Posts Tagged ‘iphone’

The Decline and Fall of Cosmo Doogood's Urban Almanac

Posted by Connor | July 7th, 2009 at 12:52 am

cosmo

Joe’s recent post filled me with a sense of pathos (bathos?), and not just for what was, but for what might have been.

I’m referring to the brief, two-year run of Cosmo Doogood’s Urban Almanac brought to us by the minds behind The Utne Reader. In 2004 I got the very first edition, and it made for literal hours of engaging reading. Naturally the volume included some very Utneish ooey gooey astrology, but there was also an engrossing discussion of phenology (a sort of armchair naturalism that perfectly blends the love of Mother Earth with cold hard science), a guide to urban dwellers such as pigeons and rats, and essays on “Foraging” and the “Joys of Walking.” The book’s 348 pages were packed with information, and this was what an almanac was always supposed to be.

That last sentence is, perhaps, a slight misstatement. Early almanacs likely didn’t provide farmers with much they didn’t already know, but they did concentrate the information in an immediate and accessible place. Planting schedules, information on seasonal change and the like were interspersed with the sort of pithy editorialism that made Benjamin Franklin famous. He was, in a sense, the inspiration for the 2005 Cosmo Doogood, and while the information it provided was somewhat less crucial to my livelihood than growing times would be to a farmer, the almanac did concentrate useful info in an accessible and engaging format.

Before I got past April, however, I left the book on a bus and lost it forever.

When 2006 rolled around I picked myself out the second issue. Already, something had changed. The astrological commentary, which had only gently intruded into the ‘05 edition, now filled page after page of exercises meant to be synced to the lunar month. Despite this, the almanac itself was thinner, less useful, less helpful. The old cover had been a stark and iciclish Chrysler building rising through a blue sky. The new edition featured a collection of hand-drawn birds perched on a weather vane. Not a bad image, but it couldn’t match the vigorous evocation of the original. It would seem that funds were running short for this project; neither volume sold particularly well, and no Urban Almanac was issued for 2007.

Quite simply, the book was great for a rather limited crowd of people: liberal urban yuppies with an ear for science and a bit of whimsy. But, there it is: even Eric Utne’s name wasn’t able to move enough copies, and this probably derives in part from the fact that said liberal yuppies go hunting for almanacs about as often as farmers go digging through The Utne Reader. For me, the individual fan, there was only one option. I went on Amazon last year and bought a used edition of the original ‘05 edition. I highlighted the more-or-less timeless 75% of the issue. It isn’t as nice as getting a new almanac each year, but it certainly beats the Old Farmers’ Almanacs I’d been buying more recently.

Is there a point to all this?

If there are major changes ahead for the publishing industry due to changing economies and modes of publication, there should be a way to exploit that for opportunities. Perhaps Cosmo Doogood would have fared better as a blog or in another online venue than as a print almanac. Perhaps it could have grown into its own iPhone application. In any event, its stay with us was too brief.

A few of us will even miss it.

So for every glass we raise to great publications that have fallen, let us also remember those we’ve likely never noticed.


In Defense of the Kindle

Posted by Dave | May 13th, 2009 at 9:53 am

kindleLast week, Amazon unveiled the Kindle DX, which will be the third version of the online retailer’s electronic reader. Currently, there are a little over a dozen various models of readers from different manufacturers on the market, but the Amazon Kindle is the hands down leader (a good simile: it’s like what the iPod is to other digital music players).

When the Kindle was first announced two years ago, I was writing for a Web site that covered online consumer electronics deals. As a bibliophile and a tech geek, I was pretty psyched. My colleagues, on the other the hand, were not. “I’d rather just read books on my iPhone,” said one, while another even made the argument that the Kindle wasn’t worth buying because “you couldn’t watch movies on it.” Rejected by my fellow nerds, I turned to my allies of bookworms—surely they would agree with me on the Kindle’s awesomeness? Alas, they did not. Despite the rejection from both sides, I became an early adopter of the first model and have been defending my decision ever since.

The concept of an electronic book is nothing new. At the height of the “digital revolution” many predicted that readers would flock online to read fiction posted on Web sites or via e-mail/downloads as a sort of 21st century serial novel. A great cultural artifact of those days is Stephen King’s novella Riding the Bullet, which went the serial route and even offered the first chapter free (King eventually stopped updating due to lack of interest and published the story in the collection Everything’s Eventual: 14 Dark Tales.)

Digital readers aren’t even that fresh of an idea. There are several models that turn up in the flotsam and jetsam of failed electronic fads, rotting and decomposing next to laserdisc players, HD DVD’s, and Sony MiniDiscs. The Franklin EB-500 Rocket eBook is the earliest one I could find. It came out in 1999—evident up by its screen contrast of olive green and dark olive green, stylus pen, and listing date on its Amazon.com entry (Hello, irony). So why are we hearing so much about e-book readers now?

Short answer: the technology is finally starting to catch up with the idea. The earliest model of electronic book readers were essentially LCD screens connected to small hard drives or overbuilt PDAs. This newest generation of readers, including the Kindle, feature electronic paper, or e-paper, which is essentially a digital display that imitates the look of ink on a page by reflecting light instead of projecting (it sounds simple, but in fact it’s very complicated). This makes it easy on the eyes to read, unlike when you read a screen (like on a computer or iPhone) for extended periods of time. It takes a bit of an adjustment, but after a while you can’t tell the difference between the Kindle screen and paper.

What makes the Kindle stand out above the others is its wireless connection. While other readers require users to connect to their computers to download the electronic books to their reader, the Kindle uses 3G WiFi to download books almost instantly. There’s nothing cooler than deciding you want to check out Toni Morrison’s Beloved, looking it up, buying/downloading it, and starting to read it; all within five minutes and without getting out of your chair.

But while I made the argument for the Kindle, like Jeff Bezo’s own personal pitchman, I discovered that some critics were right. It kind of does suck when the battery runs out while you’re on the subway and have nothing else to read—paperbacks don’t generally do that. And a lifetime of manhandling reading materials like I was a mentally challenged character in a Steinbeck novel clashed with my need to treat the Kindle with kid gloves. But the thing that really struck me was its lack of feeling like a book. You can’t flip ahead to see how many pages are left in a chapter or to go to the end. The pagination is completely tossed to fit the text to the screen, which makes sense, but it throws you off. I like reading my Kindle, but doing so has an almost ethereal feel to it. It soon devolved into just my newspaper reader, which introduced the sense of guilty for wasting the money and opportunity of such a great device.

I wanted to compare my Kindle experience with another user, so I reached out to my friend Colleen. Two years ago, just after its initial introduction, we’d spent an evening of shared awe for the device over dinner with friends at a Mexican restaurant. We munched on fajitas, sipped tequila, and dominated the conversation by talking about how much the Kindle would change our lives. We both became early adopters.

“It seemed like the greatest thing since sliced bread,” she said recalling our excitement that night. “Convenient, sleek, small, useful and especially when gifted by parents – cheap! Not to mention a better price on the New York Times and discounted book, which at the time I thought I’d be reading a mile a minute on the thing until I kept noticing that what was on my reading list was not necessarily on the bestseller lists found on the Kindle….Many of my favorite authors aren’t very well represented in the Kindle Library: Richard Ford, Zadie Smith. Also, where is the Rabbit series by the recently deceased John Updike?” I remembered my own frustration at being unable to find more of my favorite literary authors; it seemed that new releases and Penguin Classics were all that were available, though the library of accessible e-books is constantly updating (Smith’s books are now able to be downloaded, though Ford’s and Updike’s are still in limbo).

When I asked her how often she uses her Kindle, Colleen demurred. “Not as much as I should,” she said. “Now some of my ‘not-using’ might come my own personal laziness or forgetfulness, but anyway you slice it, I grab it when I get on the F train and end up having to fish back in my purse for the crumpled up New Yorker from 2 weeks ago.” Colleen cited the same problems that I did. She also even uses it to read everything but books. “I only use it now-a-days for the New York Times, Time Magazine and the occasional collection of short stories.” And added, “It’s almost like the Kindle has cut down my reading.” As for the page numbers, she was with me on that, exclaiming, “I want my page numbers back! I mean really, what’s the deal there?”

Surprisingly, when I asked Colleen if there was any upside to owning a Kindle her excitement at its life changing ability was still there. “Obviously the convenience,” she said, “I used to carry a book, the paper, and multiple magazines. This has allowed me to let some magazine subscriptions expire and to cut down on clutter.”

I know that the Kindle isn’t perfect, but most breakthroughs aren’t in the first couple years. There are some definite bugs to be worked out but if anyone can make it work–it’s Amazon. They’ve got the better delivery system, an ever-growing catalogue of titles, and most importantly: the determination and dedication to follow though on this idea. That’s why within two years, Amazon is already releasing its third model; they’re perfecting it. The DX’s larger screen, built-in PDF reader, larger memory, and longer lasting battery means we might see the return of realistic page numbers, the expansion into the textbook market, and maybe even the salvation of newspapers. And that’s pretty cool.


Time Magazine Considers Move to Fee-Based Content Online

Posted by Joe | March 11th, 2009 at 11:26 am

Here’s a hilariously snarky Gawker article about Time Magazine, as well as other paper news sources, trying to figure out how to squeeze the proverbial blood from a turnip and charge readers for online content. Among the heavies is the New York Times, one of the only news sources that actually reports on real news. I don’t have the solution but unless the subscription rate is a very low, all-access monthly fee ($5-$10 per month) and the site is shut off to non-subscribers (the front page just being a login screen and a link to the subscription page), not even the New York Times is going to make this happen.

If I had to propose a solution, it would be tastefully integrated online advertisements (which many of these online news sources already employ), a low subscriber fee for premium content (such as New York Times Magazine, the Book Review, the arts section, all reviews, opinions, and content written specifically for entertainment and enlightenment — all straight national and world news should remain free, I think), cut the salaries of those at the top unless they actually do something worthwhile and are irreplaceable, and… drum roll… stop printing daily newspapers. Instead, print a weekly magazine (connected to a subscription apart from the the online subscription) that can be bought at the news stand or mailed to a subscriber’s home that condenses all the important news that happened throughout the week. If all this could be integrated with automatic download or RSS of desired sections with a subscriber’s iPhone/BlackBerry/Kindle, that would make it all the better. I really feel like all this I’ve mentioned is common sense but maybe I’m crazy. I’d like to meet the technology officers from some of these bigger newspapers and magazines; my bet is that they’re all in their 60s, overpaid, and undereducated about how the online world works. To them, the internet is just a series of tubes.

Ultimately, though, there are very few newspapers/magazines/journals that I’ll actually pay for. If the New York Times wasn’t free online, I would pay for it. But Time Magazine? C’mon. Time decided sometime in the 90s that they no longer wanted to be a serious news source. Last time I looked at a Time, it felt overloaded with celebrity gossip and various fluff. If you’re not providing valuable, original content, what will keep people coming back? Journalism has really been debased in the last decade or two; it used to mean something. There are still serious journalists out there, but they’re a dying breed.

What newspaper or magazine would you pay for if you could get the content in no other way?


Amazon Offers eBooks for the iPhone

Posted by Joe | March 6th, 2009 at 3:16 pm

If you weren’t already aware of this two day old news, Amazon has announced that it will now make ebooks available for Apple iPhone and iPod Touch users. So, in addition to being a portable farting device, the iPhone can now display ebooks like the Kindle. All of this sounds like a lot of money to shell out to do very basic things. Still, I embrace the move toward ebooks not because I want to read a book on a little computer screen, but because ultimately it will get more people to read.

I really love the opinion of Ian Freed from Amazon on the whole situation of this cross-platform olive branch (see the afore-linked New York Times article):

“We think the iPhone can be a great companion device for customers who are caught without their Kindle,” said Ian Freed, Amazon’s vice president in charge of the Kindle.

Ha. Customers who are caught without a Kindle. It’s like the social equivalent of living in Mao-ist China and being caught without the Little Red Book. If you’re caught without a Kindle, your peers may just socially ostracize you. But luckily now the iPhone will do. For those of you without a Kindle or an iPhone, you better just stay indoors.

Anyhow, it’s cool that this technology is offered but the iPhone screen is just too small to use it to read for longer intervals. It might be nice if you’re stuck on a train or at the airport for longer than you planned. But while I think this is all a step in the right direction, I remain unconvinced. Give me a paperback!

Oh, and for some extra fun… the article mentions that Steve Jobs was once quoted, in response to the Kindle, with saying:

“[T]he whole conception is flawed at the top because people don’t read anymore.”

Well, Mr. Jobs, all I have to say to you is… wait, nevermind… American Idol’s on!


The last words of Rocky Mountian News staff

Posted by Joe | February 28th, 2009 at 2:07 pm

I’m torn on my opinion of the collapse of the newspaper industry. On one hand, we need news. We need reporters, we need journalists, we need people who can discover and parse all the messed up things that are happening in the world. But have you looked at a newspaper recently? They’re horrible. Just awful. And with the advent of the internet, once you receive your morning newspaper the news enclosed is already stale. The internet allows you to find out about news as its happening. Newspapers can’t compete with that. But what they can do is adapt. They can embrace the new technology and oportunities that the internet offers instead of shunning it. They can “print” online rather than wasting resources on paper. Why not develop an application for the iPhone that delivers your paper to its readership every morning; one click and the user has the entire paper in their hand. It would not be hard to develop a monthly subscription service or allow users to purchase just one issue. And what about technology like the Kindle? Or, they could, you know, put tasteful ads on their website. Plenty of websites make loads of money through basic ads. Newspapers survive on print ads as it is. These papers need to adapt or they will continue to fold.

The Rocky Mountain News is the latest large paper to fail. They’ve been around for 150 years. Here is a Columbia Journal Review article with the last words of the Rocky Mountain News staff. While I sympathize with them in losing their media home, their jobs, their careers, I can’t help but shake my head at their inability to adapt in an increasingly technological world. Newspapers have seemed to me a pretty backwards business model for the past ten years. Ten years. Is that not long enough to figure out the internet?