Magazine Industry Already Preparing for Possible Apple Tablet

[MacRumors]

http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/10/05/magazine-industry-already-preparing-for-possible-apple-tablet/)

Ad Age reports (http://adage.com/mediaworks/article?article_id=139387) that the print industry is not sitting idly by while it becomes increasingly obvious that Apple is planning to enter the tablet market. In fact, these traditional publishers are worried that Apple may quickly dominate the industry in the same way they dominated the music industry with iTunes and the iPod.

As a result, publishers are discussing the creation of an industry-wide digital storefront to allow customers to purchase digital content and subscriptions in an effort to bypass whatever solution Apple might provide.It's true that magazine and newspaper publishers are eager to sell digital editions tailored for the tablet and other devices -- but they're just as determined to prevent Apple from getting between them and their readers along the way.These concerns don't appear to be unfounded, as reports (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/09/30/apples-tablet-effort-aiming-to-redefine-print-media/) have described Apple's plans as "redefining" print media. Sources within The New York Times claim that Apple has already approached the newspaper regarding plans to distribute its content on a "new device".

Article Link: Magazine Industry Already Preparing for Possible Apple Tablet (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/10/05/magazine-industry-already-preparing-for-possible-apple-tablet/)

[andylyon]

A release must be due to happen sometime soon then!

[tofagerl]

And this just in: So am I!

[davidwarren]

hum, I imagine apple would require them to use the itunes store, and just make their store inaccessible from the device. I would welcome the competing storefront if it meant lower prices for consumers.

[iOrlando]

You fight for your papers? Keep them! You fight for your bank account? She will be wealthier and more powerful than ever before! You fight for you readership? You will be proclaimed warlord of all paper, answerable only to the one true master of the world! NYT, your victory will be complete if you but lay down your arms, and kneel to holy Jobs.

[mobi]

Traditional publishers wake the hell up! It is 2009 and they have been floundering for years. If they couldn't figure out how to make the shift, let Apple show them the way.

[-hh]

This is an interesting report, since what it is suggesting is that Apple has made a "Kindle-esque" tablet device, but with the distinction that it is integrated into the iTunes Store ...

... the potential is clear: the consumer signs up (buys) various weekly/monthly magazine subscriptions (eventually: daily Newspaper), which are simple "PodCast" -like downloads onto the device.

From the AT&T angle, one would expect that this would more likely be default as WiFi instead of 3G (current cost of bandwidth), but in either case, it would be capable of being synched either directly, and/or to a home desktop computer (preferably Mac).


What makes this interesting is the resistance to it by the potential content providers - - particularly because this is a competitive business: all it takes is for one of the weaker (or "more in trouble") publishers to agree, and it is going to be hard to resist.

Personally, I see & expect that the traditional Publishers will try to keep control by trying to keep their e-Publishing in-house.

The problem with this is that they don't have hardware ... and/or they'll have to try to support a bunch of hardware devices ... plus they have to figure out how to encourage the retail consumer to come to their website to buy their product.

Thus, Apple shows up on their doorstep with a turnkey solution .. but at a price.

The hardcopy publishing industry isn't in healthy enough shape to remain a solid & unified front of resistance to Apple. Someone will fold, and then the rest will pragmatically be forced to follow ... it will always be reluctantly, because it wasn't their idea and it wasn't on their terms.

The real question is which publishers will be so opposed that they would rather go out of business than change.


-hh

[crees!]

So these newspapers already have paper and online versions. Now they're worried Apple is going to cannibalize the portable market? The newspaper companies are not going to be the ones building a device together that they can all distribute content on as that's not their business/business model. You would figure any additional means to get their content out there and receive revenue from it would be welcome; especially in this day and age.

[Chaszmyr]

They're probably smart to be trying this, but ultimately I think it will be bad for consumers if they're successful. Apple isn't just on top of the music selling industry because they offered a solution, it's because they offered the best solution. I would hate to see publishers reject Apple's good ideas and instead go to the market with a half-baked solution of their own.

[Sokratesagogo]

More power to Apple

To probably horribly mispell,misquote and marmalise Public Enemy:

Right on, c'mon
What we got to say
Power to the people no delay
To make everybody see
In order to fight the powers that be


Fight the pow-errrr!

[iSee]

Publishers have always relied on distribution partners to get their products in front of customer eyeballs. I don't think their goal should be to shut Apple out. They do want to make sure there are viable competitors, though, to ensure Apple doesn't get a stranglehold on their electronic distribution.

That said, I doubt an industry consortium will be able to compete with Apple on something so dependent on the user experience like a storefront would be.

They need to make sure not to sign exclusive deals with Apple or others -- then they'll all be all right. Those deals always look good (lucrative) in the short term, but end up either (1) fragmenting the market if each publisher has exclusive deals with different distribution partners -- which constrains the entire market, keeping it small; or (2) making a single distributor too dominant if the distributor gets too many exclusive deals from the major publishers.

If a distributor becomes dominant without exclusive deals (as Apple did in the music business), it's because they provide a superior service. That's not a great position for the publishers, because they want to maintain control, but it is better than the alternative: not selling all the content the distributor sold for them.

[barkomatic]

Traditional publishers wake the hell up! It is 2009 and they have been floundering for years. If they couldn't figure out how to make the shift, let Apple show them the way.

The article states they have indeed awakened. They are trying to create a universal standard that Apple will have to use--along with competing devices. This is actually a good thing, since we don't want too much popular media controlled by one company.

What if one of these publishers decided to run a story that Apple didn't like? Apple could pull that newspaper from iTunes if it wanted. If newspapers and magazines truly switch to digital only--that would effectively cut off that peridodical from the entire group of people using it.

[str1f3]

This is laughable. It is already too late. They will have to do anything Apple says and like it. They have no leverage. The industry is already in shambles.

[felt.]

tyrese sure did an amazing job on the first digital release for a comic book (mayhem @ itunes store) I'm ready for print media to die :apple:

[Clive At Five]

The reason people starting using iTunes is because it was an excellent jukebox that synced with an excellent portable media player. The music service grew out of that.

Before iDistribution can be successful, Apple has to prove to "the people" that they have a dependable, convenient model.

On the other side of things, as far as the news-print industry is concerned, they have neither the distribution infrastructure nor the related hardware to push digital distribution on their own.

Fact of the matter is, they need companies like Apple and Amazon (Kindle) - who have both - to move their old-fashioned and dying business model towards something more modern.

-Clive

[CapturedDarknes]

Traditional publishers wake the hell up! It is 2009 and they have been floundering for years. If they couldn't figure out how to make the shift, let Apple show them the way.

Definitely, the newspapers have tried to sell digital subscriptions for the last 4-5 years, if they can't do it, let a company with a huge market share of digital media subscriptions and sales do it for you. Period.

[DipDog3]

http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/10/05/magazine-industry-already-preparing-for-possible-apple-tablet/)

Ad Age reports (http://adage.com/mediaworks/article?article_id=139387) that the print industry is not sitting idly by while it becomes increasingly obvious that Apple is planning to enter the tablet market. In fact, these traditional publishers are worried that Apple may quickly dominate the industry in the same way they dominated the music industry with iTunes and the iPod.

As a result, publishers are discussing the creation of an industry-wide digital storefront to allow customers to purchase digital content and subscriptions in an effort to bypass whatever solution Apple might provide.These concerns don't appear to be unfounded, as reports (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/09/30/apples-tablet-effort-aiming-to-redefine-print-media/) have described Apple's plans as "redefining" print media. Sources within The New York Times claim that Apple has already approached the newspaper regarding plans to distribute its content on a "new device".

Article Link: Magazine Industry Already Preparing for Possible Apple Tablet (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/10/05/magazine-industry-already-preparing-for-possible-apple-tablet/)

They will either adapt or die.

[sishaw]

They're probably smart to be trying this, but ultimately I think it will be bad for consumers if they're successful. Apple isn't just on top of the music selling industry because they offered a solution, it's because they offered the best solution. I would hate to see publishers reject Apple's good ideas and instead go to the market with a half-baked solution of their own.

Well, that's where market forces will work. If the industry's ideas are "half-baked," people won't buy them and Apple will get its opening. If, on the other hand, the threat of Apple forces the industry to come up with some better solutions, so much the better for consumers. I say: bring it on and let the best product win!

[irishgrizzly]

They need to make sure not to sign exclusive deals with Apple or others -- then they'll all be all right. Those deals always look good (lucrative) in the short term, but end up either (1) fragmenting the market if each publisher has exclusive deals with different distribution partners -- which constrains the entire market, keeping it small; or (2) making a single distributor too dominant if the distributor gets too many exclusive deals from the major publishers.

Good points. Instead of signing any exclusive deal with Apple the publishing industry should band together and come up with a set pricing structure that they sell to many different storefront platforms (eg. iTunes, Amazon).

[Wie Gehts]

what is this tablet thing? is apple making some sort of kindle device?

[babyj]

I find it amazing that the newspaper and magazine industry seem intent on copying the music industry and make a complete hash of selling content online.

They currently make close to nothing from selling content online and haven't got a single revenue model that is ever likely to work. Along come Apple who will no doubt create a new standard file format, offer access to an online shop with over 50m potential customers and handle all distribution and sales aspects for a reasonable 30% cut. All of which will lead to massive sales, yet they seem ready to oppose it.

There seems to be this built in concept of Apple being bad across the entire media industry. They don't have a good reason for Apple being bad, they just are. Trying to oppose Apple will be just as successful as the music industry working against iTunes.

[dXTC]

More power to Apple

To probably horribly mispell,misquote and marmalise Public Enemy:

Right on, c'mon
What we got to say
Power to the people no delay
To make everybody see
In order to fight the powers that be


Fight the pow-errrr!

Yo, drop the rhyme in overtime, G! Yeaaaaah, booooyieeee! :p

(sorry everyone, just had to)

[Vulpinemac]

What he did to the newspaper industry at the turn of the 20th Century could well be considered shameful... but it sold newspapers and made an Empire of his name. The name still stands as one of the biggest in national media. It appears that Steve Jobs and Apple, Inc. are becoming the Hearst of the 21st Century.

[Sol]

I think the print publishers are being a bit reactionary by uniting against Apple like this. Seems like a collected effort to bargain for a better deal than Apple is likely to be offering now. Publishers know there is demand for a colour electronic book or tablet from Apple and want their content on it. Ultimately if traditional newspaper and magazines do not sell their content on iTunes then new players like Salon and The Huffington Post would be happy to fill the void.

[Takeo]

How is this different from the web? Other than the fact that they would make you pay for it... and there would presumably be no banner ads? Would the pages not scroll? Everything on one screen with pagination and multi-touch page flipping? Does that make a difference to people compared to scrolling pages? I don't understand why I would pay for a tablet to read a magazine when they already have websites. Exclusive content maybe? The Kindle makes more sense as a reader because a) it uses eInk and b) it's focus is books, novels, textbooks... content that's not already available on the web. If it was a full color eInk device... that would be pretty great. Otherwise... I don't get the business model.

[crackbookpro]

The reason people starting using iTunes is because it was an excellent jukebox that synced with an excellent portable media player. The music service grew out of that.

Before iDistribution can be successful, Apple has to prove to "the people" that they have a dependable, convenient model.

On the other side of things, as far as the news-print industry is concerned, they have neither the distribution infrastructure nor the related hardware to push digital distribution on their own.

Fact of the matter is, they need companies like Apple and Amazon (Kindle) - who have both - to move their old-fashioned and dying business model towards something more modern.

-Clive

well put... :)

Digital Media is something that the news/media/print companies have to collaborate with developers like Apple & the Kindle(amazon) in order to stay in the loop of these ever changing ways of digital communications...

We can't forget about Mr. Gates... Microsoft is one company that I truly think should have been keening in on this market when it was first talked about way back when... :o As much as I am anticipating the Apple 'rumored' Tablet, I am looking forward to an eBook coming from the one & only Microsoft.

Hopefully, they do make this 'rumored' Microsoft Tablet - http://www.macrumors.com/2009/09/22/microsofts-prototype-multi-touch-tablet-booklet/

[couto27]

save the planet, save the florests, dont cut anymore trees.
long live the apple tablet :apple:
recycle also please

[Vulpinemac]

How is this different from the web? Other than the fact that they would make you pay for it... and there would presumably be no banner ads? Would the pages not scroll? Everything on one screen with pagination and multi-touch page flipping? Does that make a difference to people compared to scrolling pages? I don't understand why I would pay for a tablet to read a magazine when they already have websites. Exclusive content maybe? The Kindle makes more sense as a reader because a) it uses eInk and b) it's focus is books, novels, textbooks... content that's not already available on the web. If it was a full color eInk device... that would be pretty great. Otherwise... I don't get the business model.

The problem is that nobody as yet has been able to make an online magazine or newspaper subscription work. Even papers that push out 'teasers' rarely get people to pay for their articles or even pay for an online subscription; they either want their news free (a la CNN.com) or on a paper out in the front yard. Mostly it's because none of them have managed to make it easily readable and portable at the same time. Even now, some magazines already have an online distribution system, but to the best of my knowledge, none has yet been fully successful--not even Playboy.

[t0mat0]

How exactly might it take for the industry to set up a "digital storefront"?
Just wondering how long it took for Nokia, Pre, Sony etc.
Especially if they're still asking questions like "what is our role" to each other...

You would have thought that Apple might have wanted to brainstorm applications and uses of tablets and set up more infrastructure, if they saw a tablet maybe working, but requring a wait to get the hardware available (useful battery, CPU and graphics power etc).

[likemyorbs]

Not that it's going to work, but at least the magazine industry is trying something before apple releases its device unlike the record industry that is run by EXTREMELY unintelligent people who underestimated the mp3 player and are still trying to shove cd's down peoples throats

[mobi]

The article states they have indeed awakened. They are trying to create a universal standard that Apple will have to use--along with competing devices. This is actually a good thing, since we don't want too much popular media controlled by one company.

What if one of these publishers decided to run a story that Apple didn't like? Apple could pull that newspaper from iTunes if it wanted. If newspapers and magazines truly switch to digital only--that would effectively cut off that peridodical from the entire group of people using it.


An industry with as much wealth and resources and they have just now awakened? Pathetic...they are 10 years overdue.

I dislike the way Apple puppeteers iTunes / App Store... they will indeed do the same with other media.

[ChrisA]

The problem is the cost. Curently I pay $7 a month for a newspaper subscription. The paper comes with it's own display which is very large and readable. If thy offer me a deal where I pay $21 a month for the digital subscription after buying an 800 Apple talet I think i'll pass.

They would have to give me about the same thing for about the same price.

Same with a Amazon "Kindle". The books are not that much lower price so there will never be a payback. THere shouod be a saving in not having to cut trees, make paper, print the paper then truck the books off to the store. The author only gets a couple bucks.

None of the current LCD displays are as easy to read as paper.

[pagansoul]

I get all my magazine subscriptions via Zinio. I also have a Kindle for reading ebooks. I also read off my Macbookpro and iphone. I tried a newspaper subscription through amazon for Kindle but I tend to one use it one at a time as the mood strikes me. I have never been much a newspaper reader but have always got my information on line. I never watch TV news unless I'm at someone home and they have it on.

Will I end up getting some device to use as another type of reader, maybe, I just like electronics. :p

[Cheffy Dave]

This is an interesting report, since what it is suggesting is that Apple has made a "Kindle-esque" tablet device, but with the distinction that it is integrated into the iTunes Store ...

... the potential is clear: the consumer signs up (buys) various weekly/monthly magazine subscriptions (eventually: daily Newspaper), which are simple "PodCast" -like downloads onto the device.

From the AT&T angle, one would expect that this would more likely be default as WiFi instead of 3G (current cost of bandwidth), but in either case, it would be capable of being synched either directly, and/or to a home desktop computer (preferably Mac).


What makes this interesting is the resistance to it by the potential content providers - - particularly because this is a competitive business: all it takes is for one of the weaker (or "more in trouble") publishers to agree, and it is going to be hard to resist.

Personally, I see & expect that the traditional Publishers will try to keep control by trying to keep their e-Publishing in-house.

The problem with this is that they don't have hardware ... and/or they'll have to try to support a bunch of hardware devices ... plus they have to figure out how to encourage the retail consumer to come to their website to buy their product.

Thus, Apple shows up on their doorstep with a turnkey solution .. but at a price.

The hardcopy publishing industry isn't in healthy enough shape to remain a solid & unified front of resistance to Apple. Someone will fold, and then the rest will pragmatically be forced to follow ... it will always be reluctantly, because it wasn't their idea and it wasn't on their terms.

The real question is which publishers will be so opposed that they would rather go out of business than change.


-hh
EXCELLENT INSIGHTS HH!

[EagerDragon]

IMO - Publishers (books, Magazines, etc) should seriously consider Apple as their best chance of success. Most already have their own online service so they have little to loose.

Apple has millions of subscribers using a single application that runs on Macs and PCs that are used to go to iTunes for content. Apple also has a subscription service (currently for TV shows) that would work just fine for digitized print media.

The number of readers is likely to go up and they can make good money at a 70/30 rate specially of the number of readers goes up and they have no additional cost per subscriber like they would have if they were serving the content themselves.

All they need do is use the Macs they already have in their publishing environment to create a file and submitt it to Apple iTunes store and they are set to service 1 to 50,000,000 subscribers.

How can they go wrong?

There is little to be invested on their part, so even in the unlikely event that the iTunes store distribution or the iTable fails, they have invested little. They probably don't have to abandom their current online store, becuase iTunes offers them a second avenue to distribute their content and one that is likely to be very sucessfull.

Just my opinion.
:cool:

[pjarvi]

I've subscribed to MacWorld magazine via Zinio.com (http://www.zinio.com) for a couple of years now. Typical of Apple being late to the party and then claiming to have invented it.

[dpackman]

Relatively temporary information such as periodicals and newspapers are perfect for a subscription system. But books are a different issue since the expectation is that one can reread as desired over many years. Any portable device that allows reading must be part of an open standard that will outlive current devices and companies.

[philbeeney]

What makes me laugh about all this, is the way that everybody (publishers, newspapers, etc) are all getting their knickers in a twist trying to stop themselves from becoming irrelevant based on a rumour.

That's all the Apple tablet is at present. Apple haven't officially announced that they are working on one (although they won't until "one more thing" at a keynote or media event) and nobody has seen the fabled tablet.

I love it. Bow down to Steve Jobs all powerful RDF. :D

[Mark Booth]

When and if popular magazines become available for COLOR reading on a high-quality tablet device, the subscriptions to those magazines had better be DRAMATICALLY less expensive than buying the paper versions or I simply won't be interested. As is, I read very few magazines and subscribe to none. I used to be subscribed to 5 or 6 at a time. But it's too easy and far less expensive to read content on the web. Still, I would be interested in a color tablet that gives me access to magazines like Popular Photography and Outdoor Photography, as long as the subscription costs were reasonable. Meaning... $8 per year or so.

Mark

[star-fish]

How is this different from the web? Other than the fact that they would make you pay for it... and there would presumably be no banner ads? Would the pages not scroll? Everything on one screen with pagination and multi-touch page flipping? Does that make a difference to people compared to scrolling pages? I don't understand why I would pay for a tablet to read a magazine when they already have websites. Exclusive content maybe? The Kindle makes more sense as a reader because a) it uses eInk and b) it's focus is books, novels, textbooks... content that's not already available on the web. If it was a full color eInk device... that would be pretty great. Otherwise... I don't get the business model.

Theoretically they would get rid of the websites and make people pay. However, I doubt that will ever work because all it takes is for one or two news sites to stay free (or for someone to make a free news site), and they would make an absolute bomb through advertising.

Not to mention all the news sites common to a particular language would have to agree.

[thejadedmonkey]

...new players like Salon and The Huffington Post would be happy to fill the void.
But they're not the NYT or WP. Many people would rather pay less and not have to buy an expensive tablet just to read the paper.

See below:
The problem is the cost. Curently I pay $7 a month for a newspaper subscription. The paper comes with it's own display which is very large and readable. If thy offer me a deal where I pay $21 a month for the digital subscription after buying an 800 Apple talet I think i'll pass.

Also, Gizmodo got word of a Windows 7 based tablet (http://gizmodo.com/5365299). Sure it's not an Apple solution, but it is a solution. If Microsoft can get it out quickly enough, the print media can quickly made a store, and offer exactly what iTunes would offer, but on their own terms.

It it came down to a $500 Microsoft device, plus the Wall Street Journal or New York Times, versus an $800 Apple device with the huffington post or dailykos, do you really need me to tell you which device would win out?

I think how Apple treats their content partners would be enough to keep the print media from dealing with them, if they can at all help it.

[SkipperStyle]

If this thing doesnt have some setting that can change the screen to a less-eye-strain-inducing one like e-readers, I dont see who this is supposed to be marketed too.

[EagerDragon]

I buy a lot of technical manuals and prefer those manuals that have an available PDF file in either a DVD that is part of the cover or where I can download it as part of the price for the paper copy.

A lot of the printed material are very thick 1200 - 1800 pages long, making them hard to cary around, heavy, and dificult to put in a book stand on my desk.

The PDF format makes it easy for me to review the material while working on a document or program and provide me the ability to copy and paste nibbles of the information into my document as examples or quotes or just as something to remember during my writting.

I can carry a $#$$ load of books in PDF form and search their content fairly quickly for whatever I need.

I will need 3G or 4G for both web surfing and for phone calls in combination with a bluetooth earpiece on such a device as it would provide a superior screen for all I do on the iPhone without the need to put a 10 inch device to my face to talk. Browsing, reading, note taking, and maybe editing some photos or dowloading photos off the camera onto the device would be great.

Publishers should be happy that Apple is considering providing a convinient outlet for their material.

[EagerDragon]

Theoretically they would get rid of the websites and make people pay. However, I doubt that will ever work because all it takes is for one or two news sites to stay free (or for someone to make a free news site), and they would make an absolute bomb through advertising.

Not to mention all the news sites common to a particular language would have to agree.

TV shows are "Free" on peoples TV, yet they sell DVD sets for particular seasons and iTunes sells individual episodes. Some are also free at the studio web site, yet people still go to iTunes to buy because it is convinient.

[iSee]

...They are trying to create a universal standard that Apple will have to use--along with competing devices...

This would by the ideal outcome. I don't know if they can pull it off, but it would be great for all of us.... it should lead to us getting what we want, when and how we want, at a fair price. It's great for publishers, too -- if customers are very happy, more will be sold. I don't think Apple would like it though. They want to lock content to the devices they sell. Hmm. I just don't think the publishers will be able to dictate terms to Apple. Hope I'm wrong.

Good points. Instead of signing any exclusive deal with Apple the publishing industry should band together and come up with a set pricing structure that they sell to many different storefront platforms (eg. iTunes, Amazon).

Well, they've go to be careful about anti-trust issues. They can agree on standards, but not prices.

[Amdahl]

Who gives a damn about these so-called 'news' publishers? They all print the same crap stories, with the same crap slant. They all hide what they have been told to hide. The real trick has been convincing idiot Americans to pay so they can be 'informed.' Kind of like paying for TV, when it used to be free. Oh, you've got 300 channels of propaganda now, instead of just 3? Good for you!

Now, their propaganda finance model is falling apart. Congress looks at bailing out the propaganda machine... I say, let the whole thing fall apart.

We'll be better off without these liars.

[omahajim]

removed

[MacFly123]

They're probably smart to be trying this, but ultimately I think it will be bad for consumers if they're successful. Apple isn't just on top of the music selling industry because they offered a solution, it's because they offered the best solution. I would hate to see publishers reject Apple's good ideas and instead go to the market with a half-baked solution of their own.

Yup! While I can understand their concern, I also don't understand why they can't see WHY Apple and iTunes has been so immensely successful and really has no equal still. iTunes is looking to become basically THE MEDIA store.

Who gives a damn about these so-called 'news' publishers? They all print the same crap stories, with the same crap slant. They all hide what they have been told to hide. The real trick has been convincing idiot Americans to pay so they can be 'informed.' Kind of like paying for TV, when it used to be free. Oh, you've got 300 channels of propaganda now, instead of just 3? Good for you!

Now, their propaganda finance model is falling apart. Congress looks at bailing out the propaganda machine... I say, let the whole thing fall apart.

We'll be better off without these liars.

Nice :) I can't disagree with you! :) But hey, they do keep everyone up to date on all the celebrities and fuel the world with narcissism!

[firewood]

If this thing doesnt have some setting that can change the screen to a less-eye-strain-inducing one like e-readers, I dont see who this is supposed to be marketed too.

The zillions of people who already read their news, articles, blogs, etc. online from laptop and computer displays, but don't want to be tied to a desk as much anymore.

[firewood]

Before iDistribution can be successful, Apple has to prove to "the people" that they have a dependable, convenient model.


"The people" already buy more music from iTunes than Walmart, have downloaded 2 billion apps, and have left maybe 100M credit cards on file with the iTunes store. Proof or no proof, this distribution model is already a more of a success than the typical book or news publisher.

I see Apple and Amazon colliding here, where Amazon has more text content, and Apple has hardware that can do more (apps, movies, interactive color web sites, etc.)

[MacFly123]

well put... :)

Digital Media is something that the news/media/print companies have to collaborate with developers like Apple & the Kindle(amazon) in order to stay in the loop of these ever changing ways of digital communications...

We can't forget about Mr. Gates... Microsoft is one company that I truly think should have been keening in on this market when it was first talked about way back when... :o As much as I am anticipating the Apple 'rumored' Tablet, I am looking forward to an eBook coming from the one & only Microsoft.

Hopefully, they do make this 'rumored' Microsoft Tablet - http://www.macrumors.com/2009/09/22/microsofts-prototype-multi-touch-tablet-booklet/

Ok listen, I will openly admit that the Currier looks pretty nice and cool and I hate Microsoft lol. That is assuming it actually becomes a product and ends up like the prototype. But if there is anything i do NOT want, it is Micro$oft controlling media with their DRM lock-in BS!!! :rolleyes:

[Chupa Chupa]

My dream is to one day be able to wake up, tap on my tablet, and have the current day's paper ready for me. Or to be able to pack a few magazines on it for a plane trip, in addition to whatever book I'm reading at the moment.

Problem is, even though the technology for this exists now, publishers somehow think there heavily DRM'd e-Edition should cost more than the dead tree edition. That is a non-starter for me. It's mind boggling. Think of all the extra labor and resources that go into making and delivering a dead tree edition. Now please tell me why the e-Edition that I can't even share when I'm done with it costs more.

So unless Apple can do something about media cost I really could give a rat's patooty how slick the hardware is.

And another thing... The FCC needs to revise it's Banned at take off Electronics list. There is no way an e-Reader screws with a plane's navigation system.

[peterdevries]

This could be very successful if it utilizes the same push email technology of the iPhone to deliver magazine and newspaper content to the "tablet".

edit: what chupa chupa said..

[carbonware]

As someone who has worked with Mac's since the Lisa and been a Apple Systems Administrator, and consulted for them, I have worked for lots of companies as a designer, retoucher, illustrator, page production and prepress, All these folks use Macs. At the magazines, newspapers and catalogers all of the Mac users have been a primary if not a singular force in keeping Apple alive in the hard times before the iPhone and iPod. I accept that at some point technology will get good enough to significantly drive down printing as it has with many magazines and news papers. But I would think that Apple would be concerned that it's most vocal and loyal followers who have driven them to driven them to drive innovation, and who are the fastest to support and buy Apple products would garner some consideration.

Killing off the publishing world puts Apple's most loyal followers out of work. Perhaps as an entertainment company Apple no longer cares but that would be a shame. They may be riding the wave right now but every high comes with a low and APple will need loyal supporters then like they have in the past. Hopefully a few of us will be around who can afford to buy the cool toys Apple builds.

[pimentoLoaf]

NYTimes on my iPod Touch is hard on the eyes; I'd welcome a bigger device.

[Mark Booth]

From the Apple end of it, I envision a "Reader's Store" within iTunes. A place where you can buy books and subscribe to magazines just as easily as you buy music or applications. Either that, or Apple will partner with Amazon and use Kindle-like content.

But those magazine & newspaper subscription prices have to go down compared to the gouging that is taking place now. I don't care if the electronic magazine still has ads if that's what it takes to keep prices down. But it HAS to cost less than the paper-printed version.

Mark

[iphones4evry1]

I'm all for an open bookstore. I think it would be a disaster to put a single company in charge over distribution of all books, magazines, and other print materials. For example, we all know that Apple has is censorship hungry, and to give Apple control over a bookstore would be the worst disaster in the history of the human race.

I think they all need to agree on a standard format, and then have multiple, competing electronic bookstores for distribution.

[Clive At Five]

"The people" already buy more music from iTunes than Walmart, have downloaded 2 billion apps, and have left maybe 100M credit cards on file with the iTunes store. Proof or no proof, this distribution model is already a more of a success than the typical book or news publisher.

I see Apple and Amazon colliding here, where Amazon has more text content, and Apple has hardware that can do more (apps, movies, interactive color web sites, etc.)

Music =! News print / magazines, however.

Just because Apple does music well does not guarantee that they will do digital print well, it only proves that they have the ability to distribute it. Even though Microsoft has the infrastructure to sell music digitally does not mean they do it well. This is what I was alluding to with Apple.

Based on my history with Apple, I wouldn't expect anything but the best, but I'm not going to give them a free pass, and not many non-fanboys will either.

You have a valid point about Kindle - it is truly a uni-tasker - but the rumored Apple device's ability to do more does not guarantee that it better for subscribing to, and reading e-print.

-Clive

[Takuta-Nui]

The political implications certainly are fascinating, but I admit I'm more enthusiastic (or hopeful) about how this may end up reducing the amount of paper used. We need our trees!

[robbyx]

Seriously, why is everyone so greedy? Magazines and publishers should stick to what they do best and let a technology company handle the tech side of things. So now they're going to write their own software, provide tech support, etc. in addition to their publishing duties? I don't understand this sort of thinking.

[kamiboy]

Apple didn't get in the way, Apple was the only way.

[ryanrul]

Who gives a damn about these so-called 'news' publishers? They all print the same crap stories, with the same crap slant. They all hide what they have been told to hide. The real trick has been convincing idiot Americans to pay so they can be 'informed.' Kind of like paying for TV, when it used to be free. Oh, you've got 300 channels of propaganda now, instead of just 3? Good for you!

Now, their propaganda finance model is falling apart. Congress looks at bailing out the propaganda machine... I say, let the whole thing fall apart.

We'll be better off without these liars.

Quoted for truth.

[blackpond]

I honestly can't think of a single time in my life that I've paid for the news (I'm 33, btw). If the NY Times is worried I'll start buying the iTablet edition and ignoring free news sources... that's pretty damn funny to me. I'd sooner pay for a slick multimedia enhanced version of The Onion than the New York Times...

So then what is this new "print" content delivery system going to deliver to me? The dots just aren't connecting...

Stuff like augmented reality, movies, tv, games, etc. make more sense. IMHO.

[ChargerSteve]

I can see this future tablet having eReader functionality as one of its core capabilities, but certainly not its only capability. Maybe eReader functionality would be its killer app that drives adoption, but if so I think it needs to go beyond a simple porting of current print content to iTablet format. Apple should be providing the hardware, software, development/publishing tools and distribution method to really take it to the next level. The current newspaper and magazine publishers would be wise to concentrate on their core competencies which I think would be content creation and perhaps taking advantage of partners/technologies like Apple or Kindle to present this content in a way that makes it more valuable to people (readers and advertisers) than the current print medium. That collaboration to add more value to users is the big win/win opportunity for content providers and technology poviders (and consumers). I hope that end state isn't delayed too much longer by individual companies or industries trying to keep the whole pie to themselves instead of recognizing that a fraction of a much larger pie is out there for the taking.

[twoodcc]

something doesn't seem right here. i think apple could help the magazine industry, not hurt it. we'll see though

[Rodimus Prime]

My view is I think they want to get a system in place and working before apple can screw them over locking them in. I think they want a system in place that is not limited to only one brand of product.

iTMS back when it had DRM music really screwed over a lot of companies from entering the market because any one who had 30+ dollar invested in iTMS would not want to buy a different brand of player.

Apple has the money to power to control both making it near impossible for someone else to enter because very few companies would have both the money create both in a workable formate.

I do hope if Apple does the store subscription the magnetizes company force what ever DRM on the stuff to be allowed to used on other companies products.

That or they are trying to get some standard DRM in place before apple does (and there for preventing other companies from entering the tablet market_

[Sol]

...I accept that at some point technology will get good enough to significantly drive down printing as it has with many magazines and news papers. But I would think that Apple would be concerned that it's most vocal and loyal followers who have driven them to driven them to drive innovation, and who are the fastest to support and buy Apple products would garner some consideration.

Killing off the publishing world puts Apple's most loyal followers out of work. Perhaps as an entertainment company Apple no longer cares but that would be a shame....

You make it sound like Apple is out to destroy print media. Today's media eco system can support print and digital content; it is not one or the other. All the professional designers and writers you mention will eventually find similar jobs in online magazines and newspapers instead of fighting over the scraps of print media today.

I am sure there were a lot of scared video and film editors when non-linear systems became accessible to kids with computers and FireWire cameras. Did those old school editors all lose their jobs? My guess is only the ones who did not adapt and learn how to edit on Avid, Premiere, Final Cut, etc.

From all accounts Steve Jobs and Apple have lofty ambitions for their tablet. This device may revolutionise 'the news' the same way Macs did the PC and the iPod did portable music. Any editors and their staff who do not take steps towards a digital distribution model will be left behind.

[cocamouthwash]

My theory is these are gonna be aimed heavily at the educational environment. They will be the iBook of the next generation!

[wbeasley]

I've subscribed to MacWorld magazine via Zinio.com (http://www.zinio.com) for a couple of years now. Typical of Apple being late to the party and then claiming to have invented it.

I love Zinio - I get my mags months earlier than when I was buying them off the Australian news stands.

And at a huge saving.

I love magazines and have many years of hoarding behind me. Lately though, I've really rationalised my purchasing. Maybe it's all become too much the same. How many PC mags do you need to tell you Win7 is gonna suck big time if you want to upgrade from XP? LOL.

Even the graphic design mags are much the same every month. Probably why everyone and his dog seems to think they are a graphic designer/marketing guru/home renovator/fitness expert these days :)

Buying them online, skimming thru them and saving them on your hard drive saves time, effort and cost. It's the way to go. I wish I could buy all my mags this way! Zinio is pretty good even on image heavy magazines.

Some magazines already give away PDF versions (from a few years earlier) or sell you compilation DVDs of out of print editions. I'm happy with that idea too since the price is right. Only thing you can miss is the cover CDs... but even that is less of an issue now companies offer free trials or free older versions to get you to buy. Faster internet access outweighs the convenience of pre-downloaded software.

[SactoGuy18]

The book, magazine and newspaper publishers are scared because it's so convenient to read newspaper and magazine content online nowadays--who needs the dead tree version?

Indeed, the public Internet has changed EVERYTHING in terms of content distribution. For example, if you're a paid ESPN Insider member, you can get access to the digital version of ESPN the Magazine to view on your computer and download commercial-free versions of ESPN Radio's most popular radio shows (Mike & Mike in the Morning, The Herd with Colin Cowherd, etc.). Archie Comics recently started a paid subscription service (Archie Digital) where you can see hundreds of Archie Publications comics from the early ones in the 1940's up to current issues! (I believe DC and Marvel are working on similar projects.)

As for video, online distribution has already changed one industry: Japanese anime. Crunchyroll, which used to host pirated fansubbed anime, now hosts a lot of NEW anime from Japan legally, and you can watch many of the very latest anime in English-subtitled form within hours of its original airing in Japan! :D The Book of Bantora series is already online, and the equally-anticipated Fairy Tail series is coming very soon. Even Viz Communications is taking advantage: they are streaming the latest Inu-Yasha anime series now showing in Japan here in the USA within hours of its airing in Japan.

What does all the above mean? For Apple's new tablet computer, it means a lot: we may be seeing the birth of the first true portable computer that not only acts like the Amazon Kindle (complete with a larger screen for comfortable text reading), but also becomes a video playback device with excellent video quality, better than the screens you get from portable DVD players now on the market. And all of the content will be distributed by the iTunes Store, perhaps the most convenient online media download service in the world.

[firewood]

Seriously, why is everyone so greedy?

Companies that aren't (legally) greedy have a strong tendency to be out-competed in the market, go bankrupt, or just get bought out by better run companies.

Magazines and publishers should stick to what they do best and let a technology company handle the tech side of things.

Like when AOL (which was once bigger than Apple) "purchased" Time Warner so that they could handle the tech side of publishing? What a success that was. :eek:


You have a valid point about Kindle - it is truly a uni-tasker - but the rumored Apple device's ability to do more does not guarantee that it better for subscribing to, and reading e-print.


General purpose technology products can often drive better single purpose devices off the market (or into tiny specialty niches).