The hype in the newspaper industry is that it will be a savior for newspapers -- like they'll be able to charge subscription fees to replicate the printed paper on a digital device.
Some of the hype is that it will be a Kindle killer (Kindle is Amazon's digital book device).
The Apple iPad's 9.7 inch diagonal screen, tablet computer came out in January, and already publishers hope that Apple’s latest might launch the digital revolution for journalism- much as its iTunes benefited the music industry. $500 for the pad; $12 – 15 a-month for the wireless service.
Apple-Chief-Nerd, Steve Jobs hasn’t overlooked the print media as potential app. Jobs posed aside New York Times senior vice-president Martin Nisenholtz, grinning over a pixiled Times masthead crisply displayed on an iPad lcd screen. Though the Times has not struck any deals with Apple, Nisenholtz admitted Apple’s release deadline afforded only three weeks to develop the proprietary Times app. Deadlines aside, it is likely that analog newspaper is toe-to-toe with its breakthrough digital makeover. Yet to be announced, the Times model for metered pay news content.
Most newspapers face a dilemma: they’ve already given away their content for free online, How does one put the genie back in the bottle. Print-version newspaper sales have gradually fallen, and internet ad revenue hasn’t offset the revenue drop from print ads. Those papers that attempted to charge for online access lost readers to free news sites. The iPad presents itself as a solution. Apple, positioned to control distribution channels between content creators and consumers, seems able to restore the profitability of news.
The New York Times quoted an Apple contact, "Steve [Jobs] believes in old media companies and wants them to do well. He believes democracy is hinged on a free press and that depends on there being a professional press." Introducing the New York Times app, Jobs demonstrated a news display similar to a newspaper. The design allowed multiple stories on one page. The challenge for any newspaper substitute is the balance between portability and searchability. The user interface must mesh with the expectations of old-school newspaper readers. Of course one can’t wrap fish and chips in an lcd screen- a let-down to the British press, and jokes about bird cages will nolonger translate.
What might digital news look like? See the iPad remake of VIV magazine’s cover. Nisenholtz introduced the Times iPad application, "We're incredibly psyched to pioneer the next generation of digital journalism. We want to create the best of print and best of digital, all rolled up into one." This may seem obvious to most, however there are design issues that clearly favor magazine to digital vs. newspaper to digital. Clearly a magazine loses less in translation from its gatefold format to a 9.7 inch color display. When comparing the two, magazines already benefit from glossy pages and photographs. Readers tend to save their magazines long after they have flipped through their pages. Newspapers are used once. They are black and white with occasional photographs on the front pages. They must be unfolded to use.
Enabling multiframe viewing on a single display presupposes the analog browsing familiar to newspaper readers.
Aside from The Times, Condé Nast is preparing for the iPad. Vanity Fair and Sports Illustrated are preparing iPad debuts. Gannett's recent acquisition of AdMarvel, who in turn partnered with PointRoll for rich media advertising, is the basis of excitement over prospects for newspapers on iPad. Pointroll is one of the leading players in rich media ad technolgy. Their model is based on licensing technology to publishers who’s ad sales leverage the platform. Licensing defies the old ad network of publishers bedding advertisers, while media companies skim advertiser dollars.
If Gannett can engage the iPad potential- as well as the technologies poised to expand with the format, designers and content creators will be facing unique capabilities at the threshold of tablet computing. Newspaper culture needs to be escorted into the next generation of portable news. The big question is how to make the shift not only desireable to readers, but profitable to publishers. iPad newspaper content can duplicate the newspaper experience - more than a blog though less than a full-featured application. Will newspaper-giant Gannett accept the challenge? USA Today is the most widely distributed newspaper in the country. If iPad is the answer to the newspaper’s future existence, Apple and Gannett will need to be together on this maiden voyage.
iPad will be huge. Pre-orders are off the charts. By the way, the Droid likely will become a thing of the past as soon as the Verizon iPhone come out this summer. Buy Apple stock now.
I think those that are saying this is hype are not really getting what an IPad represents. The IPad is our next book, magazine, newspaper and the way we will all eventually surf the web. This movement towards truly portable technology isn’t just an "Apple" thing either. There are a whole lot of companies rushing to build very similar formats using the same OS the droid uses. The fact is you don’t need a keyboard, monitor or some big box under your desk anymore. That will all go the way of the horse, buggy and of course paper money.
I agree. The ipad will be big. I have an LG Versa right now, but I am waiting for the AT&T contract to expire as well. As soon as it does there will be two new iPhone users in the Ricci houshold.
Charlie, I think you're right. It's the first computer really designed first as a consumer device. It will have very limited ability to create content. It's designed purely for the consumption of media, with limited ability to do anything else.
I think that will appeal to a lot of people. If it ever fits into my budget, I can see getting one as a consumer device, while I'll still need my laptop to run my business.
But the killer app on it isn't going to be the New York Times, or even the book reader -- it's going to be Safari, an open network Web browser. Publishers who think this, or any similar, device is going to save their bacon and allow them to once again start charging fees just to read or view the news have fallen down the rabbit hole.
It's not about news, per se, Howard. It's about presentation. Your editor didn't let the hyperlink through to see VIV mags digital cover. Here's the link: http://vimeo.com/10207926
That is a sample of what newspaper/magazines can become, digitally. It isn't just the newspaper online.
Chelsea has an itouch (that what I call it, and Ipod touch). It doesn't compare at all to my Droid. My Droid replaces 3 of her devices and still does more.
The iphone 4g may be better but how hard is it to beat something thats been on the market for months with new technology?
Until Apple doesn't demand that I install itunes, and I don't have to use proprietary connectors for any accessories, I'll stick to Android products. But lets face it, thats not going to happen. Sony is just as notorious.
Peter, I have had several IPhones, now I have a Palm Pre with a WebOS. All of these smart phones have their strengths and weaknesses. I think what we are talking about is a time when these devices are the norm rather than just a geek’s toy. That day is close at hand now and the IPhone is what bridged the gap between what the tech geeks used a couple years ago (Blackberry, Pocket PC, Palm) to a real consumer device.
Apple is doing the same exact thing for the tablet PC. The idea has been around for years but, the technology was never simple enough for people not in the business of technology. Apple is introducing a device that can replace your newspaper, books and favorite magazines. They are wrapping the technology with a store that will allow anyone to easily consume literary products. It takes a big company to get the ball rolling. What you are seeing with your Droid was basically copied from what Apple laid out. Let me make it clear, Apple didn’t create the smart phone, they perfected it for the masses. That is what they are about to do with the tablet. They are perfecting a medium to distribute content electronically. That is what is ground breaking here, not the tablet or IPad itself.
Howard, I agree, no one is going to pay for news anymore. But, it does give publishers a medium to present advertizing, just like this site does. The change will also let news websites truly compete with print media. The one advantage print media had was you could hold it in your hand. Well, the IPad changes all that. Soon you will be able to hold TheBatavian in your hand as well.
Admittedly, I have a prejudice toward how The Batavian presents news and advertising. To the best of my ability, I've tuned it to what I believe works best on the Web. The success of the site so far gives me hope that we're on the right track.
If the future of digital content is high-impact graphic design, such as Wired and Sports Illustrated have demo'd for the iPhone, then the presentation of The Batavian won't work as an iPad app.
It would be time consuming and expensive to create a local news site that is tuned to the best features of the iPad.
But even established newspapers with corporate backing will have a hard time justifying the ROI to develop paid content apps for the iPad.
-- It's unclear how the market will develop and as it stands now, the app market is fragmented with both the Apple proprietary model and open source Droid OS. These require, for best results, separate development teams. This problem may even be compounded by needing to tune the app for iPad and Iphone, an MS tablet and an MS powered phone, etc.
-- Local news content doesn't really benefit that much from more graphics. Not all news stories even warrant a boring photo, let alone gorgeous graphics. Further, the daily news business, especially in the digital age, is about speed. Great looking story packages are time consuming and expensive to create. Local news is as much about volume as speed, and it's hard to create a quantity of great looking story packages.
-- Even for major publishers such as ESPN and Wired, the ROI is questionable. Let's be optimistic and say 20 percent of the population buys iPads. Now reduce the audience further by only those who are interested in reading newspapers or magazines online (a lot of people will buy the iPad for movies, music and books with not a bit of interest in news); now reduce that audience by further by just those people who are interested in your particular subject matter. If you're a local news site, even in a major metro area, that gets to be a pretty narrow band of potential paying readers. It's just hard to imagine how the audience will be big enough to give much of an ROI.
The iPad just will simply be the kind of mass distribution device that compares favorably to printed products. What made newspapers and magazines successful was mass production. A fragmented market of various digital devices frustrates the mass market model of media. Every new digital device compounds the problem for publishers, not solve it.
I think it is an exceptionally unsettled question as to how these new devices will change, benefit, help or hurt the publishing industry, both at the national level (SI and NYT) and local level (metro and small market).
Hopefully, for the sake of The Batavian, I'll be able to recognize the right move and adjust to meet market changes, but at this point, I'm not going to rush out and create a special app just for the iPad.
(that said, I do realize we need to improve the basic HTML of the site for better delivery on mobile devices)
(that said, I do realize we need to improve the basic HTML of the site for better delivery on mobile devices)
Howard that would probably be my only real suggestion at this point. The use of mobile tech is off the charts. I know for me personally I have tried to read something on The Batavia from my phone and the load time was quite long.
Also, I think it would be great if you did some podcasts. Kind of like a This day in review. Extrea Revenue stream?
Phil, Doing a podcast/vodcast is exceptionally time consuming and to be successful requires an ongoing to commitment that is hard for me to make with my work load. Also, we could not realistically expect more than five percent of the current audience to regularly tune in (based on adoption rates in the industry), so selling ads around that content would not produce revenue commensurate with the effort. Believe me, I like the suggestion because I think I would have a lot of fun doing it, but as a business proposition, it just doesn't pencil out.
Posted by Howard Owens on April 1, 2010 - 5:19pm
Phil, Doing a podcast/vodcast is exceptionally time consuming .....
Totally agree.
The only way to make a podcast commercially successful is to provide the platform for a sponsor specific program. For example, I've worked on podcasts for Slim Fast; eBay; Ford Motor Company; Tulane University; The Learning Channel; Discovery; etc. All of them are well attended and in some cased, virtual standing room only.
The common factor in their success is that the podcast is specific to a wide audience with like interest.
I can't see that happening here.
The ones that I have done feature a question and answer format. Questions submitted, in real time, by the audience; filtered; then asked of the panel.
Howard, the Droid has actually sold more than the original iPhone over the same amount of time... 3.5 years vs 4 months... 1 iPhone w/ 3 models being compared with 1 phone in a huge line of Androids.
Nerdy tech arguments aside... Best thing I've read on the ipad... other than the many jokes about it's absolutely horrible name:
More convenient and portable than a laptop or netbook, yes but that doesn’t mean it is convenient and portable. Imagine even trying to type an email on a flat surface where both the screen and keyboard are shared, you’ll have to lay it down which will be incredibly uncomforable to view the screen and then the rounded back will make it fairly unstable to type on, not to mention it’s too big to type with just your thumbs as you would on your iPhone.
If you want to spend a couple hundred dollars on a device that sits on your coffee table for reading, browsing the internet (without Flash support) and “comsuming” media then this is the device for you. However, for this to become a viable, mainstream device they’re going to have to add “pen” support which would be applicable for many things but primarily, and initially with the biggest potential for mass saturation, in the academic realm where students could take notes right in the margins of their e-textbooks and powerpoints and not be bothered with the aforementioned difficulty typing. Add to that the logical inclusion of a front-facing camera for video conferencing, maybe not Flash support necessarily (I know Apple has a “thing” about Flash) but at least a work-around since there is so much Flash media on the internet and multi-tasking. Those 3 things alone would put me in the “IN” category but as many people have stated, currently it’s not much more than a supersized iPod Touch.
--I can't link to that, it isn't my work, but it's a response to one of the many reviews, buried in the pages upon pages upon pages of responses... so not worth it.
I think my greatest disappointment is lack of a stylus. That would improve it as an eBook reader so I could make notes in the margin and whatnot.
I think I could learn to adjust to the keyboard for certain kinds of correspondence, but for quick notes and such, a stylus would seem to make more sense.
If it had a stylus, a camera and a mic (for audio recording), it would be the perfect kind of tool for a reporter to carry around (stylus, too, would mean, if you were standing up interviewing somebody, you could take notes with one hand while holding the device in the other -- though that's also what I would use audio recording for).
I have worked on podcasts as well and not all have to be that focused to have success. They have to be well produced and ordered, but not just restricted to a singular question. I have seen a lot of casts that are very much genre based that pull lots of listeners
Howard, I don't think that you would have to do this yourself. There are plenty of young budding journalist or broadcast majors that would love that kind of opportunity. You could partner with GCC and have it played as news breaks on the college station. Gain sponsors and get subscribers. After all, that is a great age group to attract now.
This is just a suggestion of course, but I don't think that you should rule out anything.
I'm sorry, but I don't see this iPad hype as anything huge. If anything, it'll help breathe new life into the dying newspaper industry. It could help encourage (AKA force) online newspapers into redesigning their websites into some kind of standard layout in terms of mobile viewing and accessing, possibly creating or laying the groundwork for an universal online newspaper layout.
The iPhone is an overglorified MP3 player and the iPad is an overglorified TabletPC-esque MacBook. Until you can load Linux on the iPad with the touchscreen working and a functional OSD keyboard, I'm uninterested.
It'll be like the Palm Pre release. The hype will die down 4 months after being released and just become another device on the market.
There are non-iApple devices that do the same thing as it's iApple counterparts, but do the job better.
Phil, I didn't say they were focused on a certain question. The ones we did were paid for by the companies and, of course, their audience were people interested in their product(s).
For example, eBay has them often. Some are for people who have stores on eBay; another might be on how best to use Pay Pal; etc.
Tulane, which we did as a public service, helped the administration keep in contact with students; parents; and staff after Katrina. Questions ranged from when the school would open again, what courses could not get up to speed in time for opening; housing; etc. We did a series of podcasts for Tulane.
When the series Planet Earth was filmed, podcasts were arranged as a tutorial for the press and others explainig how Planet Earth was filmed.
We also had them for the viewing audience during the original showing of the series.
We did the same for Deadliest Catch.
Slim Fast, at least when I was working, did a podcast every month for people who used their products.
Many corporations will podcast when they introduce a new product. There were times when we did eight or ten a week, depending on the clients' needs.
My personal favorite was the weekly two hour program we did for TLC's Trading Spaces. I actually did four hours every Saturday, two for the east coast and two for the west coast feed.
I'm not sure about the ones you were involved in, but each company for whom we worked had their lawyers in the "filter room".
It took me awhile to find this post but I thought I would share this review. I always check this guy out when it comes to tech stuff. ( Whats an ipad ? sounds like a female robot thing)
I once wanted to get a
I once wanted to get a bachelor pad................
YEah Dave i once had a
YEah Dave i once had a bachelor pad,it was nice!
Sorry, not following the
Sorry, not following the iHype movement.
i got a Creative Labs mp3
i got a Creative Labs mp3 player , works just as good if not better then ipod and a lot cheaper price.
Somebody called and left me a
Somebody called and left me a message saying, "I think you made a mistake. I think you mean iPod."
No, I mean, iPad, being released on April 3.
[video:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Luj263H_56A]
The hype in the newspaper industry is that it will be a savior for newspapers -- like they'll be able to charge subscription fees to replicate the printed paper on a digital device.
Some of the hype is that it will be a Kindle killer (Kindle is Amazon's digital book device).
The iPad looks like a much larger iPod/iPhone.
Apple's products are too
Apple's products are too proprietary. I stick to open source, which is why I have a droid.
The Apple iPad's 9.7 inch
The Apple iPad's 9.7 inch diagonal screen, tablet computer came out in January, and already publishers hope that Apple’s latest might launch the digital revolution for journalism- much as its iTunes benefited the music industry. $500 for the pad; $12 – 15 a-month for the wireless service.
Apple-Chief-Nerd, Steve Jobs hasn’t overlooked the print media as potential app. Jobs posed aside New York Times senior vice-president Martin Nisenholtz, grinning over a pixiled Times masthead crisply displayed on an iPad lcd screen. Though the Times has not struck any deals with Apple, Nisenholtz admitted Apple’s release deadline afforded only three weeks to develop the proprietary Times app. Deadlines aside, it is likely that analog newspaper is toe-to-toe with its breakthrough digital makeover. Yet to be announced, the Times model for metered pay news content.
Most newspapers face a dilemma: they’ve already given away their content for free online, How does one put the genie back in the bottle. Print-version newspaper sales have gradually fallen, and internet ad revenue hasn’t offset the revenue drop from print ads. Those papers that attempted to charge for online access lost readers to free news sites. The iPad presents itself as a solution. Apple, positioned to control distribution channels between content creators and consumers, seems able to restore the profitability of news.
The New York Times quoted an Apple contact, "Steve [Jobs] believes in old media companies and wants them to do well. He believes democracy is hinged on a free press and that depends on there being a professional press." Introducing the New York Times app, Jobs demonstrated a news display similar to a newspaper. The design allowed multiple stories on one page. The challenge for any newspaper substitute is the balance between portability and searchability. The user interface must mesh with the expectations of old-school newspaper readers. Of course one can’t wrap fish and chips in an lcd screen- a let-down to the British press, and jokes about bird cages will nolonger translate.
What might digital news look like? See the iPad remake of VIV magazine’s cover. Nisenholtz introduced the Times iPad application, "We're incredibly psyched to pioneer the next generation of digital journalism. We want to create the best of print and best of digital, all rolled up into one." This may seem obvious to most, however there are design issues that clearly favor magazine to digital vs. newspaper to digital. Clearly a magazine loses less in translation from its gatefold format to a 9.7 inch color display. When comparing the two, magazines already benefit from glossy pages and photographs. Readers tend to save their magazines long after they have flipped through their pages. Newspapers are used once. They are black and white with occasional photographs on the front pages. They must be unfolded to use.
Enabling multiframe viewing on a single display presupposes the analog browsing familiar to newspaper readers.
Aside from The Times, Condé Nast is preparing for the iPad. Vanity Fair and Sports Illustrated are preparing iPad debuts. Gannett's recent acquisition of AdMarvel, who in turn partnered with PointRoll for rich media advertising, is the basis of excitement over prospects for newspapers on iPad. Pointroll is one of the leading players in rich media ad technolgy. Their model is based on licensing technology to publishers who’s ad sales leverage the platform. Licensing defies the old ad network of publishers bedding advertisers, while media companies skim advertiser dollars.
If Gannett can engage the iPad potential- as well as the technologies poised to expand with the format, designers and content creators will be facing unique capabilities at the threshold of tablet computing. Newspaper culture needs to be escorted into the next generation of portable news. The big question is how to make the shift not only desireable to readers, but profitable to publishers. iPad newspaper content can duplicate the newspaper experience - more than a blog though less than a full-featured application. Will newspaper-giant Gannett accept the challenge? USA Today is the most widely distributed newspaper in the country. If iPad is the answer to the newspaper’s future existence, Apple and Gannett will need to be together on this maiden voyage.
iPad will be huge. Pre-orders
iPad will be huge. Pre-orders are off the charts. By the way, the Droid likely will become a thing of the past as soon as the Verizon iPhone come out this summer. Buy Apple stock now.
A couple of weeks ago,
A couple of weeks ago, somebody came up to me and said, "Look at my new phone. It's a Droid." He proceeded to show me all the cool things it could do.
Being a polite guy, I just kept my iPhone in its holster and said, "That's nice."
I think those that are saying
I think those that are saying this is hype are not really getting what an IPad represents. The IPad is our next book, magazine, newspaper and the way we will all eventually surf the web. This movement towards truly portable technology isn’t just an "Apple" thing either. There are a whole lot of companies rushing to build very similar formats using the same OS the droid uses. The fact is you don’t need a keyboard, monitor or some big box under your desk anymore. That will all go the way of the horse, buggy and of course paper money.
I agree. The ipad will be
I agree. The ipad will be big. I have an LG Versa right now, but I am waiting for the AT&T contract to expire as well. As soon as it does there will be two new iPhone users in the Ricci houshold.
Charlie, I think you're
Charlie, I think you're right. It's the first computer really designed first as a consumer device. It will have very limited ability to create content. It's designed purely for the consumption of media, with limited ability to do anything else.
I think that will appeal to a lot of people. If it ever fits into my budget, I can see getting one as a consumer device, while I'll still need my laptop to run my business.
But the killer app on it isn't going to be the New York Times, or even the book reader -- it's going to be Safari, an open network Web browser. Publishers who think this, or any similar, device is going to save their bacon and allow them to once again start charging fees just to read or view the news have fallen down the rabbit hole.
It's not about news, per se,
It's not about news, per se, Howard. It's about presentation. Your editor didn't let the hyperlink through to see VIV mags digital cover. Here's the link:
http://vimeo.com/10207926
That is a sample of what newspaper/magazines can become, digitally. It isn't just the newspaper online.
Chelsea has an itouch (that
Chelsea has an itouch (that what I call it, and Ipod touch). It doesn't compare at all to my Droid. My Droid replaces 3 of her devices and still does more.
The iphone 4g may be better but how hard is it to beat something thats been on the market for months with new technology?
Until Apple doesn't demand that I install itunes, and I don't have to use proprietary connectors for any accessories, I'll stick to Android products. But lets face it, thats not going to happen. Sony is just as notorious.
Best graphics on the market belong to the Droid.
Peter, I have had several
Peter, I have had several IPhones, now I have a Palm Pre with a WebOS. All of these smart phones have their strengths and weaknesses. I think what we are talking about is a time when these devices are the norm rather than just a geek’s toy. That day is close at hand now and the IPhone is what bridged the gap between what the tech geeks used a couple years ago (Blackberry, Pocket PC, Palm) to a real consumer device.
Apple is doing the same exact thing for the tablet PC. The idea has been around for years but, the technology was never simple enough for people not in the business of technology. Apple is introducing a device that can replace your newspaper, books and favorite magazines. They are wrapping the technology with a store that will allow anyone to easily consume literary products. It takes a big company to get the ball rolling. What you are seeing with your Droid was basically copied from what Apple laid out. Let me make it clear, Apple didn’t create the smart phone, they perfected it for the masses. That is what they are about to do with the tablet. They are perfecting a medium to distribute content electronically. That is what is ground breaking here, not the tablet or IPad itself.
Howard, I agree, no one is
Howard, I agree, no one is going to pay for news anymore. But, it does give publishers a medium to present advertizing, just like this site does. The change will also let news websites truly compete with print media. The one advantage print media had was you could hold it in your hand. Well, the IPad changes all that. Soon you will be able to hold TheBatavian in your hand as well.
Admittedly, I have a
Admittedly, I have a prejudice toward how The Batavian presents news and advertising. To the best of my ability, I've tuned it to what I believe works best on the Web. The success of the site so far gives me hope that we're on the right track.
If the future of digital content is high-impact graphic design, such as Wired and Sports Illustrated have demo'd for the iPhone, then the presentation of The Batavian won't work as an iPad app.
It would be time consuming and expensive to create a local news site that is tuned to the best features of the iPad.
But even established newspapers with corporate backing will have a hard time justifying the ROI to develop paid content apps for the iPad.
-- It's unclear how the market will develop and as it stands now, the app market is fragmented with both the Apple proprietary model and open source Droid OS. These require, for best results, separate development teams. This problem may even be compounded by needing to tune the app for iPad and Iphone, an MS tablet and an MS powered phone, etc.
-- Local news content doesn't really benefit that much from more graphics. Not all news stories even warrant a boring photo, let alone gorgeous graphics. Further, the daily news business, especially in the digital age, is about speed. Great looking story packages are time consuming and expensive to create. Local news is as much about volume as speed, and it's hard to create a quantity of great looking story packages.
-- Even for major publishers such as ESPN and Wired, the ROI is questionable. Let's be optimistic and say 20 percent of the population buys iPads. Now reduce the audience further by only those who are interested in reading newspapers or magazines online (a lot of people will buy the iPad for movies, music and books with not a bit of interest in news); now reduce that audience by further by just those people who are interested in your particular subject matter. If you're a local news site, even in a major metro area, that gets to be a pretty narrow band of potential paying readers. It's just hard to imagine how the audience will be big enough to give much of an ROI.
The iPad just will simply be the kind of mass distribution device that compares favorably to printed products. What made newspapers and magazines successful was mass production. A fragmented market of various digital devices frustrates the mass market model of media. Every new digital device compounds the problem for publishers, not solve it.
I think it is an exceptionally unsettled question as to how these new devices will change, benefit, help or hurt the publishing industry, both at the national level (SI and NYT) and local level (metro and small market).
Hopefully, for the sake of The Batavian, I'll be able to recognize the right move and adjust to meet market changes, but at this point, I'm not going to rush out and create a special app just for the iPad.
(that said, I do realize we need to improve the basic HTML of the site for better delivery on mobile devices)
Posted by Howard Owens on
Posted by Howard Owens on April 1, 2010 - 3:27pm
(that said, I do realize we need to improve the basic HTML of the site for better delivery on mobile devices)
Howard that would probably be my only real suggestion at this point. The use of mobile tech is off the charts. I know for me personally I have tried to read something on The Batavia from my phone and the load time was quite long.
Also, I think it would be great if you did some podcasts. Kind of like a This day in review. Extrea Revenue stream?
Droid owns Iphone...plain and
Droid owns Iphone...plain and simple
Phil, Doing a podcast/vodcast
Phil, Doing a podcast/vodcast is exceptionally time consuming and to be successful requires an ongoing to commitment that is hard for me to make with my work load. Also, we could not realistically expect more than five percent of the current audience to regularly tune in (based on adoption rates in the industry), so selling ads around that content would not produce revenue commensurate with the effort. Believe me, I like the suggestion because I think I would have a lot of fun doing it, but as a business proposition, it just doesn't pencil out.
Who owns what? iPhone vs.
Who owns what? <a href="http://getclicky.com/marketshare/us/droid/">iPhone vs. Droid market share</a>.
Posted by Howard Owens on
Posted by Howard Owens on April 1, 2010 - 5:19pm
Phil, Doing a podcast/vodcast is exceptionally time consuming .....
Totally agree.
The only way to make a podcast commercially successful is to provide the platform for a sponsor specific program. For example, I've worked on podcasts for Slim Fast; eBay; Ford Motor Company; Tulane University; The Learning Channel; Discovery; etc. All of them are well attended and in some cased, virtual standing room only.
The common factor in their success is that the podcast is specific to a wide audience with like interest.
I can't see that happening here.
The ones that I have done feature a question and answer format. Questions submitted, in real time, by the audience; filtered; then asked of the panel.
Howard, the Droid has
Howard, the Droid has actually sold more than the original iPhone over the same amount of time... 3.5 years vs 4 months... 1 iPhone w/ 3 models being compared with 1 phone in a huge line of Androids.
http://blog.flurry.com/bid/31410/Day-74-Sales-Apple-iPhone-vs-Google-Ne…
Nerdy tech arguments aside... Best thing I've read on the ipad... other than the many jokes about it's absolutely horrible name:
More convenient and portable than a laptop or netbook, yes but that doesn’t mean it is convenient and portable. Imagine even trying to type an email on a flat surface where both the screen and keyboard are shared, you’ll have to lay it down which will be incredibly uncomforable to view the screen and then the rounded back will make it fairly unstable to type on, not to mention it’s too big to type with just your thumbs as you would on your iPhone.
If you want to spend a couple hundred dollars on a device that sits on your coffee table for reading, browsing the internet (without Flash support) and “comsuming” media then this is the device for you. However, for this to become a viable, mainstream device they’re going to have to add “pen” support which would be applicable for many things but primarily, and initially with the biggest potential for mass saturation, in the academic realm where students could take notes right in the margins of their e-textbooks and powerpoints and not be bothered with the aforementioned difficulty typing. Add to that the logical inclusion of a front-facing camera for video conferencing, maybe not Flash support necessarily (I know Apple has a “thing” about Flash) but at least a work-around since there is so much Flash media on the internet and multi-tasking. Those 3 things alone would put me in the “IN” category but as many people have stated, currently it’s not much more than a supersized iPod Touch.
--I can't link to that, it isn't my work, but it's a response to one of the many reviews, buried in the pages upon pages upon pages of responses... so not worth it.
I think my greatest
I think my greatest disappointment is lack of a stylus. That would improve it as an eBook reader so I could make notes in the margin and whatnot.
I think I could learn to adjust to the keyboard for certain kinds of correspondence, but for quick notes and such, a stylus would seem to make more sense.
If it had a stylus, a camera and a mic (for audio recording), it would be the perfect kind of tool for a reporter to carry around (stylus, too, would mean, if you were standing up interviewing somebody, you could take notes with one hand while holding the device in the other -- though that's also what I would use audio recording for).
Bea, I have worked on
Bea,
I have worked on podcasts as well and not all have to be that focused to have success. They have to be well produced and ordered, but not just restricted to a singular question. I have seen a lot of casts that are very much genre based that pull lots of listeners
Howard, I don't think that you would have to do this yourself. There are plenty of young budding journalist or broadcast majors that would love that kind of opportunity. You could partner with GCC and have it played as news breaks on the college station. Gain sponsors and get subscribers. After all, that is a great age group to attract now.
This is just a suggestion of course, but I don't think that you should rule out anything.
I'm sorry, but I don't see
I'm sorry, but I don't see this iPad hype as anything huge. If anything, it'll help breathe new life into the dying newspaper industry. It could help encourage (AKA force) online newspapers into redesigning their websites into some kind of standard layout in terms of mobile viewing and accessing, possibly creating or laying the groundwork for an universal online newspaper layout.
The iPhone is an overglorified MP3 player and the iPad is an overglorified TabletPC-esque MacBook. Until you can load Linux on the iPad with the touchscreen working and a functional OSD keyboard, I'm uninterested.
It'll be like the Palm Pre release. The hype will die down 4 months after being released and just become another device on the market.
There are non-iApple devices that do the same thing as it's iApple counterparts, but do the job better.
Phil, I didn't say they were
Phil, I didn't say they were focused on a certain question. The ones we did were paid for by the companies and, of course, their audience were people interested in their product(s).
For example, eBay has them often. Some are for people who have stores on eBay; another might be on how best to use Pay Pal; etc.
Tulane, which we did as a public service, helped the administration keep in contact with students; parents; and staff after Katrina. Questions ranged from when the school would open again, what courses could not get up to speed in time for opening; housing; etc. We did a series of podcasts for Tulane.
When the series Planet Earth was filmed, podcasts were arranged as a tutorial for the press and others explainig how Planet Earth was filmed.
We also had them for the viewing audience during the original showing of the series.
We did the same for Deadliest Catch.
Slim Fast, at least when I was working, did a podcast every month for people who used their products.
Many corporations will podcast when they introduce a new product. There were times when we did eight or ten a week, depending on the clients' needs.
My personal favorite was the weekly two hour program we did for TLC's Trading Spaces. I actually did four hours every Saturday, two for the east coast and two for the west coast feed.
I'm not sure about the ones you were involved in, but each company for whom we worked had their lawyers in the "filter room".
It took me awhile to find
It took me awhile to find this post but I thought I would share this review. I always check this guy out when it comes to tech stuff. ( Whats an ipad ? sounds like a female robot thing)
<object width="560" height="340"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/IvqVuqHlLB0&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/IvqVuqHlLB0&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="560" height="340"></embed></object>