Comments on: Star PM: Good on paper, but still a failure http://blog.fagstein.com/2007/10/14/star-pm-good-on-paper-but-still-a-failure/ Can you think of a better name? Fri, 10 Feb 2012 20:25:08 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Joseph Thornley http://blog.fagstein.com/2007/10/14/star-pm-good-on-paper-but-still-a-failure/comment-page-1/#comment-2152 Joseph Thornley Sun, 14 Oct 2007 16:11:02 +0000 http://blog.fagstein.com/2007/10/14/star-pm-good-on-paper-but-still-a-failure/#comment-2152 Steve, thanks for putting the demise of Star PM in a broader context. Ottawa Citizen Rush Hour!?!? Wow. I live in Ottawa and I watch this scene pretty closely. Yet, I was totally unaware of the existence of Rush Hour. Could the experiment in PDF be doomed not simply because it's an idea that serves no real need, but also because of anemic promotion by the publishers? What has CanWest done to promote Rush Hour in its home market? Steve, thanks for putting the demise of Star PM in a broader context.

Ottawa Citizen Rush Hour!?!? Wow. I live in Ottawa and I watch this scene pretty closely. Yet, I was totally unaware of the existence of Rush Hour.

Could the experiment in PDF be doomed not simply because it's an idea that serves no real need, but also because of anemic promotion by the publishers? What has CanWest done to promote Rush Hour in its home market?

]]> By: Fagstein http://blog.fagstein.com/2007/10/14/star-pm-good-on-paper-but-still-a-failure/comment-page-1/#comment-2151 Fagstein Sun, 14 Oct 2007 15:47:23 +0000 http://blog.fagstein.com/2007/10/14/star-pm-good-on-paper-but-still-a-failure/#comment-2151 Well I don't know about that. PDFs are just the easiest way of putting word-processing documents online, especially when they involve scanned pages, tables and other stuff. But I fully agree that PDFs are clunky on-screen. For that matter, these digital editions of newspapers share that clunkiness, and I can't even download them as PDFs. Well I don't know about that. PDFs are just the easiest way of putting word-processing documents online, especially when they involve scanned pages, tables and other stuff.

But I fully agree that PDFs are clunky on-screen. For that matter, these digital editions of newspapers share that clunkiness, and I can't even download them as PDFs.

]]> By: Neath http://blog.fagstein.com/2007/10/14/star-pm-good-on-paper-but-still-a-failure/comment-page-1/#comment-2150 Neath Sun, 14 Oct 2007 15:41:56 +0000 http://blog.fagstein.com/2007/10/14/star-pm-good-on-paper-but-still-a-failure/#comment-2150 I have to admit that the only PDF's I will even consider opening are ones that I need for personal research. But when casually surfing I avoid them like the plague. Yes, they can make a very nice hard copy, but they are big and clumsy in a browser. I have come to believe that some organizations, such as the government, use them because it is technically public, but they know very few people will actually ever read 64 page PDFs, though, if you have plenty of ink to spare, you could print them out for later on. PDF's are just a contradiction to what we want on the net. I have to admit that the only PDF's I will even consider opening are ones that I need for personal research. But when casually surfing I avoid them like the plague. Yes, they can make a very nice hard copy, but they are big and clumsy in a browser. I have come to believe that some organizations, such as the government, use them because it is technically public, but they know very few people will actually ever read 64 page PDFs, though, if you have plenty of ink to spare, you could print them out for later on. PDF's are just a contradiction to what we want on the net.

]]>