they, they go out of their way to make things as unattractive as possible for publishers it seems to me.

room237
Sep 21, 2011, 02:43 PM
Well, this sucks. I guess I'll stick to RSS apps and Instapaper. Disappointing. Why not give us the option to limit how many times a day it updates?

Biolizard
Sep 21, 2011, 02:49 PM
Oh come on MR, this is a complete non-issue you're trying to peddle as the next big controversy.

Apple is positioning Newsstand as an easy way for traditional print publications to be digitally supplied; you are literally reading the print magazine on an iPad. This requires a hefty amount of information transfer in one go and so it's logical to allow Newsstand to auto-download an edition by itself. This happens once and once only for each edition of the publication.

If however you want to receive up-to-the-minute information, that needs a dedicated app; Newsstand is not, and should not, be the place, for that. Now, if the traditional app frameworks don't provide for the kind of push notifications you want to achieve, that's a separate issue altogether; don't try to put the round peg in the square hole by wanting to use Newsstand for something it shouldn't be used for.

room237
Sep 21, 2011, 03:03 PM
Oh come on MR, this is a complete non-issue you're trying to peddle as the next big controversy.

Apple is positioning Newsstand as an easy way for traditional print publications to be digitally supplied; you are literally reading the print magazine on an iPad. This requires a hefty amount of information transfer in one go and so it's logical to allow Newsstand to auto-download an edition by itself. This happens once and once only for each edition of the publication.

If however you want to receive up-to-the-minute information, that needs a dedicated app; Newsstand is not, and should not, be the place, for that. Now, if the traditional app frameworks don't provide for the kind of push notifications you want to achieve, that's a separate issue altogether; don't try to put the round peg in the square hole by wanting to use Newsstand for something it shouldn't be used for.

In my opinion, that was the whole advantage of newsstand. If it only downloads once a day, well, when will that be? Before I leave the house each morning? Maybe not. So, in the subway I could be stuck with yesterday's content, unless I manually download everything before leaving, and that defeats the purpose of push. So while I agree with you about push limitations being a separate issue, I was hoping Newsstand would be the way around that limitation. Otherwise, all it's really good for is keeping your publications in the same place, something I can do with dedicated apps and folders.

flash84x
Sep 21, 2011, 03:05 PM
This for background downloads of issues, this in no way limits the app creators ability to have a breaking news section just like the news apps have today. This is ADDED functionality it takes nothing away. Terrible positioning on this article MR. They can still use push notifications just like CNN etc do today to alert the user of a new article in the breaking news section.

nastebu
Sep 21, 2011, 03:34 PM
If it only downloads once a day, well, when will that be? Before I leave the house each morning? Maybe not. So, in the subway I could be stuck with yesterday's content, unless I manually download everything before leaving, and that defeats the purpose of push.

And what if it *does* download before you leave for work? In that case, the system works quite well I think. So before you buy that subscription, make sure you know what time the updating happens so you won't be stuck.

It seems perfectly reasonable to me. There's a useful distinction between a website and a magazine. Websites can be 100% up-to-date. Magazines can provide a more thoughtful and deeper persepective.

ssspinball
Sep 21, 2011, 03:37 PM
Apple really don't help themselves do they, they go out of their way to make things as unattractive as possible for publishers it seems to me.

Correction, Apple goes out of their way to make things as attractive as possible for users. Publishers are and will always be secondary to users in Apple's decisions.

Every time I hear about how Apple won't give away user data to third-parties I cheer for them. Every time I see Apple do something that makes it impossible for irresponsible third-parties to drain your battery life or significantly affect the OS in anyway, I cheer for them.

NAG
Sep 21, 2011, 03:45 PM
I'm hoping apps like Instapaper can take advantage of this so I don't have to remember to open the app at some point to sync the reading list.

accessoriesguy
Sep 21, 2011, 03:46 PM
I think this is good. That way we don't get spammed. During the whole apple lost the iphone in the bar a second time there were like 15 updates in the day, about apple impersonating the police and that there was no report taken (which were both false i think). waiting for things to subside we saw the full picture.

If we want a constant amount of updates, we could add them on twitter or some other means but not for things like the newspaper, which i enjoy getting a broad range of information at once at an enjoyable pace, rather than a facebook wall.

room237
Sep 21, 2011, 03:51 PM
And what if it *does* download before you leave for work? In that case, the system works quite well I think. So before you buy that subscription, make sure you know what time the updating happens so you won't be stuck.

It seems perfectly reasonable to me. There's a useful distinction between a website and a magazine. Websites can be 100% up-to-date. Magazines can provide a more thoughtful and deeper persepective.

I agree with you. But unless you have a 3G data plan on the iPad, you can't always access a news website or dedicated app. I think that it gave the impression (to me, anyway) that the updates would be more frequent, much like emails which are pushed and downloaded as they become available. It's not the end of the world and yes, it does ADD functionality, but if some content could be text only, I don't see the big deal with allowing more frequent updates.

Dhelsdon
Sep 21, 2011, 03:54 PM
They can only print their magazines once a day, so how is this any different. If they want up to the minute then this outlet isn't for them.. it's pretty simple.

jlgolson
Sep 21, 2011, 03:59 PM
I think this is good. That way we don't get spammed.
This isn't what I mean at all. It's not about getting spammed.

I want it so that when I take my iPad away from Wi-Fi, I will have the latest and greatest news on it.

Not have to update manually. Period. No updating manually, ever, and still have the latest news.

Newsstand doesn't do that.

Meriana
Sep 21, 2011, 04:07 PM
Your aware that constant updating will eat your i-Whatever devices battery pretty fast?

jlgolson
Sep 21, 2011, 04:26 PM
Your aware that constant updating will eat your i-Whatever devices battery pretty fast?No more than Exchange/push email.

Ted13
Sep 21, 2011, 04:31 PM
No more than Exchange/push email.
Because every email you receive is in the 10 to 200 MB range?

Thank you, Apple, for yet again doing the smart thing.

DeaconGTG
Sep 21, 2011, 04:42 PM
In my opinion, that was the whole advantage of newsstand. If it only downloads once a day, well, when will that be? Before I leave the house each morning? Maybe not. So, in the subway I could be stuck with yesterday's content, unless I manually download everything before leaving, and that defeats the purpose of push. So while I agree with you about push limitations being a separate issue, I was hoping Newsstand would be the way around that limitation. Otherwise, all it's really good for is keeping your publications in the same place, something I can do with dedicated apps and folders.

I would assume that the download schedule would work somewhat the same way as newspapers do on the Kindle.

I don't know when you leave the house each morning, and I don't know when the exact update time on the Kindle is. But I do know that I've ocassionally woken up around 5 a.m. (Central) and found the latest copy of the New York Times waiting on my Kindle.

jlgolson
Sep 21, 2011, 04:58 PM
Because every email you receive is in the 10 to 200 MB range?

Thank you, Apple, for yet again doing the smart thing.
It's not smart, it's dumb. I want the most up-to-date news, always. As soon as I turn the thing on.

If there is an option to force fewer updates (like setting email to retrieve every 30 or 60 minutes, as opposed to push), that's great, but the whole idea of the iPad is to have everything at your fingertips -- not 6 hours ago news at your fingertips.

NAG
Sep 21, 2011, 05:10 PM
Because every email you receive is in the 10 to 200 MB range?

Thank you, Apple, for yet again doing the smart thing.

Some of the magazines are even larger because of the method of publishing that converts text to images (stupidly).

genshi
Sep 21, 2011, 05:27 PM
nv. Issue answered.

IzzyBorden
Sep 21, 2011, 05:28 PM
It's not smart, it's dumb. I want the most up-to-date news, always. As soon as I turn the thing on.

If there is an option to force fewer updates (like setting email to retrieve every 30 or 60 minutes, as opposed to push), that's great, but the whole idea of the iPad is to have everything at your fingertips -- not 6 hours ago news at your fingertips.

Wow, for a Macrumors editor you certainly didn't do your research. :rolleyes:

I think you are confusing Newstand with something like an RSS Feed/Reader. Watch the WWDC Keynote (http://www.apple.com/apple-events/wwdc-2011/) again; they make it VERY clear that Newstand is for those daily/weekly/monthly magazine and newspaper subscriptions; to make it easy for you to say, if you have a subscription to New York Times, when you go to bed at night, the newest daily edition of that NYT will be on your iPad when you wake up in the morning.

This is how it's supposed to be. It is NOT a RSS up-to-the-minute news reader. It's for subscriptions! Again, If you subscribe to Wired Magazine, you'll only get it once a month (because, you know, Wired is only published ONCE A MONTH!)

tigres
Sep 21, 2011, 05:34 PM
Who cares. You have to currently wait a week min for new paper content.

entropys
Sep 21, 2011, 05:52 PM
If you have a contract with a cap on 3G downloads, this is exactly what you want. To automatically download the bulk of the publication while you are asleep via your wifi network, then only update when you want to during the day once a notification is received.

Even better would be the ability for a notification to detail what articles are in the updates and allow you to choose which ones to download, with a choice to download the lot in the notification if that is preferred.

jlgolson
Sep 21, 2011, 05:59 PM
Wow, for a Macrumors editor you certainly didn't do your research. :rolleyes:

I think you are confusing Newstand with something like an RSS Feed/Reader. Watch the WWDC Keynote (http://www.apple.com/apple-events/wwdc-2011/) again; they make it VERY clear that Newstand is for those daily/weekly/monthly magazine and newspaper subscriptions; to make it easy for you to say, if you have a subscription to New York Times, when you go to bed at night, the newest daily edition of that NYT will be on your iPad when you wake up in the morning.
When you go to the New York Times website, do you see the news that was published at 11PM the night before?

How about we use the technology in new and fancy ways, rather than going backwards to the way they did it before?

Why would you have an iPad at all when you can just get the paper delivered to your home AND have something to wrap your fish in?

Meriana
Sep 21, 2011, 06:33 PM
I think Apple is just assuming that you won't need the news stand app to get breaking news and that if you have a need to allways stay up2date you'll have a a 3G capable device. The app is designed for magazin and daily news papers, not as a replacement for something like the newyorktimes.com landing page. And keep in mind, it's intented for subscriptions, and Apple probably rightly assumes that people won't buy for just breaking news which they can get on every better news site for free, they'll pay for reports, background informations and articles about topics they're interested in. Nothing which requires an update every few minutes.

I think the main reason is to keep the load on the carriers network as low as possible.

DeaconGTG
Sep 21, 2011, 06:47 PM
When you go to the New York Times website, do you see the news that was published at 11PM the night before?



Improper comparison, seeing that loading the New York Times website is a manual update.

mazz0
Sep 21, 2011, 06:53 PM
Since we're talking about digital stories, often assembled from content already on websites, the concept of "editions" is now somewhat arbitrary. One of the problems I have with printed newspapers is that I've already read half the articles online the day before - do we want to have the same problem in the digital version?

In a digital landscape what's to stop you having a morning and an evening edition (one to read on the way to work and one on the way back)? Or perhaps a morning, a lunch time and an evening edition? Or hourly editions? My point is, you can, digitally, publish an edition as often as you like; the daily restrction is abitrary. I'd like the frequency to be optional so I can say how many times per day I'd like to receive new editions.

Not to worry though, I doubt many apps are going to use Newsstand anyway, which is a shame because apart from this it looks nice.

IzzyBorden
Sep 21, 2011, 10:12 PM
It's not smart, it's dumb. I want the most up-to-date news, always. As soon as I turn the thing on.

If there is an option to force fewer updates (like setting email to retrieve every 30 or 60 minutes, as opposed to push), that's great, but the whole idea of the iPad is to have everything at your fingertips -- not 6 hours ago news at your fingertips.

Wow, for a Macrumors editor you certainly didn't do your research. :rolleyes:

I think you are confusing Newstand with something like an RSS Feed/Reader. Watch the WWDC Keynote (http://www.apple.com/apple-events/wwdc-2011/) again; they make it VERY clear that Newstand is for those daily/weekly/monthly magazine and newspaper subscriptions; to make it easy for you to say, if you have a subscription to New York Times, when you go to bed at night, the newest daily edition of that NYT will be on your iPad when you wake up in the morning.

This is how it's supposed to be. It is NOT a RSS up-to-the-minute news reader. It's for subscriptions! Again, If you subscribe to Wired Magazine, you'll only get it once a month (because, you know, Wired is only published ONCE A MONTH!)

When you go to the New York Times website, do you see the news that was published at 11PM the night before?

How about we use the technology in new and fancy ways, rather than going backwards to the way they did it before?

Why would you have an iPad at all when you can just get the paper delivered to your home AND have something to wrap your fish in?

Ok, you are really missing the point (which is pretty amateurish for someone who is supposed to be an editor of a respected site like Macrumors; do your research!)

There are plenty of apps for up-to-the-minute news gathering, especially for the iPad (Flipboard, Pulse, etc.) that is NOT what Newstand was supposed to be.

Again, have you seen the Wired Magazine app? For $3.99 an issue, it is a way to subscribe to the digital version of their monthly magazine; but with interactive content. But it is published once a month. I just got the October issue delivered to me, but I had to get it manually. Now with Newstand, my Wired magazine subscription will be placed on the "Newstand" and I won't have to do anything as each month my issue of Wired will be automatically delivered, along with my issue of Spin magazine and the Daily, etc.

Newstand is not an up to the minute news reader, it is like the physical "Newstands" you see at the street corner in the city; with the hundreds of monthly magazines and daily newspapers from around the world sitting on the shelves... in other words, The Newsstand app is meant to simply collect all of your daily/weekly/monthly magazine and newspaper subscriptions. That's all.

How are you not understanding this working for Macrumors? Where's Arn...

WestonHarvey1
Sep 21, 2011, 11:14 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_0 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9A5313e Safari/7534.48.3)

One of the nicest things about the iPad is the standby battery life. Sometimes I go for a couple weeks without having to charge it. If Newstand starts updating in the background constantly, that's the end of that feature.

wovel
Sep 22, 2011, 12:12 AM
Wow so many people just don't understand this article.

IzzyBorden
Sep 22, 2011, 01:08 AM
Wow so many people just don't understand this article.

Could you maybe clarify in case I missed something? Because as I read it, crack reporter from Macrumors alerted us that Newstand will ONLY be able to push updates once a day! OMGZ! Even though we all already knew this if any of you watched the WWDC Keynote (http://www.apple.com/apple-events/wwdc-2011/) where Steve Jobs actually stated this very clearly. Not news.

I don't mean to come on so harsh, but this is just really sloppy reporting trying to make it sound like this is a newly discovered problem when this is what was intended by Newstand all along and revealed months ago. Sorry if I am missing anything else.

foobarbaz
Sep 22, 2011, 02:11 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_0 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9A5313e Safari/7534.48.3)

One of the nicest things about the iPad is the standby battery life. Sometimes I go for a couple weeks without having to charge it. If Newstand starts updating in the background constantly, that's the end of that feature.

Exactly. The feature is essentially for downloading large magazines over night, when you're connected to a power source.

If it were downloading "breaking news", it would be downloading all the time and you probably even be reading most of it. If you want breaking news, you can get a push notification and just fetch the article on demand. No need to download 300MB of permanently updating articles per day.

rmwebs
Sep 22, 2011, 03:19 AM
Seems like a bit of a dirty hack to get this working, using push notifications which are designed for plaintext but effectively hacking in support for larger data chunks...hmm...how long before that gets exploited!!

jhoffy
Sep 22, 2011, 07:08 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_0 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9A5313e Safari/7534.48.3)

Isn't a newspaper that updates several times a day called a "web page?"

Check out CNN.com for example. :)

The Phazer
Sep 22, 2011, 09:08 AM
This is still a pretty poor relation to a background downloading api that has scheduling.

The iPhone needs to be able to understand when it's plugged in overnight, and if then connected to wifi, needs to be pulling down everything.

But not just for magazines, for lots of apps. This is a step down the wrong direction.

Phazer

ratboy90
Sep 22, 2011, 09:35 AM
They can only print their magazines once a day, so how is this any different. If they want up to the minute then this outlet isn't for them.. it's pretty simple.

the difference is that we're not stuck in the 1960s where this was the only way the do things. Now newspapers can update their front pages if an important story breaks during the day. Newspapers and their readership want this.

DeaconGTG
Sep 22, 2011, 09:59 AM
the difference is that we're not stuck in the 1960s where this was the only way the do things. Now newspapers can update their front pages if an important story breaks during the day. Newspapers and their readership want this.

This opinion right here is what I can't understand. Why so much hate for the traditional format? Why can't we have both?

My job, at least 3 out of the 5 days of the work week, keeps me from checking the news sites on a periodic basis (obviously today is not one of those days). And when I get home at night (between 7 and 8 pm) I'm not always inclined to catch up on everything (maybe watch Olbermann or Maddow for a few minutes), but then its on to more relaxing activities. And during the weekend? I tend to b outdoors, away from the news outlets.

So the traditional, newspaper-landing-on-your-doorstep format is great for me. Though to save on paper and hassle, a digital format works even better. I'll typically read through the New York Times between 6 and 8 am on my Kindle. This way I can catch up on all that I missed the day before. I don't have to be worried that something I intended to read after I got through with a different article has been pushed to the archives because the web editors, in an effort to continuously chug out stories, has posted some inane story on the first lady's schedule for the day or what one of the Kardashians said on the Today show. I'm also not terrified I'm missing breaking news, because the NYT app on my iPad is pushing breaking news alerts to me.

In addition, I don't get a lot of value out of up-to-the minute "breaking news" text stories anyway. The first post that goes up about the event (ex: Bin Laden dead) has value, but then it begins of long slog of almost meaningless updates asthe news outlets scramble to collect all the facts and put together the story. I'd much prefer to turn on the TV (or streaming video) after the first alert and get the story, and then read the text story when it's finished the next day (plus whatever well thought out editorial or column that goes with it).

So yeah, sorry folks. As much as up-to-the-minute-everything is the future (and believe me, I know, I'm a twitter addict), there is still value in the daily (and weekly, and monthly) periodical. It's just taking on a new role, not as the primary place for breaking news, but for the capsulation of all that occurred the day before. And there's no reason why there can't be room for both. So for those who need everything always up-to-date, ignore newstand and stick with your NYT/CNN/Fox News/etc apps (as far as I know they are not going away). I'll be cancelling my kindle subscriptions and moving to the newstand.

kiljoy616
Sep 22, 2011, 11:30 AM
Oh come on MR, this is a complete non-issue you're trying to peddle as the next big controversy.

Apple is positioning Newsstand as an easy way for traditional print publications to be digitally supplied; you are literally reading the print magazine on an iPad. This requires a hefty amount of information transfer in one go and so it's logical to allow Newsstand to auto-download an edition by itself. This happens once and once only for each edition of the publication.

If however you want to receive up-to-the-minute information, that needs a dedicated app; Newsstand is not, and should not, be the place, for that. Now, if the traditional app frameworks don't provide for the kind of push notifications you want to achieve, that's a separate issue altogether; don't try to put the round peg in the square hole by wanting to use Newsstand for something it shouldn't be used for.

Its not a non issue, there is no technical reason fangirl for this. I can see them limiting it to say 3 a day just because its Apple but 1 a day means you get the newspaper once and your done. No updates at all. I Don't see this standing considering the money Apple will be making off this. :(

----------

This opinion right here is what I can't understand. Why so much hate for the traditional format? Why can't we have both?

My job, at least 3 out of the 5 days of the work week, keeps me from checking the news sites on a periodic basis (obviously today is not one of those days). And when I get home at night (between 7 and 8 pm) I'm not always inclined to catch up on everything (maybe watch Olbermann or Maddow for a few minutes), but then its on to more relaxing activities. And during the weekend? I tend to b outdoors, away from the news outlets.

So the traditional, newspaper-landing-on-your-doorstep format is great for me.

Because it be nice to have less trees been cut down to feed your old person desires. Personally I can't wait for the old ways of doing things to go. Now we just need for companies to actually take the time and money... not you HP, and create things that mimic or really compete with Apple but I doubt that will happen.

DeaconGTG
Sep 22, 2011, 12:11 PM
Because it be nice to have less trees been cut down to feed your old person desires.

::Sigh:: Looks like someone has some reading comprehension issues.

So the traditional, newspaper-landing-on-your-doorstep format is great for me. Though to save on paper and hassle, a digital format works even better.

Haven't subscribed to a physical paper in years. I get them all on my Kindle. And for the record, I'm 28. Not really old. Just busy, and it's nice to have a daily periodical that shows me what I missed the day before.

Let's just stop freaking out and thinking that Newstand is going to take away our RSS feeds, our news apps, and our women and children. Newstand is for traditional publishers to sell their traditional product in a convenient location. I actually like the idea of increasing the limit to 2-3 times a day (after all, newspapers used to print a late edition) but constant push is better suited for other apps.

ratboy90
Sep 23, 2011, 03:04 AM
This opinion right here is what I can't understand. Why so much hate for the traditional format? Why can't we have both?

My job, at least 3 out of the 5 days of the work week, keeps me from checking the news sites on a periodic basis (obviously today is not one of those days). And when I get home at night (between 7 and 8 pm) I'm not always inclined to catch up on everything (maybe watch Olbermann or Maddow for a few minutes), but then its on to more relaxing activities. And during the weekend? I tend to b outdoors, away from the news outlets.

So the traditional, newspaper-landing-on-your-doorstep format is great for me. Though to save on paper and hassle, a digital format works even better. I'll typically read through the New York Times between 6 and 8 am on my Kindle. This way I can catch up on all that I missed the day before. I don't have to be worried that something I intended to read after I got through with a different article has been pushed to the archives because the web editors, in an effort to continuously chug out stories, has posted some inane story on the first lady's schedule for the day or what one of the Kardashians said on the Today show. I'm also not terrified I'm missing breaking news, because the NYT app on my iPad is pushing breaking news alerts to me.

In addition, I don't get a lot of value out of up-to-the minute "breaking news" text stories anyway. The first post that goes up about the event (ex: Bin Laden dead) has value, but then it begins of long slog of almost meaningless updates asthe news outlets scramble to collect all the facts and put together the story. I'd much prefer to turn on the TV (or streaming video) after the first alert and get the story, and then read the text story when it's finished the next day (plus whatever well thought out editorial or column that goes with it).

So yeah, sorry folks. As much as up-to-the-minute-everything is the future (and believe me, I know, I'm a twitter addict), there is still value in the daily (and weekly, and monthly) periodical. It's just taking on a new role, not as the primary place for breaking news, but for the capsulation of all that occurred the day before. And there's no reason why there can't be room for both. So for those who need everything always up-to-date, ignore newstand and stick with your NYT/CNN/Fox News/etc apps (as far as I know they are not going away). I'll be cancelling my kindle subscriptions and moving to the newstand.

Of course we can have both. Those who don't want it updated just stick to the paper editions. But those who do want it updated can use an iPad/tablet which is almost constantly connected to the internet. There's no reason they can't co-exist. But, in my opinion, it's pointless to have the same system on two different platforms.

DeaconGTG
Sep 23, 2011, 09:46 AM
Of course we can have both. Those who don't want it updated just stick to the paper editions. But those who do want it updated can use an iPad/tablet which is almost constantly connected to the internet. There's no reason they can't co-exist. But, in my opinion, it's pointless to have the same system on two different platforms.

On my ipad/ipod I can listen to music stored locally or I can stream it from Pandora/Spotify/etc.

You're right, I should just delete all the MP3 versions of my old CDs that I still have stored away. Pointless to have the same system on two different platforms, right?

scleynen
Nov 5, 2011, 07:52 AM
Given, there was today a technical problem and you couldn't push before 6' o clock in the morning.

Tomorrow everything is back to normal and ready to push at 2'o clock. This won't be possible because there is no 24 hours between the two times. So one technical error means, pushing later every day, or don't push one day.

So how do you solve this?