Path: utzoo!utgpu!watserv1!watmath!att!rutgers!usc!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!rpi!leah!derek
From: derek@leah.Albany.Edu (Derek L. / MacLover)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.misc
Subject: Re: Diatribe #11a:  MacUser
Message-ID: <3342@leah.Albany.Edu>
Date: 14 Jul 90 02:43:55 GMT
References: <3337@leah.Albany.Edu> <70400029@m.cs.uiuc.edu>
Reply-To: derek@leah.albany.edu.UUCP (Derek L. / MacLover)
Organization: State U. of New York at Albany Computing Svces.
Lines: 48

In article <70400029@m.cs.uiuc.edu>, gillies@m.cs.uiuc.edu 
 spilled his guts, writing:
	[about computer mags in general]
>Their only chance to remain in circulation is to scream as loudly and
>as flambuoyantly as possible.  In five years, PC magazines will
>probably enjoy the same reputation and circulation as "Coin Prices" or
>"Hot Rod Racer" magazine.

	Hopefully the extension of networks amoung computer users will
completely negate any need for magazine information, which is usually two
months behind the industry anyway.

>I have never found a magazine with an entropic information-transfer
>rate that is *lower* than MacUser.  That's why I wanted to cancel my
>2-year gift subscription, about 9 months after receiving it.  I'd
>estimate the rate of transfer (including advertisements) is 10
>bits/page.

	The ONLY reason I pick it up is for the advertisements!  Of course
sitting around the consulting office during the summer I have to read
something, and it's just lying there... :-)

>Don W. Gillies, Dept. of Computer Science, University of Illinois


and nolan@tssi.UUCP (Michael Nolan) writes:
>Unless you read MacWeek, you're always going to get this (IMHO unnecessary)
>hype.  MacWorld tends to be worse, because a lot of their back-patting is
>congratulating the reader on reading MacWorld.  (With MacWeek you get press
>release hype, probably a better variation.)

	We haven't gotten our "complementary subscription" to MacWeek yet,
so I can't compare.  I'd suspect that it's better just by the bare fact of
being more up-to-date, and taking less room for editorials.

	For some reason, the same self-congratulation doesn't bother me as
much in MacWorld.  I don't have a rational reason why, unless it's the fact
that MacUser has proclaimed itself the "power user's" and "MacHacker's"
mag.  I still see MacWorld as basing its readership on the beginner, the
proud, confused new owner of a Mac who needs any reassurance available.
There's a lot of fluff in MacWorld, but somehow it seems more "reasonable"
fluff.  Oh well, it's all just personal opinion anyway.

						Derek L.
-- 
+ +   One Mac is worth exactly 2.317 PCs (based on current price indices)   + +
	Disclaimer:  I was asleep.	---}=-------------------------`
++    All the busy little creatures / Chasing out their destinies --Peart    ++