4 ms·

I work for the Times as a developer so I'm going to stay out of this conversation other than trying to correct or inform. I'm keeping my own opinions to myself

by donohoe 16y ago

I work for the Times as a developer so I'm going to stay out of this conversation other than trying to correct or inform. I'm keeping my own opinions to myself (as best as I humanly can). So with that said, here are 3 links I received that shed more light on this: "A Letter to Our Readers About Digital Subscriptions" http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/18/opinion/l18times.html http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/18/opinion/l18times.html "Digital Subscriptions and Premium Products" http://www.nytimes.com/content/help/account/purchases/subscriptions-and-purchases.html http://www.nytimes.com/content/help/account/purchases/subscr... More Info http://www.nytimes.com/subscriptions/Multiproduct/lp0145.html http://www.nytimes.com/subscriptions/Multiproduct/lp0145.htm... I hope they prove useful and informative.

Gaussian 16y ago
Long time coming. Great product and great service. They're fighting for the survival of the paradigm.
- bioh42_2 16y ago
  Long time coming. Great product and great service. They're fighting for the survival of the paradigm. What is that paradigm? I think some news outlets, mostly business, have proven people are willing to pay for valuable news, the WSJ comes to mind. The NY Times has a mix of hard news and soft opinions, their main problem is that almost the same news is available from many free sources around the Internet. So I am genuinely perplexed as to what the paradigm is?
  - Gaussian 16y ago
    The paradigm is one news outlet having reporters all over the country and the world covering things that may or may not make ripples in financial markets, but may be just as or more important. It's one outlet having the breadth to well cover a breaking event with disparate news aspects (the Japan earthquake being a good example) that touch all manners of people and businesses across the globe. Every decent-sized metro daily used to have bureaus in Beirut, Israel, Egypt, etc. There are plenty of reasons, some of them good, that this is no longer the case. The New York Times is one of the last vestiges of that age and I don't think that nostalgia is the only reason we should root for its success. The only thing that guarantees that success, as Rupert Murdoch has pointed out, is sustainable profitability. I think the Times' move to charge people for their coverage will ultimately be successful, just as the efforts of the FT and WSJ have been and, to a degree, as NPR's has been.
- MatthewPhillips 16y ago
  $420 a year for full access (online only).
  - donohoe 16y ago
    At the top bracket. At its lowest, its $195. http://www.nytimes.com/content/help/account/purchases/subscriptions-and-purchases.html#purchasesq01 http://www.nytimes.com/content/help/account/purchases/subscr...
    - mattlanger 16y ago
      You're selling yourself short though--at the lowest it's actually free, just like, you know, every other freemium model on the web.
doron 16y ago
I have managed to read NYtimes for the last several years, without having an account, and primarily using bugmenot to pass around the user registration, which annoyed me to no end. With that said, I would consider creating an account and paying, a big selling point for me, (which is not mentioned in any of the articles presented would be, that as a paying customer, it would be great if no ads are visible, just premium content.
scott_s 16y ago
Good work. The NY Times is, in my opinion, the best online paper by far. Navigating and reading articles is a pleasure.
- omouse 16y ago
  Now if only the content would improve...
  - shiftpgdn 16y ago
    Oh come on, what are you basing this on? The content as compared to the vast majority of other newspapers online and print is far superior in every way imaginable. If you want to see bad please check out chron.com.
    - alexqgb 16y ago
      Well, the whole shilling-for-the-Pentagon-in-the-run-up-to-the-Gulf-War stink is still floating around. Also, the editorial policy of allowing the word "torture" to describe waterboarding except in instances when the US is doing the tortur...ahem, waterboarding is more than odious. Pointing out the inferiority of less consequential papers doesn't absolve them. The point is that these guys consider themselves THE paper of record. You can't pride your self on a higher standard, then get defensive and angry when people actually hold you to it.
tomjen3 16y ago
How will you prevent me from opening the links in incognito mode? Because that is what I do currently just to get around the nagscreen.
- rksprst 16y ago
  If you really want, there are fingerprinting techniques to uniquely identify a user without using any cookies. (e.g. combination of user agent, installed fonts, screen resolution, screen depth, city, country, ip, etc...) So they could do it that way.
  - wtallis 16y ago
    For users with NoScript, that list is reduced to user agent, IP address, and the inference that none of the other tests were allowed to run. In other words, they could make it work, but only until they enable IPv6.
    - deleted 16y ago
      [deleted]
sounddust 16y ago
Are you still going to support http://mobile.nytimes.com http://mobile.nytimes.com ? I'd be happy to pay for a subscription, but I don't like the smartphone apps and strongly prefer reading the mobile site on my phone's browser instead.
fooliantor 16y ago
Dude, get out of there. I worked at another place that stole a lot of your developers and they all hated that place. Old media is a dying breed. Get out while you can.

by donohoe 16y ago

Gaussian 16y ago

Long time coming. Great product and great service. They're fighting for the survival of the paradigm.

bioh42_2 16y ago
Long time coming. Great product and great service. They're fighting for the survival of the paradigm. What is that paradigm? I think some news outlets, mostly business, have proven people are willing to pay for valuable news, the WSJ comes to mind. The NY Times has a mix of hard news and soft opinions, their main problem is that almost the same news is available from many free sources around the Internet. So I am genuinely perplexed as to what the paradigm is?
- Gaussian 16y ago
  The paradigm is one news outlet having reporters all over the country and the world covering things that may or may not make ripples in financial markets, but may be just as or more important. It's one outlet having the breadth to well cover a breaking event with disparate news aspects (the Japan earthquake being a good example) that touch all manners of people and businesses across the globe. Every decent-sized metro daily used to have bureaus in Beirut, Israel, Egypt, etc. There are plenty of reasons, some of them good, that this is no longer the case. The New York Times is one of the last vestiges of that age and I don't think that nostalgia is the only reason we should root for its success. The only thing that guarantees that success, as Rupert Murdoch has pointed out, is sustainable profitability. I think the Times' move to charge people for their coverage will ultimately be successful, just as the efforts of the FT and WSJ have been and, to a degree, as NPR's has been.
MatthewPhillips 16y ago
$420 a year for full access (online only).
- donohoe 16y ago
  At the top bracket. At its lowest, its $195. http://www.nytimes.com/content/help/account/purchases/subscriptions-and-purchases.html#purchasesq01 http://www.nytimes.com/content/help/account/purchases/subscr...
  - mattlanger 16y ago
    You're selling yourself short though--at the lowest it's actually free, just like, you know, every other freemium model on the web.

doron 16y ago

I have managed to read NYtimes for the last several years, without having an account, and primarily using bugmenot to pass around the user registration, which annoyed me to no end. With that said, I would consider creating an account and paying, a big selling point for me, (which is not mentioned in any of the articles presented would be, that as a paying customer, it would be great if no ads are visible, just premium content.

scott_s 16y ago

Good work. The NY Times is, in my opinion, the best online paper by far. Navigating and reading articles is a pleasure.

omouse 16y ago
Now if only the content would improve...
- shiftpgdn 16y ago
  Oh come on, what are you basing this on? The content as compared to the vast majority of other newspapers online and print is far superior in every way imaginable. If you want to see bad please check out chron.com.
  - alexqgb 16y ago
    Well, the whole shilling-for-the-Pentagon-in-the-run-up-to-the-Gulf-War stink is still floating around. Also, the editorial policy of allowing the word "torture" to describe waterboarding except in instances when the US is doing the tortur...ahem, waterboarding is more than odious. Pointing out the inferiority of less consequential papers doesn't absolve them. The point is that these guys consider themselves THE paper of record. You can't pride your self on a higher standard, then get defensive and angry when people actually hold you to it.

tomjen3 16y ago

How will you prevent me from opening the links in incognito mode? Because that is what I do currently just to get around the nagscreen.

rksprst 16y ago
If you really want, there are fingerprinting techniques to uniquely identify a user without using any cookies. (e.g. combination of user agent, installed fonts, screen resolution, screen depth, city, country, ip, etc...) So they could do it that way.
- wtallis 16y ago
  For users with NoScript, that list is reduced to user agent, IP address, and the inference that none of the other tests were allowed to run. In other words, they could make it work, but only until they enable IPv6.
  - deleted 16y ago
    [deleted]

sounddust 16y ago

Are you still going to support http://mobile.nytimes.com http://mobile.nytimes.com ? I'd be happy to pay for a subscription, but I don't like the smartphone apps and strongly prefer reading the mobile site on my phone's browser instead.

fooliantor 16y ago

Dude, get out of there. I worked at another place that stole a lot of your developers and they all hated that place. Old media is a dying breed. Get out while you can.