Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

iPad Newspaper From News Corp Rumored in January

CmdrTaco posted more than 2 years ago | from the if-you-can't-beat-it dept.

The Media 220

An anonymous reader writes "News Corp plans to launch its rumored iPad-only newspaper on January 17 according to recent reports. Dubbed the 'Daily,' the paper will reportedly make use of a new 'push' subscription feature from Apple wherein users can opt to be automatically billed for either week-long or month-long subscriptions. Once set up, a new edition of the publication will show up on user's iPads each and every morning."

cancel ×

220 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

*only ipad* (1)

polar red (215081) | more than 2 years ago | (#34642156)

Does that mean they won't use the same sources as their other papers and channels ?

Re:*only ipad* (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#34642212)

Rupert Murdoch is running this?

This will be AP stories from the wire, and opinion pieces from FOX.

Sign me up! (-1, Troll)

dazedNconfuzed (154242) | more than 2 years ago | (#34642414)

Good! Straight news not re-written by desk-bound "reporters", and opinions devoid of leftist drivel.

Re:Sign me up! (4, Insightful)

Captain Splendid (673276) | more than 2 years ago | (#34642548)

Good! Straight news not re-written by desk-bound "reporters", and opinions devoid of leftist drivel.

Unfortunately, no shortage [newyorkshitty.com] of douchebaggery [courthousenews.com] .

Re:Sign me up! (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#34642596)

Good! Straight news not re-written by desk-bound "reporters", and opinions devoid of leftist drivel.

Paranoid much?

Persecution complex much?

Re:Sign me up! (1)

phoenixwade (997892) | more than 2 years ago | (#34642926)

Paranoid != wrong. Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they are NOT out to get you.

Re:Sign me up! (2, Funny)

truthsearch (249536) | more than 2 years ago | (#34643032)

Unfortunately for you, reality has well-known a liberal bias.

Re:*only ipad* (2)

bigredradio (631970) | more than 2 years ago | (#34642458)

And advertising. I seem to recall that newspapers make money on ads and not the subscriptions. That is why I can get my daily paper for $0.50. Does he think he can pay for this by subscription revenue only?

Re:*only ipad* (1, Troll)

mcgrew (92797) | more than 2 years ago | (#34642590)

Um, News Corps? Isn't that the FOX people? It makes sense, only a FOX watcher would pay for news from the internet.

Re:*only ipad* (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#34643158)

and will those ads be flash... oh wait a minute...

Re:*only ipad* (1)

flyingkillerrobots (1865630) | more than 2 years ago | (#34643374)

I don't understand this from a marketing perspective. Those who buy Apple products, such as the iPad, tend to be younger college student types, and to draw a correlation, overwhelmingly liberal. Why is News Corp even attempting to market to them, let alone exclusively?

Re:*only ipad* (1, Insightful)

Concerned Onlooker (473481) | more than 2 years ago | (#34642616)

No. The only difference is you won't be able to view wikileaks stories.

What does this bring to the table (4, Insightful)

Joehonkie (665142) | more than 2 years ago | (#34642160)

How is this better than a web-based news source, even a paywalled one?

Re:What does this bring to the table (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#34642260)

Yeah.

Or, better than a regular paper newspaper delivered to the front door.

Have to check back next year and see if this one went anywhere......

Re:What does this bring to the table (4, Insightful)

spun (1352) | more than 2 years ago | (#34642266)

It makes Rupert Murdoch more money. Oh, you meant, "how is it better for the customer?" Does that actually matter?

Re:What does this bring to the table (3, Insightful)

corbettw (214229) | more than 2 years ago | (#34642288)

Um, yes it does, because if it doesn't bring something that other formats don't then no one will sign up for it. Which means Murdoch and company won't make any more money.

Re:What does this bring to the table (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#34642562)

I'd say "whoosh" but that joke would also probably go over your head.

Re:What does this bring to the table (2)

ByOhTek (1181381) | more than 2 years ago | (#34642730)

maybe that's his goal - one more piece of evidence that online news is a bad idea?

Re:What does this bring to the table (1)

corbettw (214229) | more than 2 years ago | (#34643188)

He can go looking for that evidence all day long. Meanwhile, his competitors will keep making money left, right, and center.

Cue CSS joke (1)

Yvan256 (722131) | more than 2 years ago | (#34643240)

There's no money to be made in the top, middle and bottom?

Re:What does this bring to the table (0)

spun (1352) | more than 2 years ago | (#34642964)

What a lovely fantasy world you live in, where everyone makes rational decisions based on their best interests rather than what they have been brainwashed into believing by marketing and public relations.

Re:What does this bring to the table (0, Flamebait)

polar red (215081) | more than 2 years ago | (#34642342)

Does that actually matter?

maybe pushing their Lie-bert-Arian propaganda is more important.

Re:What does this bring to the table (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#34642508)

Not just flamebait, but juvenile flamebait! Good show!

Re:What does this bring to the table (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#34642586)

Does that actually matter?

maybe pushing their Lie-bert-Arian propaganda is more important.

Are all not-brown people liars, berts (?) and misspelled racists? I think it's a lot easier to just say all not-white people are liars, idiots, and racists. It's true. I have as much evidence to support my claim as you do. I will add that the overwhelming majority of actual racists that I have met were niggers^H^H^H^H^H^H^H lazy, willfully uneducated, black thugs that had slaves as ancestors from well over 20 generations ago (in nigger generations which are easily 4x shorter than non-nigger generations).

Notice I have reserved the phrase "African-American" explicitly for legal African immigrants, not even African refugees deserve to be called African-Americans. Certainly niggers and black Americans are not "African-Americans".

You stupid nigger racists are stupid niggers.

Re:What does this bring to the table (3, Insightful)

spun (1352) | more than 2 years ago | (#34643018)

Fox News and Rupert Murdoch aren't libertarians, they are authoritarians. And like authoritarians everywhere, they simply use libertarians as tools. It's as if the wolves have convinced a few sheep to go out and argue to the rest of a sheep that a wolf's stomach makes the best home.

Re:What does this bring to the table (3, Interesting)

shadowrat (1069614) | more than 2 years ago | (#34642274)

exactly. we have been able to charge people for content on the web forever. I suspect it's about finding your market though. The iPad is like a filter that extracts all the people who want to pay for stuff. the ratio of users who will pay a subscription to users who just want free stuff is likely far higher on the iPad than on the web in general.

Re:What does this bring to the table (1)

Monkeedude1212 (1560403) | more than 2 years ago | (#34642324)

It's a pretty stupid idea though, Even if 95% of people who WOULD buy the subscription own an iPad - you're effectively cutting out 5% of your market simply because they don't want to make it available on your other iProduct.

It's not like you lose money for every person who doesn't subscribe...

Re:What does this bring to the table (2, Insightful)

characterZer0 (138196) | more than 2 years ago | (#34642526)

If anybody could get it, the people who buy iPads would not want it.

Re:What does this bring to the table (1)

arth1 (260657) | more than 2 years ago | (#34642782)

It's not like you lose money for every person who doesn't subscribe...

That depends on whether you subscribe to (npi) RIAA/MPAA accounting or not.
And given that this is the right wing, well...

If you don't subscribe and get the same news elsewhere, you're costing them a sale every day, which is the same as theft.

What's really sad is that I'm only halfway joking, and that there really are people who'd support this "logic".

Re:What does this bring to the table (2, Insightful)

Monkeedude1212 (1560403) | more than 2 years ago | (#34642290)

It's designed specifically for the typical Apple user.

"Oh! A way to spend more money with an Apple Product? An iPad only application where I can have my credit card billed automatically each month? A newspaper that will no doubt have articles that can be found on any decent news aggregating web site? Where do I sign up? That sounds piquant as shit!"

Re:What does this bring to the table (5, Interesting)

gstoddart (321705) | more than 2 years ago | (#34642566)

It's designed specifically for the typical Apple user.

You know, instead of the usual bitching and moaning about the "typical Apple user" like everybody else on Slashdot, why don't you try to actually think about this instead of just launching into the usual screed? That fact that you've been modded insightful for basically acting like a 4 year old kind of proves my point.

I have the free BBC news app on my iPad, as well as Reuters and several others. In fact, I've never paid for an app on my iPad (or a track from iTunes for that matter) -- there's so much free stuff out there it's amazing. It's so much nicer to use than a web page, because it's a user interface that takes into account the platform it runs on.

As I've pointed out elsewhere in this thread, the native interface of an iPad application (and, indeed I bet this would be true for an Android device or a Blackberry) is that the interface works the way you expect the interface to work on that platform. The web makes middling user interfaces at best -- a native app (for any platform) is simply going to be a better user experience.

This isn't even about the iPad -- it's about realizing that the 15 years we've spent using the web for everything has led to really crappy user interfaces, all bound to the HTML paradigm. I'm glad to finally see the web being eclipsed by actual applications and interfaces. This will happen on Android, Microsoft, Blackberry, and every new device that comes along.

If three months after this is released, and News Corp releases this for an Android tablet, will we be all saying how hip the Android users are because they can subscribe to the same content? Will it suddenly be cool?

Seriously, get over the whole iPad/Apple bashing thing, and recognize that tablets (of all forms) and the like are fundamentally changing the rules and the prevalence of everything being a frigging web page. You don't have to like the iPad, but you should recognize everything you've said will apply to all new touch screen devices as they come on line and available.

Personally, I don't see web pages going away, but I do see them not being the only way people get information or interact with software. This is just an example of that.

Seriously, dial back the bitching about this being about Apple, and start thinking about this in the broader context of what is going to be happening in the industry over the next bunch of years. Now that touch-screen technology is becoming prevalent, you will see this kind of thing on all platforms.

Re:What does this bring to the table (1)

Monkeedude1212 (1560403) | more than 2 years ago | (#34642682)

You honestly believe that when Windows finally gets around to mimicking the iPad that someone will go and provide a "MS Tablet Only Newspaper"?
Thats the source of the joke here. It's not that it won't make its way to other tablets, its that its specifically being marketted as iPad only.

It's the worst piece of business logic I've ever heard of, yet someone has decided to try it out on an Apple product, all of which have a bad rap as being overpriced for what you actually get - the Hardware is never Earth Shattering enough to justify the price, it often seems you are paying for Apple's Software which goes for more than even Microsoft's ludicrous amounts and locks you into it even more. I just learned the other day that in some cases you can't even activate your new iPhone without hooking it up to a computer with your iTunes.

I was merely pointing out the OBVIOUS joke that has been circling around Apple and the fact that its actually happening is almost too comical to be true.

Chill out

Re:What does this bring to the table (3, Interesting)

gstoddart (321705) | more than 2 years ago | (#34642874)

You honestly believe that when Windows finally gets around to mimicking the iPad that someone will go and provide a "MS Tablet Only Newspaper"?

No, I honestly believe that when Microsoft finally mimics the iPad, this newpaper will be made available for it. Right now, as I understand it, neither enough people are running Windows Mobile 7, nor is the interface nearly good enough to do this.

yet someone has decided to try it out on an Apple product, all of which have a bad rap as being overpriced for what you actually get - the Hardware is never Earth Shattering enough to justify the price

The hardware? No. The software is actually some of the nicest I've used in years -- and that is worth the money. The iPad is some of my first exposure to Apple's stuff beyoind iTunes on my Windows machine -- and, I'm awfully tempted to add an actual Mac to the herd of computers. It's like the old pissing contest between Intel and AMD over processor speed -- if you don't write bloated software that doubles in size every year, you don't need to be constantly doubling hardware needs. It's not like I'm running a web server on the damned thing.

I just learned the other day that in some cases you can't even activate your new iPhone without hooking it up to a computer with your iTunes.

Can't speak to that -- in my experience, my iPods and my iPad all are designed to work with iTunes, and likely the iPhone as well. Since I've been using that for around 10 years, I actually find that convenient since all of my media is already in there. Plug it into the machine, and let iTunes sort out the intial setup -- 5 minutes later, I'm syncing music and movies.

If you don't like it, don't buy it. But the whole "zomg, teh stupid Apple users" is getting kind of old.

Re:What does this bring to the table (1)

vijayiyer (728590) | more than 2 years ago | (#34643024)

"It's not that it won't make its way to other tablets, its that its specifically being marketted as iPad only."

No, it's not being marketed as anything yet. This is somewhere between a rumor and a leak.

Re:What does this bring to the table (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#34642822)

The web wouldn't have succeeded if every site had to write a fscking application to present it's data. You are a typical Apple fanboy that cannot see beyond Jobs's anus. God forbid you grasp the benefits of hyperlinking.

Re:What does this bring to the table (1)

gstoddart (321705) | more than 2 years ago | (#34642984)

The web wouldn't have succeeded if every site had to write a fscking application to present it's data. You are a typical Apple fanboy that cannot see beyond Jobs's anus. God forbid you grasp the benefits of hyperlinking.

Once again, I stand in awe of the master debaters and wordsmiths posting on Slashdot.

You've clearly run rings around me with your astute points and finely crafted logic.

Re:What does this bring to the table (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#34643440)

The fact that you respond to trolls should be indication enough that maybe your head really IS up your ass...

Re:What does this bring to the table (1, Flamebait)

arth1 (260657) | more than 2 years ago | (#34642856)

You know, instead of the usual bitching and moaning about the "typical Apple user" like everybody else on Slashdot,
[rant deleted]
Seriously, get over the whole iPad/Apple bashing thing,
[rant deleted]
Seriously, dial back the bitching about this being about Apple,
[rant deleted]

You know, instead of verbosely justifying your purchase, why don't you let it go?

Seriously, get over the whole iPad/Apple bashing thing, and dial back the bitching about bitching about Apple.

If you like your Apple devices, fine. But we don't need any more evangelists.

Re:What does this bring to the table (2)

chrome (3506) | more than 2 years ago | (#34643072)

but, but, but the web is the future for all applications! We'll all be running apps on the cloud from our thin clients! The network is the computer! etc etc! Don't tell me they sold me a lie.

Re:What does this bring to the table (3, Interesting)

PCM2 (4486) | more than 2 years ago | (#34643170)

The web makes middling user interfaces at best -- a native app (for any platform) is simply going to be a better user experience.

Wait -- so the Web was a bad idea, we should abandon it, forget about HTML5 (more of the same), and go back to the days where every single information service ran on a proprietary client? I hope you're not being serious.

When I learned that most of the so-called apps that people have on their iPhones are actually purpose-built clients designed to access a single Web site each, that's when I started to agree with the folks at Research in Motion: this whole "apps" craze is a fad.

Re:What does this bring to the table (1)

gstoddart (321705) | more than 2 years ago | (#34643422)

Wait -- so the Web was a bad idea, we should abandon it, forget about HTML5 (more of the same), and go back to the days where every single information service ran on a proprietary client? I hope you're not being serious.

Did you read the whole comment, or just stop when your knickers got into a twist? Because I also said:

Personally, I don't see web pages going away, but I do see them not being the only way people get information or interact with software. This is just an example of that.

Of course the web isn't going to go away, and of course we shouldn't abandon HTML 5.

What I said is that a native application gives a better user experience than the web. Organizations that have the resources or the inclination will make native apps (for many devices) which allow for that. The web is ubiquitous, and I don't believe that I will be seeing it go away any time soon.

But, I can't tell you how many times I've found myself grumbling about crappy applications that run on the web that are slow and ugly.

I'm saying that an app is simply a better alternative when it is available. Touch screens are an advance in the way we interact with this stuff ... it would be moronic to still slavishly stick to the old paradigms; especially of mouse and keyboard.

that's when I started to agree with the folks at Research in Motion: this whole "apps" craze is a fad.

I'll be surprised if that turns out to be true. Personally, I find apps to be a huge improvement over the "everything is a web page" we've been stuck with for the last bunch of years.

Apps and touchscreens are the first time in about 15 years that we've moved forward on user interfaces and interacting with computers. The web has advantages of zero-footprint installs and all that, but I'd hardly call it the best set of user interfaces out there. And, with companies like Microsoft seeing an app-store model in their future, it's hardly going away.

Re:What does this bring to the table (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#34643244)

You know, instead of the usual bitching and moaning about the "typical Apple user" like everybody else on Slashdot, why don't you try to actually think about this instead of just launching into the usual screed? That fact that you've been modded insightful for basically acting like a 4 year old kind of proves my point.

Because he's right, so he might as well keep up the usual bitching and moaning because it's true 99.9% of the time [citation needed].

Re:What does this bring to the table (1)

DragonWriter (970822) | more than 2 years ago | (#34643446)

This isn't even about the iPad -- it's about realizing that the 15 years we've spent using the web for everything has led to really crappy user interfaces, all bound to the HTML paradigm. I'm glad to finally see the web being eclipsed by actual applications and interfaces. This will happen on Android, Microsoft, Blackberry, and every new device that comes along.

Well, except for ChromeOS applications. And, applications that need to economically target a broad range of devices rather than being rewritten from scratch for each OS. And...

Seriously, get over the whole iPad/Apple bashing thing, and recognize that tablets (of all forms) and the like are fundamentally changing the rules and the prevalence of everything being a frigging web page.

Except that they actually aren't. Native apps were always dominant for things that were performance critical or for which web browsers don't provide APIs, or for which appropriate browser-based UI controls weren't widely implemented. Sure, in the last few years the number of common desktop uses for which that applies has been narrowing, as web APIs, UI features (whether standard HTML, provided by JavaScript libraries, or whatever), and perforamnce for common desktop application tasks has improved.

Smartphones and tablets -- with new features for which standard web tools weren't available, and lower powered processors which make performance hits a bigger deal -- obviously have a slightly different initial native:web balance than contemporary desktop/laptop systems -- but, over time, the same evolution that has happened on the web is happening to them.

Seriously, dial back the bitching about this being about Apple, and start thinking about this in the broader context of what is going to be happening in the industry over the next bunch of years. Now that touch-screen technology is becoming prevalent, you will see this kind of thing on all platforms.

Or, more likely, you'll see more robust common understanding of how to interact with the web via touch, and new common JavaScript APIs for mobile functions, and the web will march on.

Re:What does this bring to the table (1)

alen (225700) | more than 2 years ago | (#34642298)

it's for the people that can't get past the quaint idea of media being delivered in "issues" where you have to wait a day, week or month to read information

Re:What does this bring to the table (3, Interesting)

gstoddart (321705) | more than 2 years ago | (#34642348)

How is this better than a web-based news source, even a paywalled one?

Because it will be a native app instead of the web, for one. The web is a reasonable "lowest common denominator", but really, it still sucks for UIs, no matter how many advances we've made.

The difference between a native app and a web-page on this kind of device is massive in terms of how much nicer the native interface is -- in part because it scales up things to be more "touchable" instead of "clickable". I'm glad to finally see a reversal of this trend of "everything as a web page" -- the usability of an app designed for the multi-touch is easily an order of magnitude better than a web page. It's a completely different kind of interface than one you'd do for the web.

They also get Apple as a distribution and billing mechanism. Which I'm sure will also benefit them. However, I don't expect that I'll be making use of the "push" subscriptions, and least of all, for anything from News Corp. There are plenty of *free* news apps that run native on the iPad (BBC, Reuters, and others). Though, I'm sure there will be a fair few people who actually subscribe to this.

I see lots of things on the app store which you could argue is largely the same as the content on a web page. The difference being, with an app instead of a web-page, it's a far better user experience overall.

Re:What does this bring to the table (1)

dachshund (300733) | more than 2 years ago | (#34643424)

Because it will be a native app instead of the web, for one. The web is a reasonable "lowest common denominator", but really, it still sucks for UIs, no matter how many advances we've made.
The difference between a native app and a web-page on this kind of device is massive in terms of how much nicer the native interface is -- in part because it scales up things to be more "touchable" instead of "clickable". I'm glad to finally see a reversal of this trend of "everything as a web page" -- the usability of an app designed for the multi-touch is easily an order of magnitude better than a web page. It's a completely different kind of interface than one you'd do for the web.

While this is all true in theory, my experience is that low-usage proprietary formats have one huge usability disadvantage in practice: namely, it's expensive to produce content for them. So while it's true that your newspaper could have multitouch, interactive, vector-graphics-enabled, hyper-linking, Angry-Birds-quality-animated featurettes, in practice the publishers can only really justify the creation of a small number of such features per newspaper. Absent these you're down to a flat web page/newspaper that's slightly easier to manipulate through an app than through a browser.

But over time, even these advantages will go away as web designers get better at designing for tablets, and browser/web technology improves. It's more or less a self-fulfilling prophecy, since the publisher will inevitably devote more resources to improving web version if it has 10,000x the readership and it's cheaper to develop for.

I've seen this happen with a number of formats over the years. It shouldn't be surprising, once you consider how expensive it would be to produce a product every day/week/month that lives up to the hype of what a tablet-based newspaper should be. Even the iPad 'showcase' version of Wired is basically just a bunch of high-quality image files with a small number of lame 'interactive' features.

Re:What does this bring to the table (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#34642544)

because it is actually not web-based but app-based. This is the point. You turn on your iPad (no joke here...), one click on your newspaper app, here you go. Then you don't need an internet connection to read page by page as everything is (should be) already downloaded. (at least I hope so).

Re:What does this bring to the table (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#34642706)

To be honest, I don't know. I could, however, see it has an advantage that the push could happen at night, so when you get picked up your ipad in the morning it already had the next day's paper on it. Thus you could read the paper even if you didn't have wifi access (i.e. on a train or plane).

Is it something that couldn't be accomplished otherwise? Absolutely not. This is a feature though that could make some of the less techy people's lives a lot easier. I could also see applications which would automatically download web content at pre-determined times and then used an offline browsing mode doing the same thing from the users perspective.

Re:What does this bring to the table (1)

Saint Gerbil (1155665) | more than 2 years ago | (#34642804)

Didn't apple say they were going to ban apps which basically did what their main website did ?

In a related note surly apple would hit them with the ban-hammer as soon as they post an "android market share increasing" story. (or similar)

Re:What does this bring to the table (0)

MrMarket (983874) | more than 2 years ago | (#34642928)

How is this better than a web-based news source, even a paywalled one?

When you download the app flip to page 3 [wikipedia.org] . You'll see...

Re:What does this bring to the table (2)

vlm (69642) | more than 2 years ago | (#34643114)

How is this better than a web-based news source, even a paywalled one?

Its important to specify the difference between a push web app news source, which could do all kinds of cool filtering and instant access (not high latency of streaming) of attached videos, and this specific app which is probably (just guessing) designed to little more than collect more money.

A good news app would intelligently log how interested I am in a story, based on both how long I read and what rating I give it, and then in a Bayesian way filter my news for me. Also it would provide an intelligent mixture almost like a DJ for news.

Also it would have all linked multimedia pre-downloaded via the push. No click and wait for video, ultra high res images instantly available.

Also it would have much better bookmarking than current websites.

I want it location aware. If I'm reading about yet another shooting 3 blocks away I want to see it on the google maps. Or a new restaurant opening up, I want turn by turn directions from my house.

Finally I'd want push downloaded instantly available background like relevant wikipedia articles, or if a lame journalist is misreporting on a scientific article, I want the original ARVIX paper please. Not just in the text, not a link to pop open Safari, but the actual paper right there. Not a text article paradigm, but a MIME like multimedia collection for each story.

What we're probably going to get is a reskinned safari or ibooks plus a big bill. But I/we can dream.

Re:What does this bring to the table (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#34643252)

It reduces the likelihood that you will try to corroborate what you have read in iFox (which is essentially what this will be) from other sources?

Re:What does this bring to the table (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#34643442)

That question, phrased in an even more general way, is something that I kept asking and people just couldn't really explain to me .. until someone finally realized the obvious-to-them thing that I wasn't grasping since I don't (and will never fucking ever) have an iPhone.

The reason to replace a website with an Apple store app, is the store. The web is large, so you have to wait for people to find you, but Apple's store is (relatively) tiny, so your app can more easily come up on the first page of results for people looking for something. It's a alternative market. Being different is a quality all in itself, because it means you're not competing with the same old same olds.

Imagine if I open the all-new Coward Store. You can be #1 on there. Then imagine if I had a captive audience of a million people who were locked into using the Coward Store. You would then have reason to want to be #1 on my store. These vertical monopolies are very powerful compared to the free market of the web. It's all at the users' expense so the people should be telling Apple to fuck off, but for whatever reason, they don't.

Another aspect to it, is that (and this is very weird!) people basically go through Apple's store looking for things to spend money on. They want to buy things for the sake of buying things; they are compulsive shoppers and really don't give a damn what they get, as long as they receive the satisfaction of having spent some money. And conversely and much more obviously, people don't go trolling through the web looking for places who will accept their credit card number.

Why the difference in behavior? If I knew that, I would be the next Steve Jobs or L. Ron Hubbard.

minority report (2)

Laxori666 (748529) | more than 2 years ago | (#34642184)

This reminds me of the scene in minority report where everyone carried around a digital screen instead of a newspaper. When an arrest warrant went out for the main character, seconds later all their screens were updated with a News Flash saying to look out for the guy. It's, like, the future, today!

Re:minority report (1)

blair1q (305137) | more than 2 years ago | (#34643284)

Except now it won't be an arrest warrant, it will be an order to call Health Care Reform, "Government takeover of healthcare".

Re:minority report (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#34643366)

Yes, it's like the future today, oh wait, if the iPad is dropped it may break, and in Minority Report it was actually a foldeable paper? Right?

Why? (1)

cpu6502 (1960974) | more than 2 years ago | (#34642240)

I can get the daily edition of News Corp's "The Blaze" or FOXnews.com for free. What makes this new iPad edition worth paying? I guess it has something to do with the new push tech.

Wow! News content delivered automatically!! (3, Insightful)

Orga (1720130) | more than 2 years ago | (#34642248)

Who'd have ever thought such technology was feasible. Only in the world of a closed off iPad could this possibly be any kind of news. Please let us return to five years ago when things like this weren't newsworthy.

In other irrelevant news ... (-1, Offtopic)

oldspewey (1303305) | more than 2 years ago | (#34642254)

This has no bearing on me, as I have no desire to own an iPad, and even less desire to read a single word penned in Murdoch's cesspool.

Re:In other irrelevant news ... (4, Interesting)

bigredradio (631970) | more than 2 years ago | (#34642420)

This has no bearing on me, as I have no desire to own an iPad, and even less desire to read a single word penned in Murdoch's cesspool.

So you click on the slashdot article about a service you would not want on a device you don't have? Then leave a comments letting us know you don't care about it?

Re:In other irrelevant news ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#34642746)

that actually describes everyone here :)

Re:In other irrelevant news ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#34642790)

This has no bearing on me, as I have no desire to own an iPad, and even less desire to read a single word penned in Murdoch's cesspool.

So you click on the slashdot article about a service you would not want on a device you don't have? Then leave a comments letting us know you don't care about it?

Obligatory: You must be new here.

Re:In other irrelevant news ... (1)

Foobar of Borg (690622) | more than 2 years ago | (#34643026)

This has no bearing on me, as I have no desire to own an iPad, and even less desire to read a single word penned in Murdoch's cesspool.

So you click on the slashdot article about a service you would not want on a device you don't have? Then leave a comments letting us know you don't care about it?

What the fuck are you going to expect next? That he RTFA???

Re:In other irrelevant news ... (3, Insightful)

blind biker (1066130) | more than 2 years ago | (#34643322)

So you click on the slashdot article about a service you would not want on a device you don't have? Then leave a comments letting us know you don't care about it?

So? Actually, what business is that of yours? This place is designed for everyone to comment on any topic. Even if you moderate him/her to -1, you can't stop them to express a point of view. That's a good thing, not a bad one.

Re:In other irrelevant news ... (2)

countertrolling (1585477) | more than 2 years ago | (#34642426)

This has no bearing on me...

But it does.. People who read Fox also vote.. a dangerous combination.

Re:In other irrelevant news ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#34642650)

People are free to be idiots. That is the most excellent thing about our country :)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B9GespLQrM8&feature=related [youtube.com]

Now after watching that do you think people vote because of policies or because they think it is American Idol?

I personally happen to agree with many republican policies and a few democrat polices. I write my congress critter and TELL them. Paper, pen, and a stamp, no quick dashing off an email... I do not care what party they are in. They represent me no matter what. I do get rather irked with the block voting going on. Which means *NEITHER* party is actually reading the bills, and the congress critters are most certainly not reading them.

Re:In other irrelevant news ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#34642810)

what's even more disturbing, they don't just vote (which can be corrected in the long run), they breed.

Re:In other irrelevant news ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#34642974)

"People who read Fox also vote.. a dangerous combination."

It doesn't much matter who votes. The outcomes of elections are determined largely by the election systems.

Re:In other irrelevant news ... (1)

oldspewey (1303305) | more than 2 years ago | (#34643268)

Yup, check out the maps from Ohio from 2004. [gregpalast.com]

Re:In other irrelevant news ... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#34642640)

This has no bearing on me

Then STFU and go back to fucking your sister or something.

Who fucking CARES if you don't want it?

One more reason to not buy an iPad...... (0)

fatbuckel (1714764) | more than 2 years ago | (#34642276)

Just because we can does`nt mean we should.

Re:One more reason to not buy an iPad...... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#34642400)

Just because we can does`nt mean we should.

I must buy an iPad - I'm gay and I won't fit in if I don't have Apple products.

NewsCorp - News for Retards (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#34642292)

Retards who are dumb enough to believe Fox News are the fastest growing Demographic in America.

That's right, the number of retarded racists who watch Fox News are growing faster than the ethnic minorities that they and Fox News hate.

It's time for Hispanics to start popping out even more children to counter the force of retarded racists raised by Fox News.

huh... (-1, Troll)

The Hatchet (1766306) | more than 2 years ago | (#34642308)

I guess it fits, News Corp. Already runs nothing but shitty fake news. Why not add shitty fake iPad news to go with its shitty closed freedom hating operating system. Apple and GOP should be tight friends if hate was the only indicator.

Re:huh... (0)

vijayiyer (728590) | more than 2 years ago | (#34643198)

Funny, don't you think "Freedom hating" would be something you'd hear on Fox News? Or are you blinded by your own hate?

Oh goody (4, Insightful)

southpolesammy (150094) | more than 2 years ago | (#34642380)

Yet another monthly recurring charge that I'll never use, nor ever get around to cancelling. At least my idle gym membership won't feel so lonely now...

Re:Oh goody (1)

Urkki (668283) | more than 2 years ago | (#34642820)

Yet another monthly recurring charge that I'll never use, nor ever get around to cancelling. At least my idle gym membership won't feel so lonely now...

Indeed, but don't feel bad. Things like that are what keeps the economy running. Like gyms, how else could they afford to keep gym equipment factory workers (in China) fed, if not for all the generous people with idle gym memberships?

DONOTWANT (2)

toby (759) | more than 2 years ago | (#34642520)

If ever a story deserved that tag, it's this one.

Does it have a crossword puzzle? (2)

JThaddeus (531998) | more than 2 years ago | (#34642612)

That and a non-Murdoch paper could sell me on a iPad.

Re:Does it have a crossword puzzle? (1)

gstoddart (321705) | more than 2 years ago | (#34642704)

That and a non-Murdoch paper could sell me on a iPad.

BBC, Reuters and numerous others have news apps for the iPad that are free, and a fair few have subscription availability.

You can get also crossword apps, again, some free.

marketing train wreck approaching... 3.. 2... 1 (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#34642628)

What is the proportion of Apple iPad users (young, liberal, welcome novelty, tolerant of diverse lifestyles and cultures) who would shell out subscription rates for Rupert Murdoch's right-wing spin on the news?

D'oh.

Re:marketing train wreck approaching... 3.. 2... 1 (0)

LDAPMAN (930041) | more than 2 years ago | (#34643016)

Why would you assume that iPad users fall into that demographic? The folks you describe are a small minority of the population. You don't honestly believe that Apple has sold many millions of iPhones and iPads to such a niche market.

Re:marketing train wreck approaching... 3.. 2... 1 (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#34643136)

Pay attention to Apple's ads.

Re:marketing train wreck approaching... 3.. 2... 1 (2)

RightSaidFred99 (874576) | more than 2 years ago | (#34643386)

You underestimate the number of hipster douches that are out there.

They are multitude.

It's from News Corp? Save yourself some money (4, Funny)

serutan (259622) | more than 2 years ago | (#34642642)

Just scrawl "Liberal Socialists Doing Scary Bad Stuff!" on the screen in permanent marker and look at it every five minutes.

Re:It's from News Corp? Save yourself some money (2)

sa1lnr (669048) | more than 2 years ago | (#34642922)

And there will be tits on page 3?

Re:It's from News Corp? Save yourself some money (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#34643034)

No, this is aimed mostly at the US market. Page 3 will be pictures of Muslims being shot. And lots of American flags.

Re:It's from News Corp? Save yourself some money (2)

RightSaidFred99 (874576) | more than 2 years ago | (#34643412)

I actually listen to Fox sometimes, either for amusement or to get a different viewpoint. You're clearly about 3 years behind, the new Naughty Word is "Progressives". "Liberals" (i.e. "libruls", "libruhls") is so 20th Century.

Re:It's from News Corp? Save yourself some money (2)

radionerd (916462) | more than 2 years ago | (#34643454)

I think this is a great idea, I get to pay for my Fascist propaganda right up front!. My parakeet thinks it's a stupid idea, we still have to pay for it, and he ends up with no place to crap.

Time machine (2, Funny)

mrogers (85392) | more than 2 years ago | (#34642644)

When the iPad was first announced, I dismissed it as an insignificant device - little more than a giant phone or a netbook without a keyboard.

How wrong I was.

What Jobs & Co have developed is nothing less than a fucking time machine. The iPad offers to transport us back to the comfort and safety of the mid-twentieth century. A time when citizens' minds were untroubled by pornographic smut or government leaks. A time when the news was delivered to your doorstep once a day, and you were happy to pay for the privilege. A time when anyone who disagreed with the policies designed to keep them safe was quietly taken away and never heard from again.

What next from these technological wizards? Here are my predictions:

  • The iDollar, a digital currency based on the rock-solid security of the Gold Standard.
  • The iCadillac, a car the size of a house, with stylish white-wall tires and a DRM-equipped stereo.
  • The iWife, a lifelong companion and domestic servant who will teach your iKids strict gender roles and other Apple-approved family values.
  • The iCigar, a relaxing treat for gentlemen, with no proven medical link to cancer.
  • The iMac, a dapper yet practical wrap-around raincoat, available in beige, light brown, or camel.

I'm truly excited to be living in the future my grandparents dreamed of!

Re:Time machine (1)

99BottlesOfBeerInMyF (813746) | more than 2 years ago | (#34642808)

What Jobs & Co have developed is nothing less than a fucking time machine. The iPad offers to transport us back to the comfort and safety of the mid-twentieth century.

While you doubtless know the "safer more wholesome time" thing is a fiction, what's sad about this sort of thing is twofold:

First, that cutting edge companies aren't taking a stand with an eye to the future. They could be setting themselves up as common carrier type companies that will carry any content that meets technical criteria and thus they don't have to explain why they'll do business with the KKK but not Wikileaks. No one is all that offended by neutral third parties and those that are, usually don't hurt you business.

Second, that there is a real business case in the US for company run censorship on behalf of the consumer. If it didn't make business sense, i.e. if people didn't want content to be censored then we wouldn't see Walmart, Apple, Amazon, Netflix, and for that matter most major companies censoring the content that is distributed through them. Was there ever an America that truly valued individual freedom and where people thought, "stories about sex with your mother, gross, completely not interesting to me, I hope the store carries it and values individuals' rights to choose for themselves, the same way they do with content I want but most people don't like". I truly value freedom, but most businesses that have studied the issue seem to find consumers in the US are much more interested in imposing a lack of freedom and enforced adherence to the mainstream. Screw you American public!

Re:Time machine (-1, Offtopic)

Lilith's Heart-shape (1224784) | more than 2 years ago | (#34643008)

Screw you American public!

I wouldn't fuck the American public with your dick. They're fat and they just lay there.

Re:Time machine (2)

mrogers (85392) | more than 2 years ago | (#34643106)

I agree, there's a sad lack of vision in America today. The whole country seems bitter and afraid. Nobody talks about principles. Of course the same's true in Europe, but I feel like we've been suffering from that disease for longer - America used to be different. Perhaps it's a symptom of post-imperial decline, which America's only just beginning to enter. Or perhaps I've fallen for the golden age myth after all - Americans must have been bitter during the Great Depression, afraid during the Cold War - why did we ever think they were different?

Re:Time machine (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#34643304)

Was there ever an America that truly valued individual freedom and where people thought, "stories about sex with your mother, gross, completely not interesting to me, I hope the store carries it and values individuals' rights to choose for themselves, the same way they do with content I want but most people don't like".

Apparently so, or maybe this store's purchasing agent missed something [barnesandnoble.com] .

What will it be called? (1)

DrXym (126579) | more than 2 years ago | (#34642860)

My money is on "The Hipster"

We don't read Wynand (1)

Lilith's Heart-shape (1224784) | more than 2 years ago | (#34642920)

Of course, comparing Rupert Murdoch to Gail Wynand [wikipedia.org] is a more generous comparison than Murdoch deserves.

sound like trouble (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#34643112)

I can see a couple of reasons why they'd want to get everyone to read their news through a proprietary app. (1) you can't block the ads and (2) google et al. can't get to your content as easily. It increases the value of their advertising and helps get rid of news aggregators. Sounds like what Tim Berners-Lee was warning everyone about.

This just in! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#34643196)

Homophobes, racists, the mentally ill, and old coots descend upon Apple Stores nationwide!

YAY!!! (1)

koan (80826) | more than 2 years ago | (#34643248)

Propaganda pushed to my over priced hobbled tablet...yay?

Curse you Rupert Murdoch! (5, Funny)

blair1q (305137) | more than 2 years ago | (#34643270)

How the hell am I supposed to wrap a fish in that?

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>