On-line Playback versus hardcopy
Syd -- Sun, 06/01/2008 - 23:55
I have an observation that I would like to share with everyone how subscribes to Playback that were also subscribers to TPV. I find that when I received my hardcopy versions of TPV, I actually read them in a more timely and relaxed fashion. Given that it was "offline", it was actually more condusive for me to sit in my listening room, office, bedroom, yard, patio or on the beach and curl up with my magazine and get lost in my own world.
With the online nature of Playback, I find that I am queued up 4-5 issues deep and don't read the magazine on a timely basis (same with Winding Road). I think the main reason is becase when I am on my laptop, I have umteen thousand windows open at any given time that are mainly related to work, and this "environment" doesn't lend itself to the "escape" experience I get from getting off my machine and retiring to any number of relaxed settings with my hardcopy magazine.
I was wondering if anyone else has experienced this or whether I need to go see a shrink...
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1999 - 2011 NextScreen. All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
Others have mentioned this, and I think it depends on the reader. A question we have wrestled with: would you pay $20 for a subscription to Playback in printed form? Alternatively, would you pay $8 for a pdf subscription (you can print this if you like)?
CEO and Editorial Director, Nextscreen LLC
Why not 86 Playback and restart the TPV. Playback has never come close to TPV and for those of us who subscribed to TPV seems to be a
way of attracting young readers. And at the same time forsaking your loyal core readers.
Playback sucks! Since TPV died I have never gone back to read an old issue like I used to do with TPV or to check out a review.
Bring back TPV!!!
Sheepherder
Shenandoah Valley, VA
Sheepherder: We're glad you're here, but I have to tell you we already know how you feel. The problem is, every time we respond to your yelling and shouting with reasonable questions, you go silent. Not much we can do with that. Maybe you don't know why you don't like Playback, and I can understand that; we'll keep trying to make it better. But if you want to contribute to making it better, you've got to try to think and have a dialog.
Now, here's the deal: Playback is read by 3-5 times as many people per month as The Perfect Vision was. Playback is growing, TPV wasn't. So, something is going right with Playback and so frankly we don't have any logical interest in 86ing Playback and bringing back TPV. That said, if we can serve your home theater needs better, we'd certainly look at that.
Chris and Jim and I think there is lots of room for improvement, and we're all ears on ideas for that, of course.[/i]
CEO and Editorial Director, Nextscreen LLC
tmartin wrote:Others have mentioned this, and I think it depends on the reader. A question we have wrestled with: would you pay $20 for a subscription to Playback in printed form? Alternatively, would you pay $8 for a pdf subscription (you can print this if you like)?
I would gladly pay $20/year for a subscription to Playback in printed form. The pdf option, while interesting, is not in the cards for me personally. I think I'm queued several issues deeper on reading Playback since my last post...