"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)