Who is happy with QST

Status
Not open for further replies.

n0zed

Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2005
Messages
103
Location
End of the Oregon trail
I am not seeing much anywhere of the bad beta of digital QST . In my not so humble opinion it is very bad. online / browser it's so out of focus I get a headache and have to get out.
.
I love ( NOT ) the android "download " version thru their app. What's the advantage of downloading but still have online to read , and if you download it stores ONLY to system memory , you can't use the sd card storage . Hmmm my tab 8gig of system memory for everything , the 64 gig sd card sits idle because the paranoid publishers will not allow SD storage even with the heavy DRM .
.
And just to be clear on my browser version reads , I have tried on three different computers and three browsers all with the same results , CRAP . sound off and chime in , are you happy or feel it's crap also.
.
The advertisers should be happy also with the lack clarity in QST digital , with what they pay .
It's quite frustrating in this age of good enuff when it is not..
.
G. Kammerzell , n0zed
Oregon City , Oregon
 

mm

Member
Joined
Dec 19, 2002
Messages
616
Terrible interface on 4 pc's:

Windooz8.1 on a dell tablet, Windooz 10 and 8.1 two Toshiba laptops and Win 7 on another laptop the only browser it works on is Chrome and then very poorly.

It appears to be software written by a blind intern possibly on a Windows ME machine.

If using Mozilla Firecrap or Microcrap Intercrap explorer it doesn't have any zoom or any top controls for that matter and it constantly locks up.

On both my pc's with the touchscreens pinch n zoom doesn't work, the only way to zoom is with a mouse so it never focuses because it only changes pages when zoomed full out.

When zooming with the mouse does work you cannot move to the next page until zooming full out and the it's out of focus.

So you need to be zoomed full out then zoom in to read text attempt to move the page around with touch or mouse control to read more text, which works buggily, then zoom full out to change pages and repeat this annoying process.

A perfect example of using a computer at it's worst.

This is my last year With QST and ARRL but I wish I saw this poor software before I renewed in Dec.
 

n0zed

Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2005
Messages
103
Location
End of the Oregon trail
My ***** about out of focus was on a computer browser . Yes my android is clear , but cant read unless on line and I am NOT on line all the time so what happened to what I had downloaded on my Tablet ? poof they are gone
 

W9BU

Lead Wiki Manager
Super Moderator
Joined
Jul 18, 2004
Messages
5,956
Location
Brownsburg, Indiana
FWIW, just tried the new digital edition of the February 2017 QST. Loads fine on a Windows 7 computer running Chrome browser. I can flip pages, follow page links, and zoom in on pages.
 

Rred

Member
Joined
Nov 21, 2014
Messages
829
I wouldn't be surprised if Calibre can crack the new format. It can be a bit obtuse but it even allows for Kindle and other "protected" formats to be converted to PDF and then simply read without fuss.

I don't know whether to laugh or cry whenever some publisher says "We need special software" because of DRM, or because it makes page turning noises, or some other nonsense when PDF was established and solved these problems in the early 90's. I make it a point to complain to publishers, and have gotten at least one magazine ti go back to plain PDF, because I'm not the only one who complains. I have a PDF reader. I can--like most anyone--crack DRM should I choose to. And I'm damned tired of esoteric new illegible formats. And the ARRLs epublishing schemes introduce some errors that their own editors and authors are not so happy about.
So before you vote with your feet...take a look at Calibre. And COMPLAIN loudly. Sometimes the message really does get through.
 

RFI-EMI-GUY

Member
Joined
Dec 22, 2013
Messages
3,344
I wouldn't be surprised if Calibre can crack the new format. It can be a bit obtuse but it even allows for Kindle and other "protected" formats to be converted to PDF and then simply read without fuss.

I don't know whether to laugh or cry whenever some publisher says "We need special software" because of DRM, or because it makes page turning noises, or some other nonsense when PDF was established and solved these problems in the early 90's. I make it a point to complain to publishers, and have gotten at least one magazine ti go back to plain PDF, because I'm not the only one who complains. I have a PDF reader. I can--like most anyone--crack DRM should I choose to. And I'm damned tired of esoteric new illegible formats. And the ARRLs epublishing schemes introduce some errors that their own editors and authors are not so happy about.
So before you vote with your feet...take a look at Calibre. And COMPLAIN loudly. Sometimes the message really does get through.
.PDF should definitely be the standard and the document word searchable at a minimum. I have found that some of the industry magazine's on line archives routinely botch scientific notation, formulas, acronyms etc. That is unacceptable.
 

RFI-EMI-GUY

Member
Joined
Dec 22, 2013
Messages
3,344
My ***** about out of focus was on a computer browser . Yes my android is clear , but cant read unless on line and I am NOT on line all the time so what happened to what I had downloaded on my Tablet ? poof they are gone
I have an older Android tablet (Samsung) and the acrobat reader crashes and often the text rendering is blocked out or out of focus. I have a brand new one and will be scrutinizing the performance.
 

Rred

Member
Joined
Nov 21, 2014
Messages
829
Android was (as is) often implemented very laxly. And Adobe's programming skills have been, well, sophomoric since Day One. They've also made PostScript so complex that even with all the third-party renderers, it is sometimes plain unreliable. Still, it is the best tool in the box.

Even the mighty Amazon Kindle really is still a trash-o-matic much of the time. Until recently it would never allow hyphenation, and when authors self-publish or upload OCR scans of their old work without proof-reading, the reader itself can't help them. I've met a few authors who provided contact links and are actually eager to make corrections when readers find them, but for most? Impossible.

E-readers today, including Acrobrat [sic], often look like amateur night against standards that were set higher 20 years ago.
 

wrath

Member
Joined
Dec 18, 2005
Messages
464
Very rarely do I use the app, for most things I just reference the hard copy on the bookshelf.

Sent from my SM-T810 using Tapatalk
 

N3LUD

Member
Joined
Dec 26, 2004
Messages
7
I recently tried downloading several issue to read on the plane with my device (iPad) in airplane mode. I am disappointed that download does not actually mean download the issue and that you have to be online to read it.

I also find that the display quality is not very good unless I zoom in on specific sections.
 

wrath

Member
Joined
Dec 18, 2005
Messages
464
Yeah used to be bunches of magazines on radio and scanning hobbies they one by one disappeared , so call us fortunate to get QST, sure the browser isn't everything everyone could want it to be ,how many things are in this life ? The electronic version is a secondary method of reading it , instead of taking your hard copy with you the electronic version is there, I collect music , I can find common ground in almost every genre , do I have an mp3 player yes, is it as good as my Yamaha SACD or my vinyl ,no not really ,but I can carry around an mp3 player with thousands of hours of music , I can't carry my 3000 album collection and all the gear to play it ,so the mp3 has its place , just like the QST APP, Not meant to be perfect ,it's meant to be a portable reference , National Geographic put out a mini hard drive with every page and every map from the 1st issue in the 1800's thru 2012 if you love the magazine and realize how much information that it is you bought one, it's a portable reference of 100 years of info ,sure I have a collection of back issues at home that I can't take with me but this little hard drive fills that gap , maybe someday everything will be perfected and the only way QST is available will be electronic , in the mean time let's show a little appreciation for all we have . Also it's people with new ideas that create technology and the ability to do and see all we do , put some Volunteer hours at the League and share your knowledge of all of things electronic and media, maybe your the guy with the information to make QST 2.0 APP all it can be , sitting on the sidelines complaining about emerging technology not being perfect makes us the peanut gallery , getting our hands dirty under the hood makes us innovators and makes the service better.

Sent from my SM-T810 using Tapatalk
 

TomTN

Member
Joined
Jan 26, 2003
Messages
48
Location
Nashville, TN
I'm not happy with the content in QST and did not renew this year due to this and the rate increase without added value.

It's fine that the writers wish to focus on the hobby as it was in 1970 but times have changed. Forward thinking hams use digital modes and not just those of their advertisers. We use DMR and P25 as well as things like Winlink and SDR. To read the average issue of QST those don't exist.

I would like to read Motorola programming tips, articles about Connect Systems, SharkRF, etc. Not everyone lives for analog HF.
 

Aero125

Member
Joined
Feb 1, 2015
Messages
207
Location
Los Angeles, CA
At over $4.00 per issue ($49 per yr.) it's not worth it. I guess if you're an old school HF con-tester and like to see the results, list of SK's and reviews of stuff that's already been out foe a year it's a good option.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top