Does anyone take Wired seriously anymore?

[AndrewR]

I used to subscribe years ago, but I got very TIRED of their idiotic predictions. Reading successive issues gave me the feeling of reading the transcription of someone with ADHD on caffeine discussing technology.

 

[cmv]

Not really. I think magazines are dead. Well, at least to me. I've tried a few new subscriptions and most of them are full of ads and no good content. Magazines I have liked (like Linux Journal) seem to have gone down hill.

The web is much better and timely.

 

[HardcoreRobot]

i still like wired

 

[ultimatebob]

Traditional TV advertising IS dying, though. DVR's are finally starting to catch on, and most people who have them are fast forwarding through the commerical breaks.

Why do you think that series are adding so many banner ads and product placements during the show now?

 

[OS]

there was once or twice i read some article in wired related to cars which was so off i mostly stopped reading their stuff.

 

[SoulAssassin]

I've had a subscription since probably 97 and still read it each month. I think overall it's still informative, I think there's still some 'hype' to alot of things as you would in any other magazine trying to sell subscriptions and you have some bs that you have to dig through. Anytime anyone makes anykind of bold prediction like that you have to take it with a isht load of salt. Is TV advertising dead? Of course not. The day my grandparents get a tivo and start skipping commercials I'll say yes. Is it declining and is online/email/ingame/etc growing? Yeah, I'll agree to that.

After spending some time in the Mountain View/San Jose area on consulting gigs, I'll attest that everyone out there very well may have a caffeine dependecy and ADHD.

 

[brxndxn]

I love Wired.. Ya, they are full of buzz-words - but they admit they're buzz words. They predict crazy things for the near future that may take much longer than they predict.. So.

It's an artful magazine that is high-quality compared to the filth out there today (ie.. Maxim). Wired magazines look like they were laid out by graphics designers who love their jobs.

Buzz-word-dependent magazines like Business 2.0 really piss me off. My mom is convinced that magazine offers industry insides and OMG great ideas. All I see when I read it is a bunch of 1 paragraph blurbs and some articles that say what someone who made a quick buck in the tech industry did.

Wired = good
Business 2.0 = crap
Maxim = sh1t

 

[Ika]

I love Wired, just because of the way they write. It's almost engadget-esque. It's like Pop Sci, but more "chic" - that's how I view Wired.

 

[HomeBrewerDude]

usually wired is tired, but every now and then they have a decent interview or something.

 

[AndrewR]

Originally posted by: ultimatebob
Traditional TV advertising IS dying, though. DVR's are finally starting to catch on, and most people who have them are fast forwarding through the commerical breaks.

Why do you think that series are adding so many banner ads and product placements during the show now?

And how many people have them relative to the number of people with TV sets? I think the tendency within outfits like Wired is to assume that since THEY have DVRs and all THEIR FRIENDS have DVRs, well then EVERYONE has DVRs and is skipping commercials. In fact, Gizmodo.com reports that DVR sales declined 49% this year from Jan-Aug compared to sales from the same time period in 2005.

Then I found this report which gives some interesting figures on the market penetration of different devices (dated 2005):

6% of all US households have a DVR, compared to the 87% with a VCR, 60% with a DVD console and 12% with Video on Demand

If only 60% of US households have a DVD player and that's painfully easy to use and cheap as dirt these days, how likely is it that a majority of US households are going to buy a DVR in the near future? The same article mentions that at the end of 2004, 3.5 million US households had a DVR. Double that and then add a few million more, and you're still talking under 10 million. I'd say the market for TV advertising is still a very strong one.

 

[imported_goku]

Originally posted by: brxndxn
I love Wired.. Ya, they are full of buzz-words - but they admit they're buzz words. They predict crazy things for the near future that may take much longer than they predict.. So.

It's an artful magazine that is high-quality compared to the filth out there today (ie.. Maxim). Wired magazines look like they were laid out by graphics designers who love their jobs.

Buzz-word-dependent magazines like Business 2.0 really piss me off. My mom is convinced that magazine offers industry insides and OMG great ideas. All I see when I read it is a bunch of 1 paragraph blurbs and some articles that say what someone who made a quick buck in the tech industry did.

Wired = good
Business 2.0 = crap
Maxim = sh1t

Um, do you need your head exam? WTF is wrong with you? Where do you get off comparing 'wired' with 'maxim'?

 

[ultimatebob]

Originally posted by: AndrewR

Originally posted by: ultimatebob
Traditional TV advertising IS dying, though. DVR's are finally starting to catch on, and most people who have them are fast forwarding through the commerical breaks.

Why do you think that series are adding so many banner ads and product placements during the show now?

And how many people have them relative to the number of people with TV sets? I think the tendency within outfits like Wired is to assume that since THEY have DVRs and all THEIR FRIENDS have DVRs, well then EVERYONE has DVRs and is skipping commercials. In fact, Gizmodo.com reports that DVR sales declined 49% this year from Jan-Aug compared to sales from the same time period in 2005.

Then I found this report which gives some interesting figures on the market penetration of different devices (dated 2005):

6% of all US households have a DVR, compared to the 87% with a VCR, 60% with a DVD console and 12% with Video on Demand

If only 60% of US households have a DVD player and that's painfully easy to use and cheap as dirt these days, how likely is it that a majority of US households are going to buy a DVR in the near future? The same article mentions that at the end of 2004, 3.5 million US households had a DVR. Double that and then add a few million more, and you're still talking under 10 million. I'd say the market for TV advertising is still a very strong one.

You're right, most people aren't buying DVR's anymore. They don't have to, because they're already included with the HDTV cable boxes that the cable and satellite companies are renting out to new customers. The last two cable boxes I got had built in twin tuner DVR's, and I don't even live in a major city filled with early technological adopters like San Francisco or NYC. Those guys have been getting DVR cable boxes since 2003.

The adoption has been slow so far, but I'll bet that most folks will have a DVR within the next 5 years.