Print versus online news consumption

5 07 2009

I’m ranking this quote under “wish I had read this sooner”.

Paper newspapers are hard to hold, hard to fold, hard to move around in (”cont’d on page E35″), smelly, smudgy, static (no video), unlinked, and wasteful. At the moment, the replacement readers are over-priced, under-sized, static, black and white, and barely-linked. But over time that’ll change, and when it does, I don’t think we’ll mourn papers for long.

David Weinberger

About these ads

Actions

Information

2 responses

7 07 2009
billbennettnz

I’m about 70 percent in agreement with David.

My main points of difference are:

1. I don’t want video. I REALLY don’t want video. Unless I’m looking for it, then I want now.

2. Want better screen resolution and no flicker so my eyes don’t get tired. This is the electronic reader killer as far as I’m concerned.

3. I have a fear of technological lock-in. A news reader has to be open technology. Imagine buying a reader from one newspaper company that is locked only to that firm’s content?

7 07 2009
Tom Van Hout

Thanks, Bill. Screen resolution & platform independence are indeed vital. As for video, I think/hope/expect that mode of presentation will become a choice (setting), along with automatic/manual updating, content filtering/aggregation, power options, security, etc.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s




Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

%d bloggers like this: