the last word

Photography meets digital computer technology. Photography wins -- most of the time.

  • site home
  • blog home
  • galleries
  • contact
  • underwater
  • the bleeding edge
You are here: Home / Technology Hall of Shame / Tech hall of shame: NYT digital delivery

Tech hall of shame: NYT digital delivery

April 13, 2011 JimK Leave a Comment

The New York Times has long been a leader in delivering news in the form of pigmented petroleum products arranged over processed dead trees. About 10 years ago, they realized that their primary delivery system would someday become obsolete. They have experimented ever since with replacements. First they had a free website. Then they had a free website with for-pay components. Then they went back to the free website. Now they’re trying a paid website with free samples. Along the way, they’ve played with ways to deliver the news with a reading tool more flexible than a web browser.

The first of these was Times Reader. When it worked, it delivered a pretty nice user experience, but reliability wasn’t its long suit. It experienced frequent crashes. There were a few updates with accompanying small improvements in reliability, followed by a long period with no revisions whatsoever. Then came Times Reader 2.0. I was so excited; finally they were going to fix some of the bugs.

No such luck. TR2 turned out to be based on Adobe Air, a spinoff from Flash that lets that cross-platform environment roam free on your desktop instead of confining it to your browser. This was a marriage made in hell. We got the user interface weirdness of Flash, the instability of Flash, and the lousy coding skills of the Times staff. I can’t complain any more about infrequent updates; every time I turn around the Air environment wants to reinvigorate itself. I might be more sympathetic if the updates produced stability, but I can detect no overall improvement. For desktop Times consumption, I’ve gone back to the Web.

When the iPad came out, the good news was that the New York Times was Johnny on the spot with an app. The bad news was that the app wasn’t very good. It didn’t offer a lot of content. After a couple of months, the New York Times came out with a much improved app, which only had one major problem: it crashed a lot. Every few weeks, there would be an update. Some of the updates were a small step forward, and some were huge step back, crashing on opening. When that happened, since the iPad and the Apple Store offer no way to reinstall an old version, there was nothing to do but wait until a new update occurred, and hope that that fixed the crashing. Usually it did (for at least on upgrade cycle), and once it did not, replacing a DOA app with another. Over the last year the New York Times iPad app has achieved moderate reliability. Considering where they started from, I guess you could say that’s a big improvement.

To be fair, the Android NYT app doesn’t try to do much, and does it pretty well, with the only persistent irritant being its occasional reticence to update the news.

Recently, the Grey Lady started to charge for electronically delivered news. The fees are high – thirty five bucks a month for access on all of your devices. I’ll let you in on a way to save a bit off that: subscribe to the weekday print version for thirty two dollars and change, and you’ll get access to all the online services tossed in.

I don’t know how most users will react, but I’m going to be a lot less tolerant of all the software bugs when I’m paying. Not that it will do me much good; the Times help line has been in “leave a message and we’ll call you back” mode for a while, and I’ve never gotten a callback.

Technology Hall of Shame

← Virtualization THoS: An email from the NYT →

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

February 2023
S M T W T F S
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
262728  
« Jan    

Articles

  • About
    • Patents and papers about color
    • Who am I?
  • Good 35-70 MF lens
  • How to…
    • Backing up photographic images
    • How to change email providers
  • Lens screening testing
    • Equipment and Software
    • Examples
      • Bad and OK 200-600 at 600
      • Excellent 180-400 zoom
      • Fair 14-30mm zoom
      • Good 100-200 mm MF zoom
      • Good 100-400 zoom
      • Good 100mm lens on P1 P45+
      • Good 120mm MF lens
      • Good 18mm FF lens
      • Good 24-105 mm FF lens
      • Good 24-70 FF zoom
      • Good 35 mm FF lens
      • Good 60 mm lens on IQ3-100
      • Good 63 mm MF lens
      • Good 65 mm FF lens
      • Good 85 mm FF lens
      • Good and bad 25mm FF lenses
      • Good zoom at 24 mm
      • Marginal 18mm lens
      • Marginal 35mm FF lens
      • Mildly problematic 55 mm FF lens
      • OK 16-35mm zoom
      • OK 60mm lens on P1 P45+
      • OK Sony 600mm f/4
      • Pretty good 16-35 FF zoom
      • Pretty good 90mm FF lens
      • Problematic 400 mm FF lens
      • Tilted 20 mm f/1.8 FF lens
      • Tilted 30 mm MF lens
      • Tilted 50 mm FF lens
      • Two 15mm FF lenses
    • Found a problem – now what?
    • Goals for this test
    • Minimum target distances
      • MFT
      • APS-C
      • Full frame
      • Small medium format
    • Printable Siemens Star targets
    • Target size on sensor
      • MFT
      • APS-C
      • Full frame
      • Small medium format
    • Test instructions — postproduction
    • Test instructions — reading the images
    • Test instructions – capture
    • Theory of the test
    • What’s wrong with conventional lens screening?
  • Previsualization heresy
  • Privacy Policy
  • Recommended photographic web sites
  • Using in-camera histograms for ETTR
    • Acknowledgments
    • Why ETTR?
    • Normal in-camera histograms
    • Image processing for in-camera histograms
    • Making the in-camera histogram closely represent the raw histogram
    • Shortcuts to UniWB
    • Preparing for monitor-based UniWB
    • A one-step UniWB procedure
    • The math behind the one-step method
    • Iteration using Newton’s Method

Category List

Recent Comments

  • JimK on Shutter shock and the Nikon Z7
  • John Vickers on Shutter shock and the Nikon Z7
  • Brian Olson on Fuji GFX 100S exposure strategy, M and A modes
  • JimK on Picking a macro lens
  • JimK on Picking a macro lens
  • Glenn Whorrall on Picking a macro lens
  • JimK on What pitch do you need to scan 6×6 TMax 100?
  • Hatzipavlis Peter on What pitch do you need to scan 6×6 TMax 100?
  • JeyB on Internal focusing 100ish macro lenses
  • JimK on How focus-bracketing systems work

Archives

Copyright © 2023 · Daily Dish Pro On Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in

Unless otherwise noted, all images copyright Jim Kasson.