NYT reader 2.0(timesreader.nytimes.com)
timesreader.nytimes.com
NYT reader 2.0
http://timesreader.nytimes.com/timesreader/index.html?campaignId=34W8F
23 comments
I just spent 30 minutes with this App - It's a winner. I've subscribed to the $3.45/week subscription.
I've been a NYT reader for the last seven years - it's basically my home page - but for whatever reason, the web edition obscures my sense of what the entire paper is offering. Keep in mind I read the NYT.com web page 3-5 times a day for about two hours, and, seven years later, I _still_ feel like I'm missing out from the "Paper" experience.
The NYT reader has the following features that I love:
o Flawless Article-Map. I've got my sections on the left, the article number on the bottom, and the page number on the bottom right (Though, with a 30" monitor it almost 100% of the time will fit an article onto a single page).
o Great navigation - Cursor Right/Left changes articles. Cursor Up/Down changes Page. Command Up/Down changes Section.
o It's the NYT Paper edition, delivered electronically Sometimes, having that authoritative "We commit this to history" version of the NYT is reassuring, for all its faults.
o Great resizing - Text, Graphics all relocate themselves very well - much better than the nyt.com page. This app works just as cleanly on a 30" monitor as it does a 15" monitor - which is rare for Newspaper readers.
o Much less advertising - I expect that will change, but it's nice to have a pristine page without having to load up your system with ad-blockers - just a single banner at the bottom right now.
o News in Video - All of the video news in a single section. (Great Video Article on West Point Cyber Warfare today, BTW)
o News in Pictures - Nice roundup of all the NYT pictures of the day.
o Latest News - A nice addition - gives you the dynamic element of nyt.com in addition to the authoritative version.
We'll see if I'm as hyper-enthusiastic a couple months from now, but, this is where I'm going for my NYT news. Need to see if WSJ (which has better charts/graphics than the NYT, particularly on the financial side) has a reader as nice as the NYT.
[Added:] Back in 1999/2000 or thereabouts, there was an earlier version of the NYT reader that I did _not_ like very much. It wasn't as nimble as the existing one, and , incredibly, didn't come out until quite late in the morning. There were several occasions when the -paper- edition was available before the electronic, and the web site was always more complete. Fail.
I'm happy to see the following note when I subscribed:
"Getting it first So fast, you get delivery while our presses are still running "
We'll see.
I've been a NYT reader for the last seven years - it's basically my home page - but for whatever reason, the web edition obscures my sense of what the entire paper is offering. Keep in mind I read the NYT.com web page 3-5 times a day for about two hours, and, seven years later, I _still_ feel like I'm missing out from the "Paper" experience.
The NYT reader has the following features that I love:
o Flawless Article-Map. I've got my sections on the left, the article number on the bottom, and the page number on the bottom right (Though, with a 30" monitor it almost 100% of the time will fit an article onto a single page).
o Great navigation - Cursor Right/Left changes articles. Cursor Up/Down changes Page. Command Up/Down changes Section.
o It's the NYT Paper edition, delivered electronically Sometimes, having that authoritative "We commit this to history" version of the NYT is reassuring, for all its faults.
o Great resizing - Text, Graphics all relocate themselves very well - much better than the nyt.com page. This app works just as cleanly on a 30" monitor as it does a 15" monitor - which is rare for Newspaper readers.
o Much less advertising - I expect that will change, but it's nice to have a pristine page without having to load up your system with ad-blockers - just a single banner at the bottom right now.
o News in Video - All of the video news in a single section. (Great Video Article on West Point Cyber Warfare today, BTW)
o News in Pictures - Nice roundup of all the NYT pictures of the day.
o Latest News - A nice addition - gives you the dynamic element of nyt.com in addition to the authoritative version.
We'll see if I'm as hyper-enthusiastic a couple months from now, but, this is where I'm going for my NYT news. Need to see if WSJ (which has better charts/graphics than the NYT, particularly on the financial side) has a reader as nice as the NYT.
[Added:] Back in 1999/2000 or thereabouts, there was an earlier version of the NYT reader that I did _not_ like very much. It wasn't as nimble as the existing one, and , incredibly, didn't come out until quite late in the morning. There were several occasions when the -paper- edition was available before the electronic, and the web site was always more complete. Fail.
I'm happy to see the following note when I subscribed:
"Getting it first So fast, you get delivery while our presses are still running "
We'll see.
First Major Flaw in Times Reader: Almost all figures, diagrams, and charts are missing. These are present in the Paper, Electronic Edition, and nyt.com. In some cases you barely notice the missing diagram, but in others, such as the Lincoln Center Remodel article, in which _the entire diagram showing the remodeled Lincoln Center - including colored elements showing what has been completed, and what is under construction_ - it's a gaping hole.
Particularly painful are the missing graphs/charts for business articles. WSJ is typically better than NYT, but eliminating them altogether seriously devalues the Times Reader.
Particularly painful are the missing graphs/charts for business articles. WSJ is typically better than NYT, but eliminating them altogether seriously devalues the Times Reader.
Thanks for the mini-review, sounds like they do deliver a better experience than the Web counterpart. What about links? say to comment on an article from a blog post, or following a link from another site to the NYT? I guess you still need the Web/HTML version for that.
Any reason why it can't be the same experience over a Web browser? Nothing wrong to try and sell subscriptions based on an enhanced experience, just that personally the NYT isn't worth $150+/yr.
Any reason why it can't be the same experience over a Web browser? Nothing wrong to try and sell subscriptions based on an enhanced experience, just that personally the NYT isn't worth $150+/yr.
Links: The NYT is pretty schizophrenic about links - most of the time they'll link to their own information on a link (ala Wikipedia, but nowhere near as useful), sometimes they'll link to an external resource (Marketwatch for companies), sometimes they'll actually link to the site under review (wolfram alpha) - all of them, of course, require internet access + your browser.
The good news is that all of these links are somehow maintained in the "Time Reader" version of the article - I have no idea how they accomplish that. Makes me think that the paper version is now a _derivative_ of some primary electronic version. Interesting.
Re: Same Experience in Web Browser - After I used Google Maps, I realized that Javascript can do pretty much anything, so I have to believe if someone really, really wanted to, they could create an application that would simulate the "Times Reader" in a browser. I'm guessing that the design team that did this for the NYT probably looked at the toolsets that were available, and that they knew, and just decided that AIR would be the fastest, easiest, and provide the best user experience. I'm guessing here.
The good news is that all of these links are somehow maintained in the "Time Reader" version of the article - I have no idea how they accomplish that. Makes me think that the paper version is now a _derivative_ of some primary electronic version. Interesting.
Re: Same Experience in Web Browser - After I used Google Maps, I realized that Javascript can do pretty much anything, so I have to believe if someone really, really wanted to, they could create an application that would simulate the "Times Reader" in a browser. I'm guessing that the design team that did this for the NYT probably looked at the toolsets that were available, and that they knew, and just decided that AIR would be the fastest, easiest, and provide the best user experience. I'm guessing here.
How would a company enforce that? Is the NYT going to start suing customers? Cutting off their access?
How is any EULA enforced? I think the goal is not so much to "prevent" as it is to clearly indicate that it isn't "approved."
[EDIT] I'm guessing they put that "No Tablet" option to ensure they get a licensing chunk from vendors who might want to sell inexpensive tablet that run on the AIR platform.
[EDIT] I'm guessing they put that "No Tablet" option to ensure they get a licensing chunk from vendors who might want to sell inexpensive tablet that run on the AIR platform.
Edit: On further reading everything I speculated below is pretty much wrong and inapplicable.
That, and now that people are paying for subscriptions they (pragmatically, if not strictly legally) have to guarantee a particular level of user experience.
Even though AIR is cross platform (write-once look almost same almost anywhere) having only a single platform that's legal to use helps cut down on customer support headaches.
That, and now that people are paying for subscriptions they (pragmatically, if not strictly legally) have to guarantee a particular level of user experience.
Even though AIR is cross platform (write-once look almost same almost anywhere) having only a single platform that's legal to use helps cut down on customer support headaches.
"The New York Times offers you a digital experience that reads like a newspaper."
I think this pretty much sums up why newspapers have problems. They aren't looking ahead, they're looking back. They're trying to squeeze an old-fashioned newspaper into a new format instead of using the possibilities and limitations that the new medium offers. Yes, they talk a bit about video but except for that it's just reinventing the old ways.
Instead they should focus on citizen journalism, user interaction, one-to-one communication, personalisation and all the other possibilities that the web offers.
It reminds me of the old Henry Ford quote "If I asked customers what they wanted they would say a faster horse"
It looks like The New York Times is busy making a faster horse.
Edit: Just read schwanksta's comment, and maybe I was a bit too triggerhappy in my criticism :-)
I think this pretty much sums up why newspapers have problems. They aren't looking ahead, they're looking back. They're trying to squeeze an old-fashioned newspaper into a new format instead of using the possibilities and limitations that the new medium offers. Yes, they talk a bit about video but except for that it's just reinventing the old ways.
Instead they should focus on citizen journalism, user interaction, one-to-one communication, personalisation and all the other possibilities that the web offers.
It reminds me of the old Henry Ford quote "If I asked customers what they wanted they would say a faster horse"
It looks like The New York Times is busy making a faster horse.
Edit: Just read schwanksta's comment, and maybe I was a bit too triggerhappy in my criticism :-)
Newspapers should not look beyond quality. I value well-written reporting as a consumer and a citizen and want to see the NYT flourish. I really like the new reader.
Of the foci you mention: Citizen journalism - I can get this on the local broadcast news. Except for breaking local news - no thanks.
User interaction - there are a great number of sites that discuss issues and they are filled with citizen journalists. I would rather the NYT concentrate on well-written reporting.
Personalization - RSS feeds and sub-reddits are better at this for me.
I miss the pure joy of opening the newspaper and discovering something interesting such as an in-depth investigative report on a unknown or misunderstood problem.
Of the foci you mention: Citizen journalism - I can get this on the local broadcast news. Except for breaking local news - no thanks.
User interaction - there are a great number of sites that discuss issues and they are filled with citizen journalists. I would rather the NYT concentrate on well-written reporting.
Personalization - RSS feeds and sub-reddits are better at this for me.
I miss the pure joy of opening the newspaper and discovering something interesting such as an in-depth investigative report on a unknown or misunderstood problem.
I really like this. Offline browsing for a full 7 days, video and even a crossword puzzle? That's a pretty good bridge between Web-only reading and traditional newspapers. This app could really take off if they promote it right. At the very least, this would be awesome for an airplane or car trip.
Hopefully they roll out an iPhone/Blackberry/Whatever app too. Make it as mobile and easy to read as the real paper.
Hopefully they roll out an iPhone/Blackberry/Whatever app too. Make it as mobile and easy to read as the real paper.
They already have an iPhone Application: http://www.nytimes.com/services/mobile/iphone.html
They've done a great job porting this to Air. The Fl(ash|ex) platform has improved by leaps and bounds in the last few years, a kudos to both the NYT and Adobe.
Performance is a bit sluggish on my machine, but overall it feels pretty nice. There aren't many new features over 1.0 (having the crossword is great, and obviously cross-platform is super-important). I'm looking forward to future iterations.
(Full disclosure: I worked on the NYT Reader 1.0 back when I was at MSFT)
Performance is a bit sluggish on my machine, but overall it feels pretty nice. There aren't many new features over 1.0 (having the crossword is great, and obviously cross-platform is super-important). I'm looking forward to future iterations.
(Full disclosure: I worked on the NYT Reader 1.0 back when I was at MSFT)
If anyone is curious on how they structure their data you can look at the SQLite database files which are stored here (on windows at least):
%USERPROFILE%\Application Data\com.nyt.timesreader.78C54164786ADE80CB31E1C5D95607D0938C987A.1\Local Store\
"newsreader.db" contains all the article information and eventRecorder.db contains records of all the actions you take in the application.
"newsreader.db" contains all the article information and eventRecorder.db contains records of all the actions you take in the application.
This might be my youth showing, but to me, this looks like a browser customized to the NYT... nice, but why not let it be just another tab in Chrome?
Also, where are the social features? I want to solve the crossword puzzle faster than my friends, and post to my facebook profile how quickly I did it. I want to be able to share/discuss the stories with those friends, also - that's one of the reasons why I read them.
Aside from that, this is just a pretty redesign of the layout... not much to see, moving along.
Also, where are the social features? I want to solve the crossword puzzle faster than my friends, and post to my facebook profile how quickly I did it. I want to be able to share/discuss the stories with those friends, also - that's one of the reasons why I read them.
Aside from that, this is just a pretty redesign of the layout... not much to see, moving along.
[deleted]
This seems much better than the horrendous New Yorker digital reader.
Between this, map/reduce and everything else NYT has been doing the last year or so, it is easy to see who will survive when the newspaper industry comes crumbling down.
Looks great and feels great.
But before you download, it says a subscription for full access to Times Reader is $3.45 a week.
But before you download, it says a subscription for full access to Times Reader is $3.45 a week.
I don't understand why a proprietary reader when the browser is the best reader out there and html the best format.
Want to allow off-line reading? Give the user the full version as a single html file so it can be saved and read anywhere, anytime, on any device.
Thumbs down.
Want to allow off-line reading? Give the user the full version as a single html file so it can be saved and read anywhere, anytime, on any device.
Thumbs down.
> the browser is the best reader out there
This is a joke, right?
This is a joke, right?
"...you may not use an Adobe Runtime on any (a) mobile device, set top box (STB), handheld, phone, web pad, tablet and Tablet PC (other than with Windows XP Tablet PC Edition and its successors), game console, TV, DVD player, media center (other than with Windows XP Media Center Edition and its successors), electronic billboard or other digital signage, Internet appliance or other Internet-connected device, PDA, medical device, ATM, telematic device, gaming machine, home automation system, kiosk, remote control device, or any other consumer electronics device,"