I just got the email from the ARRL:

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

.... with a button to push if I want to opt out of getting the "dead
tree" version of QST.

Now, let me make it clear that I don't have any problem with people who
want the printed version. I also don't have a quarrel with those who
prefer an online publication.

I've been a life member of the ARRL since 1972. They do some good and
important things in Newington. What they are not doing, at least not
yet, is producing a version of QST that can be used online.

There are some nice features, such as clickable links in the table of
contents. They are a good start toward making QST online more usable.

But ...

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.

It's not going to work for me. When it comes to digital publications, I
go back so far that I get to say "We used to write on the disks with a
chisel", and this isn't going to work. Computers are /not/ the same as
print media: graphic displays are not going to work well with content
that is formatted for a magazine.

In short: "A" for effort, but "D" for results. Check back later.

73,

Bill, W1AC

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

In article , Bill Horne wrote:
I just got the email from the ARRL:

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

... with a button to push if I want to opt out of getting the "dead
tree" version of QST.

What do you mean by "ARRL drops the other shoe"? Are they making the
digital edition mandatory?


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.

Hmmm, I'm not seeing any obscuration. Is it some kind of shaded gray
that's covering the bottom part of the page? Oh, and to be clear, are
you talking about the Nxtbook version of QST on the ARRL website, or
did you find a way to actually download a PDF file? Oftentimes, these
flashy online digital magazines let you download a PDF version, but
all I see with this one is an option to run their software on your
computer. No thanks. :-)

If you're hoping that the League will convert each issue to HTML
format, complete with nice layout and graphics, I wouldn't hold
my breath on that. The reason companies choose solutions such as
Nxtbook is because it's a lot easier and cheaper than redoing the
layout in HTML.


Patty

I think Bill, what is happening - is that the yuppies who wants to save the world - would like to eliminate as much mail as possible and use as little paper as possible..
Just look at books, how many times do you see someone buy an actual paper book anymore?

On the other hand, as the price of postage goes up, probably some pencil pusher at the ARRL got the bright idea that it would be great to get rid of the paper copy - then they would save the price of printing, mailing etc..

On the other hand, you joined the ARRL in 1972?
Lets say a lifetime membership at that time was $150.00
The ARRL - even if they put your money into a interest bearing account, stopped making money on you about 12 years ago....

Let alone a couple of friends of mine who has been a ham for 50 years and only paid like $65.00 in 1960 to join the ARRL and bought lifetime memberships...

At some point the ARRL is either going to have to raise lifetime memberships to about $1000.00 or close it's doors.

My friends tells me that if they buy yearly memberships and let it run out at the end of the year, in time the ARRL will send them free gifts to rejoin.
They let it expire purposely - just to get the free gifts...

Me personally - I don't have a tablet or a laptop computer, or a cell phone, so it doesn't matter to me if they want to give away electronic versions - they would also have to give me something to look at it with besides my home computer.

When you stop and think about it - the QST doesn't really have much in it.
It is sponsored by equipment manufacturers and amplifier dealers - since most people who calls themselves hams are either appliance operators or they compensate for a lack of antenna by using some type of amplifier.

This irks me as much as anything when I hear them talk about antenna tuners and G5RV's and how they can load them up and use them on any band.
You end up with one guy who's receive is as deaf as a door knob and another guys receive who is deaf as a door knob and they are shouting between each other, and not hearing anyone else.

The persistent drone of the antenna tuner - trying to match up the antenna - while a net is taking place, irritates me to the point of where I refuse to listen to most nets..

Maybe if QST would put actual articles in their magazine about good amateur radio practice, and how all new hams needs actual Elmers, and how to become a real Elmer and be knowledgeable and not just some moron who checks into a net and says NO TRAFFIC! We could produce a new pool of amateurs to replace the ones we have lost and maybe attract more amateurs that actually operates and not just ones that gets the license and then lets it expire 10 years from now when they find out that there isn't anyone to talk to of any intelligence anymore on anything below 10 meters!

On 1/12/2013 3:20 PM, Patty Winter wrote:
In , Bill 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.

Hmmm, I'm not seeing any obscuration. Is it some kind of shaded gray
that's covering the bottom part of the page?

No, it's simply not on my screen, as if I were trying to read the
printed version with a book on top of the magazine, covering the lower
2/3 of the page.

Oh, and to be clear, are you talking about the Nxtbook version of
QST on the ARRL website, or did you find a way to actually download
a PDF file? Oftentimes, these flashy online digital magazines let
you download a PDF version, but all I see with this one is an
option to run their software on your computer. No thanks. :-)

I'm talking about the /appearance/ of the page on my computer screen,
which looks like the pdf file that most printers now ask for instead
of "photo ready" paste-up copy.

If you're hoping that the League will convert each issue to HTML
format, complete with nice layout and graphics, I wouldn't hold
my breath on that. The reason companies choose solutions such as
Nxtbook is because it's a lot easier and cheaper than redoing the
layout in HTML.

I'm hoping that the league spends the money needed to make the online
edition of QST viable. I don't care if it's done in HTML, or sent as a
pdf, or by other means. A page formatted to be easy-to-read in a "tall
and narrow" format such as a magazine page simply doesn't work in
a "short and wide" format such as my computer screen.

73,

Bill, W1AC

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

On Sat, 12 Jan 2013 12:35:38 -0500, Bill Horne wrote:

I just got the email from the ARRL:

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

... with a button to push if I want to opt out of getting the "dead
tree" version of QST.

Now, let me make it clear that I don't have any problem with people who
want the printed version. I also don't have a quarrel with those who
prefer an online publication.



But ...



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).

CQ/PopComm/WorldRadio use some proprietary format called Zinio, which
from what I heard, makes the magazine ads as pop-up ads to click off, and
cannot be converted to PDF (though they do say the articles can be
printed, so I guess Bullzip or something might work for part of the
article).

No freedom, no open standards: I choose paper or a blog's RSS feed.

--

Red Blade

President of alt.politics, alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, & talk.politics.misc
Fanfiction Committee Chairman of alt.tv.beavis-n-butthead

http://www.libertycolumns.com/

On 2013-01-13, Red Blade wrote:

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

Never, ever gonna happen. It's fairly crappy looking because of the DRM
wrapper that it comes in. But if they simply made it a PDF or HTML what
would keep you from sending it to 100,000 of your buddies?

No reason to buy the cow when the milk is free...

--
Jeff, KE9V

On 1/16/2013 5:22 PM, Jeff Davis wrote:
On 2013-01-13, Red wrote:

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

Never, ever gonna happen. It's fairly crappy looking because of the DRM
wrapper that it comes in. But if they simply made it a PDF or HTML what
would keep you from sending it to 100,000 of your buddies?

No offense, OM, but I think we're getting off track he I don't think
DRM is the cause of the online edition of QST looking less-than-ideal.

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.

73,

Bill, W1AC


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

On 2013-01-17, Bill Horne wrote:

No offense, OM, but I think we're getting off track he I don't think
DRM is the cause of the online edition of QST looking less-than-ideal.

Sorry, but not off track. I was responding to another post. Check the
thread a little closer.

--
Jeff, KE9V

On 1/17/2013 2:41 PM, Jeff Davis wrote:
On 2013-01-17, Bill wrote:

No offense, OM, but I think we're getting off track he I don't think
DRM is the cause of the online edition of QST looking less-than-ideal.

Sorry, but not off track. I was responding to another post. Check the
thread a little closer.


The DRM that ARRL uses is not real DRM, you can make unlimited copies,
you can download as many copes as yoru bandwidth will allow, It is just
that the first time you open a copy on any given computer you have to
"log in" with your ARRL user name (Call) and password and you must be
connected to the net. That one time.

After that it opens normally.

Older versions you can download PDF's. they are straight scans of the
paper document. But you need to download article by article by
article, Major pita.

That said.. I have to say I do not really like the Nextbook system.
Lots of reasons. Even if there are things in the digital version (like
hyperlinks) they can not put on paper (Though they are starting to put a
few QR codes on paper) I would much prefer say Mobi format (kindle) or
Nook or ________.
--
Nothing adds Excitement like something that is none of your business.
Remove the invalid part to email me.

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