You mean you haven't tried to hold up your iPhone to the speaker and use Shazam? Get wit the technology baby!
I kid I kid... I have no idea what that song is
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Wired Launches iPad Magazine App with Help from Adobe
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
You mean you haven't tried to hold up your iPhone to the speaker and use Shazam? Get wit the technology baby!
I kid I kid... I have no idea what that song is
I thought New York Times was thinking about doing this for their yearly subscribers who have been subscribers for > 2 years... Or they did the math and decided it would be cheaper... Of course this was with the kindle, but still, same idea. I like it.
After all that was said and done last year...
After all the flashy previews and hype for e-mags... price blowout...
So much potential to be had...
After all the flashy previews and hype for e-mags... price blowout...
So much potential to be had...
My point is that - as a subscriber, I know that to get the magazine delivered to me, I am allowing Conde Nast to show me advertising and use my details for marketing.
Why am I being asked to do it again? And pay more money? It's daft.
I grant you, asking them to give me an Ipad for free is me being augmentative, but certainly, it's obvious that magazine publishers have a bottom line interest in giving me the option to subscribe digitally. I subscribe three magazines from one publisher - costing me about £9 a month. I reckon, conservatively, that £5 of that goes on delivery/printing etc. If that publisher asked me to subscribe for 2 years and gave me £100 off an iPad, not only would I jump at it, I bet you lots of new would be subscribers would become very very interested also.
Come up with a partnership with a mobile network also - and you could clean up. People want this device, content suppliers should be using it as leverage, not as exploitation.
Now just imagine what calculus text books, trig, physics etc all can look like with this technology. The kids today are going to be wowed like never before.
Two words: Static JPEG. Two more words: <noscript> tag
Tell me how that's costly. But I agree customers must be educated.
Exactly... pricing is all wrong on this stuff ....
So far, everyone seems to be charging around $5 per issue with no yearly or multi-year subscription options.
This feels like they're saying to me, the reader; You're only allowed to buy our new magazine at full newsstand price, issue by issue! How many people would go for THAT (a magazine with no subscription options)?
Beyond that, if they really feel they need to make $5 per issue (or even a little bit more), I'd suggest a whole new way of thinking about the magazine? How about "dynamic digital issues", where after you buy it, content keeps getting revised/updated over the next year or so?
Especially with a format like Consumer Reports magazine does, this would be *awesome*! Imagine you read a review on washers and dryers, but 3 months later, some new models come out and they aren't even in the list of models tested. Suddenly, the issue announces a revision has been done, and those new models are added to the review!
So far, everyone seems to be charging around $5 per issue with no yearly or multi-year subscription options.
This feels like they're saying to me, the reader; You're only allowed to buy our new magazine at full newsstand price, issue by issue! How many people would go for THAT (a magazine with no subscription options)?
Beyond that, if they really feel they need to make $5 per issue (or even a little bit more), I'd suggest a whole new way of thinking about the magazine? How about "dynamic digital issues", where after you buy it, content keeps getting revised/updated over the next year or so?
Especially with a format like Consumer Reports magazine does, this would be *awesome*! Imagine you read a review on washers and dryers, but 3 months later, some new models come out and they aren't even in the list of models tested. Suddenly, the issue announces a revision has been done, and those new models are added to the review!
$4.99. Bwahahahahahaha.
Good luck with that Wired.
I can think of few magazines worth $4.99 -- in paper, plastic, engraved metal, suede, or electronic form. No maybe if it was on gold leaf, I consider, but only for the recycling value.
In simple words, a subscription.
Good luck with that Wired.
I can think of few magazines worth $4.99 -- in paper, plastic, engraved metal, suede, or electronic form. No maybe if it was on gold leaf, I consider, but only for the recycling value.
In simple words, a subscription.
You mean you haven't tried to hold up your iPhone to the speaker and use Shazam? Get wit the technology baby!
I kid I kid... I have no idea what that song is
Shazam can't identify it. I'd like to know too. What song is it?
$4.99. Bwahahahahahaha.
Good luck with that Wired.
I can think of few magazines worth $4.99 -- in paper, plastic, engraved metal, suede, or electronic form. No maybe if it was on gold leaf, I consider, but only for the recycling value.
In simple words, a subscription.
So far I have only seen magazines that are 3.99+ in the app store. But I agree with you subscription is the only way to go and I will not take part until they either do subscriptions or lower the price of mags.
+1 I wish I knew what it was, this must be one of the first times shazam has failed me quite this badly -_-
Frt
I've been in print publishing for 25+ years; ~90% of the cost of publishing is printing, paper and distribution. With digital media, all of that is gone. If a publisher's print media is $5 per issue, then it should be $0.50 per issue for digital.
I've been in print publishing for 25+ years; ~90% of the cost of publishing is printing, paper and distribution. With digital media, all of that is gone. If a publisher's print media is $5 per issue, then it should be $0.50 per issue for digital.
For all those wanting to know what song it is!
It is *drumroll*
The Black Keys
Howlin' for you
Enjoy
It is *drumroll*
The Black Keys
Howlin' for you
Enjoy
Sorry, don't agree at all with the statment that magazine publishers don't want the digital medium to succeed. Unlike the record companies who were fighting to protect a very strong business (and one that they didn't really have that much input in when you get right down to it) publishers know that they're staring at a dying industry. They WANT to find the next big thing and, of course, they are usually the content producers as well so have a vested interest in selling more. Plus digital has a lot of advantages for them that don't apply to the music business.
At the same time though they don't have the huge financial reserves that other industries have. They simply can't afford to take the risk of their existing financial market vanishing as a result of agressive pricing on the digital side. Perhaps more importantly, we do need to remember that right now the iPad install base is still pretty small, less than a couple of million worldwide. If and when that figure gets up to ten million + you'll probably find publishers a lot more open to taking a few risks.
I wonder how exactly the magazine went together... Did someone start in inDesign and export the "pages" as pdfs, to be animated in another program? If they were originally animating in flash, you would hope they were not producing the doc in it too, because in all fairness to flash, although it's a brilliant vector animation package, it's not great at DTP! You would think there is a market here for a program to handle the DTP and slick animations that compiles in C.
Will the iPad price remain the same a year from its release in March 2011? Or will it go down $100 bucks once the initial worldwide release is over?
How much is it costing these companies to create their own "magazine" apps? I know I searched for app writers to see and one offered a free quote and had you fill out a form and had a budget selection and the lowest one was in the 3,000 - 5,000 dollar range and obviously went up from there, thus ending my thoughts of having a simple iPad app for my website.
Maybe 4.99 is to recoup their initial costs, just like Apple recoups on the R&D of a product and eventually trims the price as the component costs go down and Apple needs to target the market of people who wanted an iPad but at 499.00 still out of reach even though nicely priced.
Although, 499 is kind of a misnomer, what with Apple Care added to it, the charging stand or keyboard stand, buy a cover, and the app store which can be very addictive if one is not careful... ooh that looks cool and it's only 2.99! A bargain!! Click to buy... a bunch of apps later and totaling a tidy sum is easy to do... kind of like some people and their HSN channel on tv, that just watches and buys...
You don't have shazam or soundhound? (soundhound is better than Shazam)
Ho wait a minute.... gosh both app does'nt find the name of the song
I hope Adobe's experience here has both given them the expertise and incentive to encourage them to come up with designer's apps that output iPad compliant material without the need to hand code.
Totally! iPads are useless. I mean one could browse photos on a computer before!
/s
Take off your fanboy hat, it's totally blocking your ability to see that guy's actual point.
As for the app...hahahaha charging half a years subscription rate per issue? Sure, they'll get some suckers to buy it, but at that price its going to tank.
Adobe charges its viewer also (to system makers), mainly to embedded systems, and also to mobile devices.
Adobe hides its Flash earnings over multiple business units so people can't tell how much money Adobe getting for Flash.
"Adobe's rates were widely considered to be prohibitively high, and it was this issue[citation needed] that led Apple to design their own system, TrueType, around 1991."
Apple also designed its own PDF reader because Adobe's version takes a long time to open.
Thanks. Fail again.