O.K. Here we go again!!!!! EZine Poll # 2!!!!

bushbison · « **on:** 12 Jun 2007, 03:20 pm »

There REALLY is a method to my madness, trust me!!! Please give your 2 cents .....SO much appreciated ...... aa

JEaton · « **Reply #1 on:** 12 Jun 2007, 07:10 pm »

In what context? It depends on where you're coming from. If it's an e-zine site, there's no reason not to link to both the entire back issue (link to October 06, November 06, etc.) as well as linking to individual articles. In fact, link to the articles from a dozen different places - whatever is convenient for visitors. Take equipment reviews, for instance - link to them from a page listing all past reviews (or pages listing them by category) or from a search page, plus link to them from the individual archived magazines' tables of contents.

In my opinion, PDF is an absolutely terrible format for publishing on the web. It is good for one thing and one thing only: replicating content from a _PRINT_ magazine. It's a good format for a manufacturer that posts on their own website a review from a printed magazine, and wishes to present the article as it appeared in its orginal printed form. To replicate the same review from an e-zine, they just drop the article's text and photos into an HTML page.

For the web and e-zines, all articles should be presented in HTML. There's absolutely no reason to use PDF, but we still see it from publishers with backgrounds in print media that don't understand the power and flexibility afforded them by using all the tools available on the web. Or maybe they have hopes of getting it into print one day when viewership reaches some point (good luck with that), or maybe they just want to pretend that they're publishing a real magazine.

And Word files? You've got to be kidding.

gitarretyp · « **Reply #2 on:** 12 Jun 2007, 07:23 pm »

I second everything JEaton said, and will add a third for using word

.

chadh · « **Reply #3 on:** 12 Jun 2007, 07:56 pm »

There is another, completely valid reason for using pdf (or ~gasp~ even word files) on web sites. If the document is likely to be printed out, then the pdf version already contains appropriate formatting that is transferred to the paper. Granted, much (maybe most) web-site content doesn't benefit from this form of presentation. But some things (specifically things that take a long time to read, and so are often printed out) benefit greatly. For example, in my area all academic articles are made available in pdf form. If someone tried to make a working paper available in html, nobody would read it.

As a result, the pdf version for an online magazine CAN make sense if you think a large portion if your readership wants to print the thing out and read it from cover to cover (or even if many of the articles are long, and people will want to print out an article). But if the articles were made available only in pdf form, it would undoubtedly annoy anybody who wasn't interested in printing it out.

Chad

bushbison · « **Reply #4 on:** 12 Jun 2007, 08:28 pm »

..all great input; please keep it up and encourage others to vote and participate in the discussion ....

craig223 · « **Reply #5 on:** 12 Jun 2007, 10:01 pm »

I do not like to download an entire issue for the one article that is of interest. Why not have a contents page that has the articles listed along with several viewing/downloading options. This way you can have you article the way you want it. You can read some online and download others for later/archiving. I publish property information (web and CD) for commercial developments this way. For CD/DVDs, just add an autorun file that opens a HTML contents page.

TONEPUB · « **Reply #6 on:** 13 Jun 2007, 12:33 am »

Quote from: JEaton on 12 Jun 2007, 07:10 pm

In what context? It depends on where you're coming from. If it's an e-zine site, there's no reason not to link to both the entire back issue (link to October 06, November 06, etc.) as well as linking to individual articles. In fact, link to the articles from a dozen different places - whatever is convenient for visitors. Take equipment reviews, for instance - link to them from a page listing all past reviews (or pages listing them by category) or from a search page, plus link to them from the individual archived magazines' tables of contents.

In my opinion, PDF is an absolutely terrible format for publishing on the web. It is good for one thing and one thing only: replicating content from a _PRINT_ magazine. It's a good format for a manufacturer that posts on their own website a review from a printed magazine, and wishes to present the article as it appeared in its orginal printed form. To replicate the same review from an e-zine, they just drop the article's text and photos into an HTML page.

For the web and e-zines, all articles should be presented in HTML. There's absolutely no reason to use PDF, but we still see it from publishers with backgrounds in print media that don't understand the power and flexibility afforded them by using all the tools available on the web. Or maybe they have hopes of getting it into print one day when viewership reaches some point (good luck with that), or maybe they just want to pretend that they're publishing a real magazine.

And Word files? You've got to be kidding.

While I think you are entitled to your opinion, I think you're conclusions are a bit ill founded. There are a ton
of great reasons for publishing as a PDF: Does'nt require trees, is easy to get around the world in a hurry, looks good on the screen, allows selective reprinting of articles of interest. However, we are adding web content as we go as well, but in the end, I really don't much care for the look and feel of the whole HTML thing, not until we get a little bit more sophisticated tools to publish on the web.

I also think your comments about "pretending to publish a real magazine" are pretty insulting. What qualifies you do decide whether we are a "real" magazine or not? Are we not real because we don't sell on the stand at Barnes & Noble?
That's pretty backward thinking.

We produce a quality product and have a very large audience world wide. I can't help it if we don't make it the way you want to read it. Gosh, the thing is free after all. If you don't like it, don't read it. No one is putting a gun to your head.

What qualifies you to decide how things should or should not be published? And why are you so grumpy about this?

JEaton · « **Reply #7 on:** 13 Jun 2007, 12:46 am »

Quote from: TONEPUB on 13 Jun 2007, 12:33 am

What qualifies you to decide how things should or should not be published?

I just gave an opinion. I haven't decided anything for anyone else. Those who publish magazines on the web in PDF format can continue to do so and those who find the format tedious and ill-suited for web viewing will continue to not read them.

TONEPUB · « **Reply #8 on:** 13 Jun 2007, 12:48 am »

Well then that's the way it shakes out. Try as we might, we can't keep everyone
happy...

MaxCast · « **Reply #9 on:** 13 Jun 2007, 01:23 am »

I'll chime in and say pdf with two columns is hard to read. Waiting for the page to load, scrolling up, oops went to far gotta go back....sometimes I just close the pdf and find something better to do.

vinyl anachronist · « **Reply #10 on:** 13 Jun 2007, 03:12 am »

I know I'm biased and all, and Jeff is too modest to say it, but the best reason to use PDF is that it shows off Jeff's photography like no other format. When I'm looking at conventional online audio websites, most of the photography looks indistinct and grainy. Every photo looks like a snapshot from CES on a cheap digital camera.

Both my brother and my brother-in-law are professional photographers, and they continually tell me how stunning TONEAudio looks, and how it stands out from ordinary e-zines. I know I had a few problems in the beginning learning how to navigate through a PDF file, but it's not brain surgery. Everyone figures it out.

JEaton · « **Reply #11 on:** 13 Jun 2007, 03:23 am »

Quote from: vinyl anachronist on 13 Jun 2007, 03:12 am

I know I'm biased and all, and Jeff is too modest to say it, but the best reason to use PDF is that it shows off Jeff's photography like no other format. When I'm looking at conventional online audio websites, most of the photography looks indistinct and grainy. Every photo looks like a snapshot from CES on a cheap digital camera.

This has nothing to do with the PDF format, merely the resolution of the photgraphs.

vinyl anachronist · « **Reply #12 on:** 13 Jun 2007, 03:37 am »

Hmmm...I've been told otherwise. Perhaps you're mistaking my comment as saying that PDF somehow makes the photos look better. No, it's just PDF's ability to preserve the look of an existing document, which as always been one of its selling points.

bushbison · « **Reply #13 on:** 13 Jun 2007, 02:27 pm »

bump! aa

Danny Kaey · « **Reply #14 on:** 16 Jun 2007, 04:59 pm »

Quote from: vinyl anachronist on 13 Jun 2007, 03:37 am

Hmmm...I've been told otherwise. Perhaps you're mistaking my comment as saying that PDF somehow makes the photos look better. No, it's just PDF's ability to preserve the look of an existing document, which as always been one of its selling points.

it has to do with 2 issues: image size and resolution / compression as well as color management of internet browsers: Safari (now on Windows!) is the only browser that uses true color management. Neither Firefox nor IE use it and as a result color consistency is off, way off sometimes.

James Romeyn · « **Reply #15 on:** 16 Jun 2007, 05:32 pm »

An enthusiastic & wholehearted YES!

TONEPUB · « **Reply #16 on:** 16 Jun 2007, 11:09 pm »

Color management is a source of grief whether you are on the web, in PDF
or in print. I spent 20 years in extremely high end print before doing this
and getting the color you saw to the final destination is always tough...

It's kind of like being a mastering engineer!!

No matter what you do, you can never keep everyone happy.

We keep trying, but I have a piece of closed cell foam on my desk
(so I can bang my forehead against the wall) for use when
necessary...

bushbison · « **Reply #17 on:** 17 Jun 2007, 03:57 pm »

Hi all; please, when submitting replies, stay away from the flames

; a dialog is fine, but this is not the space to tear someones hard work apart.
We are lucky that we have so many choices of format to choose from; it would be a shame if they were all the same. And especially with the fine publications that are part of "the circle", let's be respectful here; I don't know about you, but I read 'em, & enjoy 'em regardless of the format. And we're not paying $11.00 / issue like I just did yesterday for a copy of british hi-fi mag

Thanks!!!

MaxCast · « **Reply #18 on:** 17 Jun 2007, 09:20 pm »

Quote from: TONEPUB on 16 Jun 2007, 11:09 pm

Color management is a source of grief whether you are on the web, in PDF
or in print. I spent 20 years in extremely high end print before doing this
and getting the color you saw to the final destination is always tough...

It's kind of like being a mastering engineer!!

No matter what you do, you can never keep everyone happy.

We keep trying, but I have a piece of closed cell foam on my desk
(so I can bang my forehead against the wall) for use when
necessary...

Stop banging and keep typing, Bro.
Your efforts are much appreciated...more than you know.

TONEPUB · « **Reply #19 on:** 17 Jun 2007, 10:56 pm »

Now if I could just get away from paying 11 dollars each for those gorgeous
British car magazines....

Poll

How do you prefer to access back issues and / or articles/reviews in web/e-zines?

O.K. Here we go again!!!!! EZine Poll # 2!!!!