On 2018-02-01 07:31 AM, o1bigtenor via talk wrote:

Perhaps instead of letting us know what you, meaning all the individuals complaining in this thread, can't stand about what it was  - - - well let them know what you do want. You never know - - - you just might get lucky!

I doubt it. I prefer the magazine on paper. I spend enough time in front of a computer as it is. The last thing I want to do is have to spend more time in front of one so I can read a magazine. -- Cheers! Kevin. http://www.ve3syb.ca/ |"Nerds make the shiny things that distract Owner of Elecraft K2 #2172 | the mouth-breathers, and that's why we're | powerful!" #include <disclaimer/favourite> | --Chris Hardwick

On 1 February 2018 at 16:09, David Collier-Brown via talk <talk@gtalug.org> wrote:

On 01/02/18 02:55 PM, Kevin Cozens via talk wrote:

On 2018-02-01 07:31 AM, o1bigtenor via talk wrote:

Perhaps instead of letting us know what you, meaning all the individuals complaining in this thread, can't stand about what it was - - - well let them know what you do want. You never know - - - you just might get lucky!

I doubt it. I prefer the magazine on paper. I spend enough time in front of a computer as it is. The last thing I want to do is have to spend more time in front of one so I can read a magazine.

Hmmn, I often read PDFs by sending to my Kobo, which has a superior screen for text (but not for images)

I wonder if there is a good random-website-to-epub converter? I'll need to try dotEPUB.

I'm also very doubtful about technology oriented media outlets that don't know how to manage SSL/TLS - especially when they expect me to pay them money through their website: https://www.ssllabs.com/ssltest/analyze.html?d=www.linuxjournal.com The short version: they commit several crimes, but the worst is not supporting TLS 1.2 at all. Since TLS 1.1 and 1.0 are so weak as to be broken, I'm not going to trust their site. (I found this out because I cranked up the security on FF to refuse TLS below 1.2.) -- Giles https://www.gilesorr.com/ gilesorr@gmail.com

On 2018-02-02 12:45 PM, D. Hugh Redelmeier via talk wrote:

| From: David Collier-Brown via talk <talk@gtalug.org>

| Hmmn, I often read PDFs by sending to my Kobo, which has a superior screen for | text (but not for images)

My Kobos are not good for PDF. At least not for those designed for letter-sized or A4 paper. This is a real diappointment to me.

I have a similar issue with my Sony eReader and PDF files. It allows me to read a PDF file but the screen is a bit small. I sometimes have use the zoom feature to make it easier to read the page. I prefer PDF format files as I mostly use my eReader for reference material rather than books to be read cover to cover. Saves a lot on shelf space which is in short supply at my home.

| I wonder if there is a good random-website-to-epub converter? I'll need to try | dotEPUB.

I'd like a good PDF to epub converter. But any converter is an impediment.

I don't know about conversion from website to some reader format. If you want to convert PDF (or other files) to epub (or other formats) take a look at the program called Calibre. I use that program mostly to manage the files I keep on my eReader but it also lets you read the files on the computer, and it can convert files to many other formats. -- Cheers! Kevin. http://www.ve3syb.ca/ |"Nerds make the shiny things that distract Owner of Elecraft K2 #2172 | the mouth-breathers, and that's why we're | powerful!" #include <disclaimer/favourite> | --Chris Hardwick

On 02/02/18 12:45 PM, D. Hugh Redelmeier via talk wrote:

| From: David Collier-Brown via talk <talk@gtalug.org>

| Hmmn, I often read PDFs by sending to my Kobo, which has a superior screen for | text (but not for images)

My Kobos are not good for PDF. At least not for those designed for letter-sized or A4 paper. This is a real diappointment to me. I have a touch (quite small) and an Aura One (larger). For both, some but not all PDF are fine.  Reflowables are better if you use a large font size (I don't) as they reformat nicely to whatever size you like, rather than A4 or 8.5x11.

--dave -- David Collier-Brown, | Always do right. This will gratify System Programmer and Author | some people and astonish the rest davecb@spamcop.net | -- Mark Twain

| From: James Knott via talk <talk@gtalug.org> | I have a Kobo, but stopped using it when I got a tablet. I have | different readers installed for epub, Kobo, Amazon and library books. | The tablet also works with PDFs. Note for relevance: Kobos run Linux. So do most tablets (iPads and Windows tablets do not). Tablets are better than ereaders for many things. Where ereaders win: - much much longer battery life - much smaller and lighter (mine fit in my pockets) - much less disruptive of sleep (according to many sources, but it may not be true) I don't actually use tablets much any longer. My phone has all the functionality of my tablets except the large screen. When I want the large sceen out of my house, I take a laptop (which has many other advantages and is only a little bit more awkward to drag around). These thing are very personal. Everyone in my family makes different trade-offs.

| From: Russell via talk <talk@gtalug.org> | It's a somber fact of modern publishing that, as the cost of delivering | written content goes down, so does the monitary value of that content. That is an interesting second-order effect. For one thing, it's not that the unit cost has gone down. It's that the cost of getting in the game has gone down. Newspaper printing and distributing technologies deliver quite inexpensive copies if you are printing and distributing hundreds of thousands of copies regularly. It's hard to get in the game -- look what it cost Conrad Black to create the Post newspapers. With competition as it was in the newspaper business a decade or more ago, there was an auction for good writers. The quality of the product went up. But it was an unsustainable war and the collapse is happening now. The cost of putting up a web site is minor. Lots of folks aspire to be writers so will generate content for peanuts. It's a race to the bottom. Eyeballs are in short supply. What we need is more discerning readers. Ones who will pay for good content (and lack of bad content!). Or otherwise reward. I haven't put my money where my mouth is. For example, LWN.net seems deserving but I haven't thrown any money their way. But I do value the Globe and Mail and do subscribe.

On 02/02/2018 12:39 PM, D. Hugh Redelmeier via talk wrote:

I haven't put my money where my mouth is. For example, LWN.net seems deserving but I haven't thrown any money their way. But I do value the Globe and Mail and do subscribe.

I do the same with the Toronto Star. However, there are too many news sources for most people to afford to pay for. Perhaps what's needed is some sort of system, where a pool account is used. The subscribers would pay into that account and get access to sources that can receive revenue from that pool. However, what's needed are readers who use critical thinking, rather than accept any nonsense they come across.

On 2018-02-01 05:06 PM, Russell wrote:

For my personal pleasure in reading tho, I prefer paper. For one it's easier on the eyes. [snip] Accidental learning, this is something almost completely eliminated by key word searches of digital documents.

I know what you mean. I have found useful information in printed books while flipping through it to find something, or just when randomly looking around in the book. That is not something that would be easy to simulate in an eReader. -- Cheers! Kevin. http://www.ve3syb.ca/ |"Nerds make the shiny things that distract Owner of Elecraft K2 #2172 | the mouth-breathers, and that's why we're | powerful!" #include <disclaimer/favourite> | --Chris Hardwick

On 03/03/18 08:31 AM, Ken Heard via talk wrote:

On 2018-02-02 05:06, Russell via talk wrote:

Snip.

...

For my personal pleasure in reading tho, I prefer paper. For one it's easier on the eyes.

Also I have several dog eared reference books I would never trade for their digital versions. The simple fact is, that while flipping pages searching for one thing, I learn many other things.

Accidental learning, this is something almost completely eliminated by key word searches of digital documents. I don't think so. I find that when I look up something on for example Wikipedia, I find myself following many of the links in its articles which take me to all sorts of places unrelated to my original quest. In fact I sometimes run the danger of forgetting what I was originally looking for -- but on the other hand memory loss is attributable to age, and I qualify for such loss on the ground of age.

Ken

I'm now using the chrome dotEPUB add-on to turn web pages into epubs to read on my kobo on the bus. This preserves the links and the searchability, but gives me an acceptable screen quality.  My typesetter friends excoriate even my best dot-matrix screens (;-))

--- Talk Mailing List talk@gtalug.org https://gtalug.org/mailman/listinfo/talk

-- David Collier-Brown, | Always do right. This will gratify System Programmer and Author | some people and astonish the rest davecb@spamcop.net | -- Mark Twain

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Russell writes:

I tend to follow distracting links, and forget my original purpose as well

Sometimes that's a bug; sometimes that's a feature...

Traditional folds so you can book the paper and scan columns don't seem to work well any more.

I know! Newspapers should always have an even number of columns so that you can fold the pages back on themselves, the better for reading on the subway without spilling all over the other passengers' laps. - --Bob. On 2018-03-03 09:18 AM, Russell via talk wrote:

On March 3, 2018 8:31:07 AM EST, Ken Heard via talk <talk@gtalug.org> wrote:

...

On 2018-02-02 05:06, Russell via talk wrote:

Snip.

...

For my personal pleasure in reading tho, I prefer paper. For one it's easier on the eyes.

Also I have several dog eared reference books I would never trade for their digital versions. The simple fact is, that while flipping pages searching for one thing, I learn many other things.

Accidental learning, this is something almost completely eliminated by key word searches of digital documents.

I don't think so. I find that when I look up something on for example Wikipedia, I find myself following many of the links in its articles which take me to all sorts of places unrelated to my original quest. In fact I sometimes run the danger of forgetting what I was originally looking for -- but on the other hand memory loss is attributable to age, and I qualify for such loss on the ground of age.

Me too. I tend to follow distracting links, and forget my original purpose as well. I did say almost in relation to keyword searches. Although if you tried to those away from me today, I'd fight you tooth and nail.

Memories are funny things. I use to know all my friends phone numbers by heart, now I can't think of one, my phone does that for me.

In support of books, you can underline, highlight and dog ear them, even in the bath with little chance of data corruption. Try that with a phone and you might put hundreds of dollars at risk and lose data to boot.

In support of digital media. I can add page links to my phones home screen and group them in folders. I can download some types of PDFs and highlight passages. However I think my favorite reason for reading on a handheld is that it is shakey viewing. Just like holding a book, I do believe this reduces eyestrain by making the eye constantly refocus more often than when sitting in front of a monitor.

IMHO you cant beat a hot bath and a good read. Newspapers have changed their format somewhat. Traditional folds so you can book the paper and scan columns don't seem to work well any more.

...

Ken

Cheers,

- -- Bob Jonkman <bjonkman@sobac.com> Phone: +1-519-635-9413 SOBAC Microcomputer Services http://sobac.com/sobac/ Software --- Office & Business Automation --- Consulting GnuPG Fngrprnt:04F7 742B 8F54 C40A E115 26C2 B912 89B0 D2CC E5EA -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 Comment: Ensure confidentiality, authenticity, non-repudiability iEYEARECAAYFAlqazp4ACgkQuRKJsNLM5erE3wCg2eLpi+TVgVBQy+L8rWtCKNwf N8sAnAqweST/zaqW1x4gjh/AjvscGn81 =o/zb -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

On February 7, 2018 5:18:15 PM EST, Evan Leibovitch via talk <talk@gtalug.org> wrote:

On 1 February 2018 at 14:55, Kevin Cozens via talk <talk@gtalug.org> wrote:

...

I doubt it. I prefer the magazine on paper. I spend enough time in front of a computer as it is. The last thing I want to do is have to spend more time in front of one so I can read a magazine.

If you want a paper version of the digital content, there are these magical things called "printers" that allow you to generate such paper versions quickly and inexpensively, in the privacy of your own home. If you

Inexpensive is a relative term. If all the environmental considerations of shipping and disposing of household plastic cartridges, residual inks, paper and packaging are taken into consideration, then those hidden costs outweigh the lesser cost of purchasing a mass produced periodical.

don't have your own "printer" you may readily find one at libraries, friends' homes, UPS stores, or a number of other locations. You could even selectively produce your copy so that you don't need to carry around content in which you have no interest.

I tend to buy reference books. Fiction, periodicals and broadsheets I tend to read at the library.

Sheesh. Talk about first-world problems.

Well we should do all we can to stop shipping our garbage to the so called third world, even under the guise of recycling. I note China is going to stop taking Western plastics. I guess first world convenience is catching up with their capacity to absorb our castoffs.

​It's the content that matters. Like or complain about that. The solution to preferring a paper version of a digital document that you own is distressingly trivial -- unless you derive joy from sucking up the resources to truck a physical copy to you from some distant location.​

Everything which is based on convienience sucks up resources. It is price points and margins which drive industries. This is why carbon credits are a good idea, it exposes those hidden costs. Unfortunately that is also the biggest factor in opposition to those credits, industrial need of keeping the real world costs hidden from consumers.

Eliminating the massive costs of centralized printing and distribution can be the difference between life and death for many publications.

This is the distemper of our time. The massive cost of printing may be decentralised but is it really diminished? One of the hidden costs of screen reading is the additional artificial light these screens radiate and the effects on eye and even skin health. This sounds kind of nitpicky, I know that, but these are real issues. Should you use a uv cream in order to read a lcd screen which radiates light? One of the reasons I do most of my digital reading on a small hand-held device is that it is almost always in motion when I use it. This causes the eye to constantly refocus, as it is meant to. This serves to reduce eyestrain, just like holding a book or a broadsheet. I think like most things these days, balancing the hidden costs and the choice of convienience, is a double edged sword.

-- Evan Leibovitch Toronto, Canada

Em: evan at telly dot org Sk: evanleibovitch Tw: el56

-- Russell