In message <4d6cb2c2.7020...@dunbar-it.co.uk>, Norman Dunbar <nor...@dunbar-it.co.uk> writes

Hi,

I think that the argument is that it is a preference to have a physical magazine to read, rather than an electronic imitation.

I do receive another magazine in electronic form, which is very well implemented with pages that 'turn' properly as an image. Together with full colour, easy page access, or double page, zoom in/out, etc.

However, you still need a 'screen' on which to view it.

For the QL I prefer the magazine, in paper format, yet would also not mind having an electronic version to have access to the individual articles, etc.

Each media has its pros and cons.


Morning Geoff,

Could you then please put your survey results on your website with a
link? Much easier to read that as a poor text file at the end of an email.
In all fairness to Dave, he did say that the email was in HTML format
and quite large. Unfortunately, it seems that the list prevents HTML
postings and has converted it to plain text - with all the attendant
formatting troubles and loss of clarity.

The QL community is a good deal more conservative that we probably would
like to think,
Interesting. I wonder if there is a correlation between the lack of
internet access on the QL and the seeming lack of interest in getting QL
stuff from the internet?

Maybe, people using the QL can't be bothered to fire up a laptop or
desktop just to get a magazine?

Just a random thought.


Cheers,
Norman.

--
Malcolm Cadman
_______________________________________________
QL-Users Mailing List
http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm

Reply via email to