On 1/18/2013 11:50 AM, MM wrote:
On 1/17/13 11:34 AM, Bill Horne wrote:
...
I don't care what DRM the ARRL chooses: the issue for me is that the
online edition is just a page-by-page image of the printed version, and
I don't feel that this is a viable way to make QST available online.


I dunno, that's the way I prefer it. They can imbed links to more info
so you can look at them if you want, which I think they do. How else
would you want it? Anything else would be just a bunch of web pages, it
wouldn't be QST anymore.

FWIW, the iPad QST app works quite well. I wish they had an Android
version too, I don't particularly care for the web version.

To each his own, I guess.

73... Mark AA7TA


LKikewise on the Andriod request, I do have Adobie Air installed on my
'droid so it should be possible.... Have not yet tried it.

I'm not an I-Fan.
--
Nothing adds Excitement like something that is none of your business.
Remove the invalid part to email me.

On 1/13/2013 11:39 AM, Red Blade wrote:

I'm not an ARRL fan, so I don't know about what QST is doing right now,
but we won't get into that.

The only way I will subscribe to a "digital magazine" is if it's a DRM-
free PDF file (like K9YA is).


The digital QST requires you enter your call an ARRL password the first
time you open it.. So that's a form of DRM I'd guess. Though it's easy
to get around You can make copies, (or download the same edition 20
times if you like) but you have to "Authorize" each copy by entering
your call and password.

I am going to go digital only .. This, however, is because of how I live
(For a picture of my house QRZ my call) Paper editions cost me money.
Digital does not.


--
Nothing adds Excitement like something that is none of your business.
Remove the invalid part to email me.

"Bill Horne" wrote

From what I've seen of the online edition, it looks like the pdf file that
was sent to the printer to make the paper-and-ink version. The articles
are shown in page-image format, which means that each page appears as it
would if I were holding the paper-and-ink version open, but with the lower
2/3 of each page obscured. I have to page down to the bottom of one
column, go back to the top, go down to the bottom of the second, etc.

When I first open the digital edition, the "magazine" shows up in FULL on my
15.6" laptop screen. That is, I see two full pages side by side. The print
size, however, is awfully small, so I have to enlarge it. To do that I click
on the page, it instantly grows to readable size. Holding down the left
button of my mouse, I can move the page around as necessary. Is that ideal?
Heck no. But it works, and it seems to be the simplest way. Still, I *much*
prefer the printed magazine regardless how well QST [ever] presents their
digital version.

Howard N7SO

In article ,
Howard Lester wrote:

When I first open the digital edition, the "magazine" shows up in FULL on my
15.6" laptop screen. That is, I see two full pages side by side. The print
size, however, is awfully small, so I have to enlarge it. To do that I click
on the page, it instantly grows to readable size. Holding down the left
button of my mouse, I can move the page around as necessary.

I just tried the QST Nxtbook on my 13" MacBook. In full-screen mode,
zoomed in to a readable print size, the content of some pages fits on
the screen. On most pages, I have to use the trackpad a bit to scroll
the page. It would be the same situation if I were reading a downloaded
PDF. So yeah, that's a bit annoying. Of course, no scrolling is necessary
on the larger screen of my iMac, so if "the other shoe" is that ARRL is
going to discontinue the printed edition of QST (although I really, really
doubt that), it'll be fine.


Patty N6BIS

On 1/13/2013 12:53 PM, Howard Lester wrote:
"Bill Horne" wrote

From what I've seen of the online edition, it looks like the pdf file
that was sent to the printer to make the paper-and-ink version. The
articles are shown in page-image format, which means that each page
appears as it would if I were holding the paper-and-ink version open,
but with the lower 2/3 of each page obscured. I have to page down to
the bottom of one column, go back to the top, go down to the bottom of
the second, etc.

The print size, however, is awfully small, so I have to enlarge it.

You and me both, brother, you and me both ...

Let's face it: hams, as a class, got old. There have been
volumes written about the readability problems associated
with tiny computer screens and old eyes, and the cure for that
problem is to let each viewer vary not only the font size,
but also the presentation of the page.

I want to read the page from top to bottom, not top-to-bottom-to-
top-to-bottom-to-top-to-bottom. I don't think that's unreasonable.

Still, I *much* prefer the printed magazine regardless how
well QST [ever] presents their digital version.

No surprise the I prefer the printed version myself. It has all
the classic advantages of paper-and-ink publishing, including
high contrast, intuitive formatting, and goes-anywhere portability.

As a computer professional, I stare at a display for as many as
ten hours a day. When reading about my hobby, I /like/ being able
to lay in a hammock on a nice day and hold QST between me and the
sky, and I'm reluctant to take my laptop out on a boat or to
try to read it in a car.

The postal service, however, does not work for free, and the ARRL's
advertisers are eager for more "active" content and more targeting
capability, neither of which can be gotten from Johannes Gutenberg's
methods. Ergo, digital QST will be with us for the foreseeable future,
and may even replace the dead-trees version.

I think it's reasonable to expect the ARRL to do more than copycat
the print image in return for the cookies my computer delivers up.

73,

Bill, W1AC

--
Bill Horne
(Remove QRM from my address to write to me directly)

On Sat, 12 Jan 2013 12:35:38 EST, Bill Horne
wrote:

I just got the email from the ARRL:

"QST's Stacking Up? Get Digital QST Only".

My only experience with reading a magazine electronically was a few
years ago when World Radio stopped paper publication, CQ bought it,
and published a PDF version on their web page (free for a while, they
charge for it now).

I downloaded a couple of the free issues. The problem I had was that
I don't have contiguous blocks of time to read an entire issue at
once. And there was no way to bookmark in the PDF file where I left
off.

With a paper magazine, I can stop reading any time I want, put a piece
of paper at the point I stopped, and then a day or so later resume
where I left off. Sometimes it takes me more than a month to read an
issue. Also, when I have a doctor's appointment, I can take the paper
copy with me to read while waiting my turn. (Yes, I could do that
with an iPad or similar mobile device, but only if I had one, which I
don't).

Also, I bring my recent past issues of QST and CQ to the VE license
exams sessions which I run, and hand them out to newly-minted hams.
Can't do that with the online versions.

Dick Grady, AC7EL

In article ,
Dick Grady AC7EL wrote:


My only experience with reading a magazine electronically was a few
years ago when World Radio stopped paper publication, CQ bought it,
and published a PDF version on their web page (free for a while, they
charge for it now).

I downloaded a couple of the free issues. The problem I had was that
I don't have contiguous blocks of time to read an entire issue at
once. And there was no way to bookmark in the PDF file where I left
off.

I don't have the PDF files you write about, but if they are standard PDF
files and if you use Adobe Reader, at least on a Mac when you re-open a
PDF file if you have made the right Preference choices for Adobe Reader
the file will open to the very same page you were looking at when you
closed the file. Perhaps Windows machines behave differently.

In Adobe Reader Preferences, select the "Documents" category and click
the "Restore last view settings when reopening documents" choice. Then
the same page will show up that you were looking at when you closed a
PDF document. You just have to make this preference choice once, and
then it will hold for all PDF documents you look at in the future.

I've been using PDF files and Adobe Reader ever since they first became
available, and in particular during the past ten years or so while doing
pre-publication accuracy checking for John Wiley, Inc. of mathematics
textbook files written by others. That's ever since Wiley realized that
it would be easier for me to download a PDF file than for them to ship
100 pages of paper or so per chapter by UPS from New Jersey to
southwestern Canada, and for me to ship marked pages back to them. (I
had to laugh when they e-mailed me and asked "Do you know what a PDF
file is, and can you open them?" I had been using them for years and
years before that.) The ability to go back to the same point in a
manuscript where I left off reading the night before has been essential.
And being able to search for a word or two rather than to scan visually
through 100 paper pages until I found it has been essential also. But
the 27 inch screen in front of me does help.

As to ancient eyes and ease of reading, my 77+ year old eyes manage
pretty well. The 27 inch screen does help! But when away from home I
make do with a 13 inch screen on our laptop, and it's OK. With Adobe
Reader you can choose whatever magnification ratio you want.

One strong suggestion: If you use Adobe Reader, disable JavaScript for
it, again in the Preferences. (There is a "Javascript" item in the
Preference Categories list.) Frequently Adobe's implementation of
Javascript has opened up entry points for malware. They'll find this
out, cure it with an upgrade to Adobe Reader, and then a new entry way
will be found by the bad guys. I just permanently disable Javascript in
my copy of Adobe Reader.

David, ex-W8EZE

--
David Ryeburn

To send e-mail, change "netz" to "net"

On Tue, 15 Jan 2013 20:40:52 EST, David Ryeburn
wrote:

I don't have the PDF files you write about, but if they are standard PDF
files and if you use Adobe Reader, at least on a Mac when you re-open a
PDF file if you have made the right Preference choices for Adobe Reader
the file will open to the very same page you were looking at when you
closed the file. Perhaps Windows machines behave differently.

In Adobe Reader Preferences, select the "Documents" category and click
the "Restore last view settings when reopening documents" choice. Then
the same page will show up that you were looking at when you closed a
PDF document. You just have to make this preference choice once, and
then it will hold for all PDF documents you look at in the future.

This setting is in the Windows version, also. It was unchecked.
Once I checked it, PDF files open again where I left off.
Thanks for the tip!

One strong suggestion: If you use Adobe Reader, disable JavaScript for
it, again in the Preferences. (There is a "Javascript" item in the
Preference Categories list.) Frequently Adobe's implementation of
Javascript has opened up entry points for malware. They'll find this
out, cure it with an upgrade to Adobe Reader, and then a new entry way
will be found by the bad guys. I just permanently disable Javascript in
my copy of Adobe Reader.

Good idea. Done.

Dick Grady, AC7EL