Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84 exptools; site ihuxn.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!ihnp4!ihuxn!res
From: res@ihuxn.UUCP (Rich Strebendt @ AT&T Information Systems - Indian Hill West; formerly)
Newsgroups: net.sf-lovers
Subject: Re: IASFM
Message-ID: <1092@ihuxn.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 10-Jun-85 18:42:31 EDT
Article-I.D.: ihuxn.1092
Posted: Mon Jun 10 18:42:31 1985
Date-Received: Tue, 11-Jun-85 05:08:27 EDT
References: <2218@topaz.ARPA>
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories
Lines: 30

> I've been hearing a lot lately about how good Isaac Asimov's SF Magazine
> is.  From time to time I pick up issues of Analog or F&SF ... From
> what I hear of Asimov's, it has the highest level of quality of the three.
> Does anyone out there have any opinions on the magazine?

I have subscriptions to all three and look forward most to the monthly
arrival of IASFM, then next most eagerly for Analog, and finally for
F&SF.  

I feel that IASFM has lots of quite good work in most issues, and has
a variety of stories so that I generally find one story I like very
well, one I don't really care for, and the rest are entertaining to
me if not memorable.  

Analog has a number of interesting fact articles as well as fiction,
which I find enjoyable if there is not an overabundance of fact
articles in the issue.  The fiction seems too homogeneous somehow.

I keep debating whether or not to renew my F&SF subscription.  When they
publish SF it is usually quite good -- some new work by one of the big
names -- but I am not into fantasy and horror stories enough to find the
rest of the magazine worth the money.

Incidently, I dropped my subscription to OMNI magazine some time ago
because I got tired of the strong emphasis on the paranormal and on
flying saucers.  I can tolerate fantasy in an SF magazine, but I
cannot tolerate garbage.

					Rich Strebendt
					...!ihnp4!iwsl6!res