Cincinnati Enquirer's New Online Subscription Model

Last week The Cincinnati Enquirer began a new subscription model for those wishing to read the paper online.  Responding to the changing readership patterns fostered by a myriad of electronic devices, Cincinnati’s sole daily newspaper has adopted a model already embraced by some other major national publications.  Now those wishing to read articles online will be able to read a limited number without paying for a subscription.  In any given month that number of articles is twenty.  Want to read more that month and you must pay.

For several years, newspapers have been struggling with how to monetize delivery of online material.  In the early years of web publication, newspapers looked at online content as a novelty.  It was something that only a relatively few technically adroit readers would find useful.  Jumping ahead to 2012 we find the landscape much different.  The number of daily “paper and ink” publications is shrinking and paid readership of those still publishing is also on the wane.  Even award winning newspapers like the New Orleans Times Picayune no longer publish a hard copy version every day of the week.

Last Year the New York Times adopted this online subscription model.  I subscribe to the New York Times and can read it on my Kindle, smart phone or computer.  I have also been a subscriber to the WallStreet Journal online edition.   The latter was never offered free on line.

I signed up for the online version of the Enquirer.  So far I am impressed.  The Enquirer has adopted a point and click navigation system for reading the newspaper.   You can read the paper page by page as the online version has the same page layout and format used in the print edition.   You also have the choice of reading the articles in a regular text format.  Using this method allows you to copy and paste the article from the newspaper into a word document or email.

Unlike Cincinnati.com, the Enquirer’s website, which is filled with intrusive display ads that dominate the page and make reading articles painful, the Enquirer’s E-newspaper contains only the ads as they would be seen in the printed edition.  You can click on them to make them larger but if you choose to ignore them they blend into the page.  This may not be good news for the advertisers but it is a real plus for the reader.  Let’s hope that the intrusive ads remain on Cincinnati.comonly.

While it is a positive sign that the Enquirer is providing these online options, the key to future acceptance and success will be what they deliver, not how they deliver it. 

Cincinnati Enquirer's New Online Subscription Model

Last week The Cincinnati Enquirer began a new subscription model for those wishing to read the paper online.  Responding to the changing readership patterns fostered by a myriad of electronic devices, Cincinnati’s sole daily newspaper has adopted a model already embraced by some other major national publications.  Now those wishing to read articles online will be able to read a limited number without paying for a subscription.  In any given month that number of articles is twenty.  Want to read more that month and you must pay.

For several years, newspapers have been struggling with how to monetize delivery of online material.  In the early years of web publication, newspapers looked at online content as a novelty.  It was something that only a relatively few technically adroit readers would find useful.  Jumping ahead to 2012 we find the landscape much different.  The number of daily “paper and ink” publications is shrinking and paid readership of those still publishing is also on the wane.  Even award winning newspapers like the New Orleans Times Picayune no longer publish a hard copy version every day of the week.

Last Year the New York Times adopted this online subscription model.  I subscribe to the New York Times and can read it on my Kindle, smart phone or computer.  I have also been a subscriber to the WallStreet Journal online edition.   The latter was never offered free on line.

I signed up for the online version of the Enquirer.  So far I am impressed.  The Enquirer has adopted a point and click navigation system for reading the newspaper.   You can read the paper page by page as the online version has the same page layout and format used in the print edition.   You also have the choice of reading the articles in a regular text format.  Using this method allows you to copy and paste the article from the newspaper into a word document or email.

Unlike Cincinnati.com, the Enquirer’s website, which is filled with intrusive display ads that dominate the page and make reading articles painful, the Enquirer’s E-newspaper contains only the ads as they would be seen in the printed edition.  You can click on them to make them larger but if you choose to ignore them they blend into the page.  This may not be good news for the advertisers but it is a real plus for the reader.  Let’s hope that the intrusive ads remain on Cincinnati.com only.

While it is a positive sign that the Enquirer is providing these online options, the key to future acceptance and success will be what they deliver, not how they deliver it. 

Free Is Not Always Better

A few weeks ago the Enquirer announced that it was going to begin to charge a subscription fee for online access to the newspaper. This announcement comes as no surprise as several newspapers around the country have either already instituted subscription policies or have one that will begin shortly. Charging for online content has been a challenge for most all traditional paper and ink publications. Few have charged a fee for their publications from the very beginning of making their content available online. The Wall Street Journal is one. Those who purchased a regular subscription to the Journal were offered complete online access to the stories and articles for an extra fee. If you didn’t pay the fee you could not read the complete articles. Most other publications were not as prescient.

According to the Enquirer, there will be a limited number of free articles that can be read online every month but to read anything beyond those articles, readers will need to buy a subscription. This is the same policy that has been adopted for the New York Times. After you read 10 articles online in a one month period you, you must pay the subscription price of about $3.75 per week to continue to read.

It will be interesting to see what success the Enquirer has in adopting this pay to read policy. I have found the paper to be less relevant with actual news content decreasing. There are some days when the paper delivered to my front door looks like an advertising flyer rather than one of Gannett’s premiere publications. I fear that few will opt to pay for it. It is a downward spiral that may not be able to be arrested.

When the Internet first made it possible to get information free from major publications many began to feel that free information was part and parcel with the new online experience. Of course this is not a sustainable model. Newspapers, news magazines and TV networks pay millions of dollars to support the reporters and bureaus worldwide. This infrastructure is necessary if factual unbiased reporting is to continue. It is also expensive. If there is no revenue generated from the service it can’t survive. For years the ink and paper subscribers to newspapers where paying not only for the paper delivered to their home, they were paying for the people reading the content free on the Internet.

The fact is that someone is going to pay for the gathering and reporting of news and information. It seems to me that a user-pay system, either directly with fees from the consumer or through advertising messages is much preferable to having some third party pay for this service. As the old adage goes, “He who pays the piper calls the tune.”

We are entering a new phase of access to quality online content. This will require fees and subscriptions. To me is a small price to pay for unbiased factual reporting.

Click to video call me

  

ooVoo Video Chat

Free Is Not Always Better

A few weeks ago the Enquirer announced that it was going to begin to charge a subscription fee for online access to the newspaper. This announcement comes as no surprise as several newspapers around the country have either already instituted subscription policies or have one that will begin shortly. Charging for online content has been a challenge for most all traditional paper and ink publications. Few have charged a fee for their publications from the very beginning of making their content available online. The Wall Street Journal is one. Those who purchased a regular subscription to the Journal were offered complete online access to the stories and articles for an extra fee. If you didn’t pay the fee you could not read the complete articles. Most other publications were not as prescient.

According to the Enquirer, there will be a limited number of free articles that can be read online every month but to read anything beyond those articles, readers will need to buy a subscription. This is the same policy that has been adopted for the New York Times. After you read 10 articles online in a one month period you, you must pay the subscription price of about $3.75 per week to continue to read.

It will be interesting to see what success the Enquirer has in adopting this pay to read policy. I have found the paper to be less relevant with actual news content decreasing. There are some days when the paper delivered to my front door looks like an advertising flyer rather than one of Gannett’s premiere publications. I fear that few will opt to pay for it. It is a downward spiral that may not be able to be arrested.

When the Internet first made it possible to get information free from major publications many began to feel that free information was part and parcel with the new online experience. Of course this is not a sustainable model. Newspapers, news magazines and TV networks pay millions of dollars to support the reporters and bureaus worldwide. This infrastructure is necessary if factual unbiased reporting is to continue. It is also expensive. If there is no revenue generated from the service it can’t survive. For years the ink and paper subscribers to newspapers where paying not only for the paper delivered to their home, they were paying for the people reading the content free on the Internet.

The fact is that someone is going to pay for the gathering and reporting of news and information. It seems to me that a user-pay system, either directly with fees from the consumer or through advertising messages is much preferable to having some third party pay for this service. As the old adage goes, “He who pays the piper calls the tune.”

We are entering a new phase of access to quality online content. This will require fees and subscriptions. To me is a small price to pay for unbiased factual reporting.

Click to video call me

  

ooVoo Video Chat

The Future of Newspapers

I am developing a love-hate relationship with traditional newspapers. Not too long ago I would read two or three “hard copy” newspapers each day. I read The Cincinnati Enquirer to keep up on what was happening in our area. A daily read of The Wall Street Journal was more for the in-depth reporting of significant national and international issues than for gaining any financial insight. I read The New York Times as a moderating voice to offset the leanings of the Journal. More and more I find myself drifting away from the traditional “paper and ink” format to online.

The publishers of these newspapers are not helping to keep my allegiance. The Enquirer in November sent me a notice informing me that the paper on Thanksgiving Day would be priced as a Sunday edition since it was going to be very large. Let me get this straight: I pay more because they were successful in getting more advertisements aimed at getting me to spend more money. Now our friends at Gannett inform us that the paper will soon be in a format akin to a comic book than a newspaper.

The folks at The Wall Street Journal were not much better in 2011. After almost 20 years of paying for a print subscription, the process of getting the paper to the front door of my office each morning seemed to have become too complicated, so I dropped it. Don’t get me started on the hours I spent on the phone trying to get my printed subscription converted to an on-line subscription.

Now I have to say, I have so far been lucky as the folks at The New York Times have yet to cancel my online access to the paper via my smart phone. I have several colleagues who have lost access as the Times converted to a paid subscription model only.

While all of this might sound like the insignificant complaints of an aging boomer, in reality I am worried about these trends. The Internet’s immediacy, reach, and efficiency can provide valuable news reporting but such reporting does require adequate funding and a viable business model. Today, looking through the news websites you quickly find that many are aggregating reports from major traditional newspapers and wire services. If those companies continue to shrink, where will this reporting come from?

For sure there is a place for the citizen journalist. This fact continues to be demonstrated with events in Syria and last year in Egypt and Libya. The amount of information that citizens of a democracy need to know increases daily, but it is like drinking from a fire hydrant. Having newspaper professionals do the heavy lifting of gathering, synthesizing and reporting is critical. For this to happen will require the traditional press to figure out a viable business model so they can convert to digital delivery while maintaining the integrity and value of the old model. So far this seems to be an elusive quest.

The Future of Newspapers

I am developing a love-hate relationship with traditional newspapers. Not too long ago I would read two or three “hard copy” newspapers each day. I read The Cincinnati Enquirer to keep up on what was happening in our area. A daily read of The Wall Street Journal was more for the in-depth reporting of significant national and international issues than for gaining any financial insight. I read The New York Times as a moderating voice to offset the leanings of the Journal. More and more I find myself drifting away from the traditional “paper and ink” format to online.

The publishers of these newspapers are not helping to keep my allegiance. The Enquirer in November sent me a notice informing me that the paper on Thanksgiving Day would be priced as a Sunday edition since it was going to be very large. Let me get this straight: I pay more because they were successful in getting more advertisements aimed at getting me to spend more money. Now our friends at Gannett inform us that the paper will soon be in a format akin to a comic book than a newspaper.

The folks at The Wall Street Journal were not much better in 2011. After almost 20 years of paying for a print subscription, the process of getting the paper to the front door of my office each morning seemed to have become too complicated, so I dropped it. Don’t get me started on the hours I spent on the phone trying to get my printed subscription converted to an on-line subscription.

Now I have to say, I have so far been lucky as the folks at The New York Times have yet to cancel my online access to the paper via my smart phone. I have several colleagues who have lost access as the Times converted to a paid subscription model only.

While all of this might sound like the insignificant complaints of an aging boomer, in reality I am worried about these trends. The Internet’s immediacy, reach, and efficiency can provide valuable news reporting but such reporting does require adequate funding and a viable business model. Today, looking through the news websites you quickly find that many are aggregating reports from major traditional newspapers and wire services. If those companies continue to shrink, where will this reporting come from?

For sure there is a place for the citizen journalist. This fact continues to be demonstrated with events in Syria and last year in Egypt and Libya. The amount of information that citizens of a democracy need to know increases daily, but it is like drinking from a fire hydrant. Having newspaper professionals do the heavy lifting of gathering, synthesizing and reporting is critical. For this to happen will require the traditional press to figure out a viable business model so they can convert to digital delivery while maintaining the integrity and value of the old model. So far this seems to be an elusive quest.

Print vs. Online a Non Issue

It is good to see the Harrison Press providing more and more content on line. For sure this is where many of us will eventually look to find our news and views rather than from the traditional printed versions. If you are reading this column in the print edition of the Harrison Press you are already part of a shrinking minority of hard copy newspaper readers. It is true that the weekly or community newspapers seem to have been able to hold on to more print subscribers than their big brother daily counterparts but the trends indicate that this phenomenon will be short lived.

Some may lament the passing of the newsprint method of reporting the happenings of daily life. For many of us who grew up reading the newspaper, there certainly is a pleasant tactile response that we have while holding in our hands a newspaper or book. Whether that response is innate or learned is debatable.

Observing our younger generation can give us some hints on what the future holds not only for the printed word but for all media. Ask almost anyone under 35 if they regularly read a printed newspaper or watch TV programs in real time on the broadcast TV or on the cable/satellite channels. More often than not the answer will be no. It is not that they are not interested in current events and are unaware of what is happening around their town or the world. For sure they do enjoy entertainment. In most instances they are informed and conversant. They just get their information and entertainment in different ways.

Instead of half asleep saunter down the driveway before the first cup of morning coffee to retrieve the print edition of the newspaper, the “30 somethings” log on to a news web site or check Twitter and Facebook. Often the content on these sites are provided by the very newspapers they eschew. The Enquirer has Cincinnati.com and most premiere newspapers like the New York Times or the Wall Street Journal have very popular online editions. I read both on my computer and smart phone. The Kindle and other eReaders offer electronic versions of several daily newspapers.

For breaking news a printed newspaper can’t compete with an electronic edition. It was almost 24 hours after it happened that the printed edition of the Cincinnati Enquirer was able to report on the recent devastating earthquake in Japan. By then most people had consumed hours of video reports and analysis. Much was from the web.

It is not only the newspaper industry that is undergoing change. TV, both broadcast and cable are losing viewers to video services provided on the Internet. There is an increasing amount of first run programming available on line and on demand. “Appointment” viewing, that is watching a program when it is broadcast, is becoming less and less prevalent among all age groups. Among the 25 to 35 year old demographic regular TV viewing is the exception rather than the rule.

Some worry about these trends. Others, me included, feel that we should not concentrate on how we get information and entertainment as much as the quality and reliability of the information and entertainment we get.

Print vs. Online a Non Issue

It is good to see the Harrison Press providing more and more content on line. For sure this is where many of us will eventually look to find our news and views rather than from the traditional printed versions. If you are reading this column in the print edition of the Harrison Press you are already part of a shrinking minority of hard copy newspaper readers. It is true that the weekly or community newspapers seem to have been able to hold on to more print subscribers than their big brother daily counterparts but the trends indicate that this phenomenon will be short lived.

Some may lament the passing of the newsprint method of reporting the happenings of daily life. For many of us who grew up reading the newspaper, there certainly is a pleasant tactile response that we have while holding in our hands a newspaper or book. Whether that response is innate or learned is debatable.

Observing our younger generation can give us some hints on what the future holds not only for the printed word but for all media. Ask almost anyone under 35 if they regularly read a printed newspaper or watch TV programs in real time on the broadcast TV or on the cable/satellite channels. More often than not the answer will be no. It is not that they are not interested in current events and are unaware of what is happening around their town or the world. For sure they do enjoy entertainment. In most instances they are informed and conversant. They just get their information and entertainment in different ways.

Instead of half asleep saunter down the driveway before the first cup of morning coffee to retrieve the print edition of the newspaper, the “30 somethings” log on to a news web site or check Twitter and Facebook. Often the content on these sites are provided by the very newspapers they eschew. The Enquirer has Cincinnati.com and most premiere newspapers like the New York Times or the Wall Street Journal have very popular online editions. I read both on my computer and smart phone. The Kindle and other eReaders offer electronic versions of several daily newspapers.

For breaking news a printed newspaper can’t compete with an electronic edition. It was almost 24 hours after it happened that the printed edition of the Cincinnati Enquirer was able to report on the recent devastating earthquake in Japan. By then most people had consumed hours of video reports and analysis. Much was from the web.

It is not only the newspaper industry that is undergoing change. TV, both broadcast and cable are losing viewers to video services provided on the Internet. There is an increasing amount of first run programming available on line and on demand. “Appointment” viewing, that is watching a program when it is broadcast, is becoming less and less prevalent among all age groups. Among the 25 to 35 year old demographic regular TV viewing is the exception rather than the rule.

Some worry about these trends. Others, me included, feel that we should not concentrate on how we get information and entertainment as much as the quality and reliability of the information and entertainment we get.

Change Only Getting Faster

With your indulgence, I thought I might depart from my more traditional “nuts and bolts…what’s in it for you” remarks and share some observations about the impact of the changes in technology on our daily lives. Part of this is a reaction to some comments I get from readers. Many express a frustration on how quickly things are changing and how hard it is to keep up with even the simple things in life like watching TV. This got me to thinking and looking a bit more deeply into the topic.

Simply put, like it or not, our advanced technology has forced us and the rest of the world into a rate of change that is nothing short of exponential. We may not like it, we may not want it, but it is here and only going to get even more pronounced.

There are several examples. It took radio about 40 years to get to 50 million regular users. Television took just 14 years to reach this same level. The Internet went from 0 to 50 million users in just 4 years. In 1984 there were about 1000 devices connected to the Internet. In 2008 it is estimated that more than 1 billion devices were Internet based. This one must put a smile on Steve Jobs’ face: the iPod™ reached 50 million in just 2 years.Enough about sales of products and services. What does this mean for other parts of our society? While I should leave education to the pros at the Board of Education, I did come across some factoids that would surely keep me up at night if I was in a teacher's shoes. I read recently that one of the challenges facing educators is that they are charged with educating kids for jobs and careers that don’t yet exist using technology that has not yet been invented to solve problems that we haven’t yet identified.

Another education guru wrote that for college students in four year technical programs, 50% of what they learn as freshmen will be out of date by graduation.So what are we to do? Living in a society where 2 weeks of articles in the New York Times contains more information than a well educated 18th century scholar would know in a lifetime, can we ever hope to keep up?

Well, it seems to me that coupled with helping students and employees to embrace change, we need to make sure that they can think critically. There is a big difference between knowing the “innards” of a specific technology and knowing the appropriate application. The latter requires thinking skills beyond computational facility. This is not just a challenge to schools but workplace training as well. Just my observations…

Change Only Getting Faster

With your indulgence, I thought I might depart from my more traditional “nuts and bolts…what’s in it for you” remarks and share some observations about the impact of the changes in technology on our daily lives. Part of this is a reaction to some comments I get from readers. Many express a frustration on how quickly things are changing and how hard it is to keep up with even the simple things in life like watching TV. This got me to thinking and looking a bit more deeply into the topic.

Simply put, like it or not, our advanced technology has forced us and the rest of the world into a rate of change that is nothing short of exponential. We may not like it, we may not want it, but it is here and only going to get even more pronounced.

There are several examples. It took radio about 40 years to get to 50 million regular users. Television took just 14 years to reach this same level. The Internet went from 0 to 50 million users in just 4 years. In 1984 there were about 1000 devices connected to the Internet. In 2008 it is estimated that more than 1 billion devices were Internet based. This one must put a smile on Steve Jobs’ face: the iPod™ reached 50 million in just 2 years.Enough about sales of products and services. What does this mean for other parts of our society? While I should leave education to the pros at the Board of Education, I did come across some factoids that would surely keep me up at night if I was in a teacher's shoes. I read recently that one of the challenges facing educators is that they are charged with educating kids for jobs and careers that don’t yet exist using technology that has not yet been invented to solve problems that we haven’t yet identified.

Another education guru wrote that for college students in four year technical programs, 50% of what they learn as freshmen will be out of date by graduation.So what are we to do? Living in a society where 2 weeks of articles in the New York Times contains more information than a well educated 18th century scholar would know in a lifetime, can we ever hope to keep up?

Well, it seems to me that coupled with helping students and employees to embrace change, we need to make sure that they can think critically. There is a big difference between knowing the “innards” of a specific technology and knowing the appropriate application. The latter requires thinking skills beyond computational facility. This is not just a challenge to schools but workplace training as well. Just my observations…

A Digital Teaching Moment

I listened to a commentary on National Public Radio a few days ago. The commentator, David Shipley of the New York Times, was discussing how President Obama was able to convince his security contingent and his legal counsel to allow him to keep his beloved “Blackberry.” As has been reported extensively, Mr. Obama long ago joined the throngs of aficionados of this part phone, part computer, and part social secretary. While the commentator was not lamenting this new twist to presidential communications, he did suggest that the President could use this as a real “teaching moment” for the others who are - some would say - addicted to this device. In fact, the “Blackberry” has been dubbed by some pundits as the “crackberry.”

The commentator opined that it was not that the President used a “Blackberry” it was how and when he chose to use it that was going to be significant. It is one thing to check email and voice mail while riding in the back seat of your car to the next appointment. It is another to have it on the conference room table in plain site and beeping while meeting face to face with another human.

I could not agree more. It is not just the improper use of “Blackberries” that drive me nuts. It is the use of cell phones, iPods, GPS devices and other personal electronics that has given an entirely new definition to rude and dangerous behavior.

There is nothing more distracting than giving a business presentation to a group of “professionals” sitting around a conference table festooned with enough “Blackberries” to bake a good size digital pie. It is one thing to multitask and another to be just plain rude. I am never sure if the people are emailing the CEO of the company or playing a game with the guys sitting across the table.

I have written several times about the proliferation of “Bluetooth” and how it has made the cell phone even more intrusive. Standing at the deli counter at Biggs, I am in no mood to learn all the gory details of the most recent surgical procedures or loves lost of the lady standing next to me waiting for ½ pound of ham, “sliced very thin please…and Suzy you won’t believe what Rita said about…..”.

And there are the folks that think they are on the Star Ship Enterprise now that they have equipped their vehicles with a new GPS devices. OK, let’s look out the windshield occasionally and see some of us other drivers who are not only in the same galaxy, but on the same road. And for heavens sake put that cell done down while driving 5 MPH though a snow storm in I-74 …with your flashers on!

It really comes down to doing what your mother told you. Do what you are doing. Be respectful to others and keep your eyes on the road. I am not worried. Our new President has had good upbringing.

A Digital Teaching Moment

I listened to a commentary on National Public Radio a few days ago. The commentator, David Shipley of the New York Times, was discussing how President Obama was able to convince his security contingent and his legal counsel to allow him to keep his beloved “Blackberry.” As has been reported extensively, Mr. Obama long ago joined the throngs of aficionados of this part phone, part computer, and part social secretary. While the commentator was not lamenting this new twist to presidential communications, he did suggest that the President could use this as a real “teaching moment” for the others who are - some would say - addicted to this device. In fact, the “Blackberry” has been dubbed by some pundits as the “crackberry.”

The commentator opined that it was not that the President used a “Blackberry” it was how and when he chose to use it that was going to be significant. It is one thing to check email and voice mail while riding in the back seat of your car to the next appointment. It is another to have it on the conference room table in plain site and beeping while meeting face to face with another human.

I could not agree more. It is not just the improper use of “Blackberries” that drive me nuts. It is the use of cell phones, iPods, GPS devices and other personal electronics that has given an entirely new definition to rude and dangerous behavior.

There is nothing more distracting than giving a business presentation to a group of “professionals” sitting around a conference table festooned with enough “Blackberries” to bake a good size digital pie. It is one thing to multitask and another to be just plain rude. I am never sure if the people are emailing the CEO of the company or playing a game with the guys sitting across the table.

I have written several times about the proliferation of “Bluetooth” and how it has made the cell phone even more intrusive. Standing at the deli counter at Biggs, I am in no mood to learn all the gory details of the most recent surgical procedures or loves lost of the lady standing next to me waiting for ½ pound of ham, “sliced very thin please…and Suzy you won’t believe what Rita said about…..”.

And there are the folks that think they are on the Star Ship Enterprise now that they have equipped their vehicles with a new GPS devices. OK, let’s look out the windshield occasionally and see some of us other drivers who are not only in the same galaxy, but on the same road. And for heavens sake put that cell done down while driving 5 MPH though a snow storm in I-74 …with your flashers on!

It really comes down to doing what your mother told you. Do what you are doing. Be respectful to others and keep your eyes on the road. I am not worried. Our new President has had good upbringing.

AvantGo™ turns wasted time into productive time

If you are like me you hate to waste time, but try as we might there seems to be too many occasions when we find ourselves waiting. Perhaps it is in the doctor’s office or the “Quickie Lube” joint. I sure can remember sitting for hours on gym bleachers waiting for my son’s 3 minutes of wrestling fame. One option of course is to always have reading material with you. I have an idea for those of you who use a PDA (Personal Digital Assistant) or other mobile device. You can download all sorts of information in the form of electronic newspapers, magazines, short stories and other information form the Internet using a service called AvantGo™ (www.avantgo.com)

Each morning when I get to the office I connect my PDA to my office computer to update any appointments I may have made since I last “synched” the two. At that same time my computer connects with AvantGo™ and downloads sections of the New York Times, articles from Wired Magazine and selected other publications. So when I have a few minutes I can pull out my PDA and do some reading. I would not recommend reading Gone With the Wind in this 2” x 2” screen, but for short articles it is great

AvantGo™ bills itself as the world’s largest mobile internet service delivering content to some 7 million people using PDAs, wireless PDAs, and smart phones like the Blackberry™. The service does carry advertising but this allows for the basic subscription to be free. I don’t find the ads intrusive and you will find that they will be customized to relate to the content you are requesting. So if you subscribe to GolfLine, an AvantGo™ offering in cooperation with Golf Magazine, don’t be surprised if you see lots of ads for golf clubs.

Another neat feature of AvantGo™ is a MapQuest™ option. You can have your MapQuest™ results sent to your PDA so you don’t need to print them. It saves trees and time and you can just erase the information after your trip.

If you have a PDA and you are only using it for an address book and Calendar, I think you will find AvantGo™ a way to make it more useful.

AvantGo™ turns wasted time into productive time

If you are like me you hate to waste time, but try as we might there seems to be too many occasions when we find ourselves waiting. Perhaps it is in the doctor’s office or the “Quickie Lube” joint. I sure can remember sitting for hours on gym bleachers waiting for my son’s 3 minutes of wrestling fame. One option of course is to always have reading material with you. I have an idea for those of you who use a PDA (Personal Digital Assistant) or other mobile device. You can download all sorts of information in the form of electronic newspapers, magazines, short stories and other information form the Internet using a service called AvantGo™ (www.avantgo.com)

Each morning when I get to the office I connect my PDA to my office computer to update any appointments I may have made since I last “synched” the two. At that same time my computer connects with AvantGo™ and downloads sections of the New York Times, articles from Wired Magazine and selected other publications. So when I have a few minutes I can pull out my PDA and do some reading. I would not recommend reading Gone With the Wind in this 2” x 2” screen, but for short articles it is great

AvantGo™ bills itself as the world’s largest mobile internet service delivering content to some 7 million people using PDAs, wireless PDAs, and smart phones like the Blackberry™. The service does carry advertising but this allows for the basic subscription to be free. I don’t find the ads intrusive and you will find that they will be customized to relate to the content you are requesting. So if you subscribe to GolfLine, an AvantGo™ offering in cooperation with Golf Magazine, don’t be surprised if you see lots of ads for golf clubs.

Another neat feature of AvantGo™ is a MapQuest™ option. You can have your MapQuest™ results sent to your PDA so you don’t need to print them. It saves trees and time and you can just erase the information after your trip.

If you have a PDA and you are only using it for an address book and Calendar, I think you will find AvantGo™ a way to make it more useful.

Why the iPhone™ is not myPhone

OK, I admit it; I am upset with Steve Jobs. Before the iPhone™ was released last month he sent complementary phones to Walt Mosberg of the Wall Street Journal and David Pogue of the New York Times so they could write reviews. Perhaps Ollie forgot to give me the package that came from Apple but I don’t think so. I guess Steve thought that a column in the Harrison Press was just not that important! Well there is always the next model, Steve.
You have to give Apple credit. When they introduce a new product they do it right or at least loudly! There was more reporting about the iPhone™ than there was about Paris Hilton’s revolving jail door. So what is all the buzz?
Well, I have to tell you I have only had about 15 minutes of “quality time” playing with an iPhone™ but that time and a review of the documentation and other reports have given me some reactions to share with you.
First, the “Cool Factor” rating is off the charts. The sleek, compact, shiny case is enough to impress both techie and artist. The touch screen and a display that senses the orientation of the phone, changing from horizontal to vertical depending how you hold the phone, is just plain cool.
The “Swiss Army Knife” concept of adding iPod, PDA and Internet browser capacity thus making the phone do much more than make calls seems to be somewhat successful. There are some shortcomings, at least in version #1. The connection to the Internet using AT&T is very slow, the battery is sealed and can not be replaced by the user, the phone will not play Flash® videos and you must use AT&T as your carrier. In some parts of the country AT&T is reported to have spotty coverage.
There is one other factor that will keep me from contributing to the value of Apple stock in the near future and that is the price. With the introductory price of the phone set at a hefty 500 bucks and a service contract with AT&T required, you will spend the better part of $3000 for the first two years.
As much as I would like to be “cool,” I think I will just save the cool cash and stay with my three-year-old Verizon phone.
Oh yes, Steve, feel free to send the complimentary updated model of the iPhone™ to the Harrison Press office and I will pick it up.

Why the iPhone™ is not myPhone

OK, I admit it; I am upset with Steve Jobs. Before the iPhone™ was released last month he sent complementary phones to Walt Mosberg of the Wall Street Journal and David Pogue of the New York Times so they could write reviews. Perhaps Ollie forgot to give me the package that came from Apple but I don’t think so. I guess Steve thought that a column in the Harrison Press was just not that important! Well there is always the next model, Steve.
You have to give Apple credit. When they introduce a new product they do it right or at least loudly! There was more reporting about the iPhone™ than there was about Paris Hilton’s revolving jail door. So what is all the buzz?
Well, I have to tell you I have only had about 15 minutes of “quality time” playing with an iPhone™ but that time and a review of the documentation and other reports have given me some reactions to share with you.
First, the “Cool Factor” rating is off the charts. The sleek, compact, shiny case is enough to impress both techie and artist. The touch screen and a display that senses the orientation of the phone, changing from horizontal to vertical depending how you hold the phone, is just plain cool.
The “Swiss Army Knife” concept of adding iPod, PDA and Internet browser capacity thus making the phone do much more than make calls seems to be somewhat successful. There are some shortcomings, at least in version #1. The connection to the Internet using AT&T is very slow, the battery is sealed and can not be replaced by the user, the phone will not play Flash® videos and you must use AT&T as your carrier. In some parts of the country AT&T is reported to have spotty coverage.
There is one other factor that will keep me from contributing to the value of Apple stock in the near future and that is the price. With the introductory price of the phone set at a hefty 500 bucks and a service contract with AT&T required, you will spend the better part of $3000 for the first two years.
As much as I would like to be “cool,” I think I will just save the cool cash and stay with my three-year-old Verizon phone.
Oh yes, Steve, feel free to send the complimentary updated model of the iPhone™ to the Harrison Press office and I will pick it up.