The Magazine: For geeks like us. By Marco Arment • Hacker News Board

Re: The Magazine: For geeks like us. By Marco Arment

#41

Post by saturdaysaint » Thu, Oct 11, 2012, 5:09 PM UTC

lutusp wrote: post #31

> "The Magazine: For geeks like us" ... geeks "like us" who only care about iOS and are willing to pay for content. Just to be accurate. Not that there's anything wrong with paying for content. Every time you're confronted by an ad that you didn't volunteer to look at, you're paying for content. But iOS-only seems like quite a limitation, and seems to contradict "for geeks like us" as the headline appears in HN.

It's certainly iOS-first, but I don't see any indication that it's iOS-only. Given the iPad's position in the tablet market, it will be a while before magazine style publications (which are natural for the form-factor) give equal priority to Android.

Re: The Magazine: For geeks like us. By Marco Arment

#42

Post by mirtes » Thu, Oct 11, 2012, 5:12 PM UTC

All the articles are available on-line at http://the-magazine.org/1 which is useful for sharing and reading on other devices.

I wonder how much evil it would be to create an RSS feed for it.

Re: The Magazine: For geeks like us. By Marco Arment

#43

Post by lutusp » Thu, Oct 11, 2012, 5:15 PM UTC

mjb wrote: post #36

lutusp wrote: post #31

> "The Magazine: For geeks like us" ... geeks "like us" who only care about iOS and are willing to pay for content. Just to be accurate. Not that there's anything wrong with paying for content. Every time you're confronted by an ad that you didn't volunteer to look at, you're paying for content. But iOS-only seems like quite a limitation, and seems to contradict "for geeks like us" as the headline appears in HN.

I don't have a problem paying for content, but I do have a problem with IOS-only. Even though I own an iPad, I like to have access to my reading material in multiple places. I spend a bunch more time looking at my Kindle, for example, and prefer the reading experience there to the iPad. A decade ago, something like this published in the closed formats of the time (MS Word, maybe) would have met with a huge backlash.…

> Today, it seems like Apple have convinced the market that 'closed' is OK ...

Yes, to the degree that Microsoft has decided to imitate the Apple model. It seems Microsoft has closed Windows 8 to third-part applications (except pre-existing ones operating in compatibility mode). All Windows 8 apps that depend on Windows 8 features can only be gotten from Microsoft directly, in an obvious imitation of the App store:

http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2012/10/developers-windows-8/

What's worse, these cyber-birdcages seem wildly popular.

Re: The Magazine: For geeks like us. By Marco Arment

#44

Post by ThomasQue » Thu, Oct 11, 2012, 5:16 PM UTC

mirtes wrote: post #42

All the articles are available on-line at http://the-magazine.org/1 which is useful for sharing and reading on other devices. I wonder how much evil it would be to create an RSS feed for it.

Those are excerpts :/

Re: The Magazine: For geeks like us. By Marco Arment

#45

Post by georgemcbay » Thu, Oct 11, 2012, 5:26 PM UTC

89a wrote: post #38

shortformblog wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Strokes, The Walkmen and The Yeah Yeah Yeahs would like to have a word with you.

They're not called "The Band" though are they

No, but "The Band" was.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Band

Re: The Magazine: For geeks like us. By Marco Arment

#46

Post by kmfrk » Thu, Oct 11, 2012, 5:39 PM UTC

Osmium wrote: post #21

It doesn't surprise me that it takes an AAA iOS developer to finally make a good iOS magazine. It always struck me that Newsstand was a wasted potential: full of good publications trying to squeeze their paper format into an app instead of releasing the same content in a better format. Does anybody know of "good" Newsstand apps? This might be the first. I personally think Apple should release a more aggressive Newsst…

The New Yorker is pretty good now. It's available in Retina from a certain issue a few months back, too. What bothers me is that I don't have any way to make annotations, but that's what happens when you don't see a more universal framework for Newsstand magazines.

Re: The Magazine: For geeks like us. By Marco Arment

#47

Post by cag_ii » Thu, Oct 11, 2012, 5:40 PM UTC

re_todd wrote: post #40

shortformblog wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Strokes, The Walkmen and The Yeah Yeah Yeahs would like to have a word with you.

And especially "The The".

The Who?

Re: The Magazine: For geeks like us. By Marco Arment

#48

Post by guiambros » Thu, Oct 11, 2012, 5:44 PM UTC

k-mcgrady wrote: post #9

Interesting. First of all it's very nicely designed and after reading the introduction I like the philosophy behind it. Taking the Instapaper approach of focussing on text is interesting. While images and graphics can often enhance content having nice, plain text on a device the size of the iPhone makes much more sense. So first impressions of it are good. Hopefully the content is just as good. Update: After reading…

Agree. It's refreshing to see something simple and focused on the content: no images, no videos, no fancy infographics, and none of the 'bloatware' that permeates the magazine industry.

Each issue of Wired is now 500+ MB (due to the Retina displays). If you're on 3G or at a public WiFi, it probably takes more time to download than to read the 2-3 articles you're interested.

In hindsight, you wouldn't expect anything different from Marco. Really hope he succeeds.

Re: The Magazine: For geeks like us. By Marco Arment

#49

Post by incision » Thu, Oct 11, 2012, 5:54 PM UTC

saturdaysaint wrote: post #41

lutusp wrote: post #31

> "The Magazine: For geeks like us" ... geeks "like us" who only care about iOS and are willing to pay for content. Just to be accurate. Not that there's anything wrong with paying for content. Every time you're confronted by an ad that you didn't volunteer to look at, you're paying for content. But iOS-only seems like quite a limitation, and seems to contradict "for geeks like us" as the headline appears in HN.

It's certainly iOS-first, but I don't see any indication that it's iOS-only. Given the iPad's position in the tablet market, it will be a while before magazine style publications (which are natural for the form-factor) give equal priority to Android.

>It's certainly iOS-first, but I don't see any indication that it's iOS-only.

You know exactly what he meant, no need to play word games.

>Given the iPad's position in the tablet market, it will be a while before magazine style publications (which are natural for the form-factor) give equal priority to Android.

It's text.

Also, considering it took 4 years for Instapaper to make it to Android, skepticism is more than warranted.

Re: The Magazine: For geeks like us. By Marco Arment

#50

Post by guiambros » Thu, Oct 11, 2012, 5:57 PM UTC

mjb wrote: post #36

lutusp wrote: post #31

> "The Magazine: For geeks like us" ... geeks "like us" who only care about iOS and are willing to pay for content. Just to be accurate. Not that there's anything wrong with paying for content. Every time you're confronted by an ad that you didn't volunteer to look at, you're paying for content. But iOS-only seems like quite a limitation, and seems to contradict "for geeks like us" as the headline appears in HN.

I don't have a problem paying for content, but I do have a problem with IOS-only. Even though I own an iPad, I like to have access to my reading material in multiple places. I spend a bunch more time looking at my Kindle, for example, and prefer the reading experience there to the iPad. A decade ago, something like this published in the closed formats of the time (MS Word, maybe) would have met with a huge backlash.…

I also share the concern with an iOS-only model, but give him a break: it's just a 2 months proof-of-concept.

He needs critical mass in order to make this sustainable in the long term - without having to resort to ads, sponsored reviews and all sorts of ways to keep the quality.

The choice for iOS for the initial platform seems obvious: it's much easier to monetize quickly. And it's easy to add Kindle, Android, HTML5 and others later on - at the cost of maintaining multiple versions, provided that there's enough interested paying subscribers to justify the effort.

I think that's exactly the right approach, and a real step forward.