Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!seismo!sundc!pitstop!sun!decwrl!ucbvax!agate!saturn!ucscc.UCSC.EDU!haynes
From: haynes@ucscc.UCSC.EDU (99700000)
Newsgroups: comp.misc
Subject: Re: ELECTRONICS, R.I.P.
Message-ID: <4617@saturn.ucsc.edu>
Date: 25 Aug 88 04:31:50 GMT
References: <79700011@p.cs.uiuc.edu> <79700012@p.cs.uiuc.edu> <3860@tekgvs.GVS.TEK.COM>
Sender: usenet@saturn.ucsc.edu
Reply-To: haynes@ucscc.UCSC.EDU (Jim Haynes)
Organization: California State Home for the Weird
Lines: 32

In article <3860@tekgvs.GVS.TEK.COM> toma@tekgvs.GVS.TEK.COM (Tom Almy) writes:
>
>My personal experience with Electronics is I subscribed to it in the late
>60's and early 70's but dropped it by mid 70's because, while it was the
>best, they had no free subscriptions (at that time), and several freebees
>combined were as good (perhaps better).

Me too - and when I really liked Electronics was back in the 50s, and reading
old issues from even earlier.  The main reason I lost interest in it
in the 70s was that it changed from a solid technical magazine to one
mostly concerned with the business side of the industry.  I don't 
remember all the chronology, but seems to me it started downhill when
McGraw-Hill acquired it, or was it when RCA acquired McGraw-Hill?

> Particularly good then and now
>are Electronic Design and EE Times (esp. for rumors!).  A good bet now
>is to join the IEEE Computer Society and get Computer and Micro magazines.
>Not too likely they will be reviewing 10 PC/AT clones! (I hope!)

I agree wholeheartedly.  The Computer Society isn't free, it's not even
cheap, but the editors (unpaid volunteers) work really hard to keep
the members on top of where the technology is going, not merely where
it is today; and to keep the facts separate from the sales promotion.

--->Non-Disclaimer: I'm one of those editors, and I don't work very
hard at all, and in my column (Open Channel) "Any clod can have
the facts, but having opinions is an ART."


haynes@ucscc.ucsc.edu
haynes@ucscc.bitnet
..ucbvax!ucscc!haynes