Quote:

---

Your post was thoughtful and well written, with only one typo. I don't think you submitted it to peer review. You were able to produce a good piece of work because you are a good and conscientious writer.

---

Only one typo? See, I am getting better!

Quote:

---

On the other hand, I have frequently had the misfortune of spending $59.95 on a 750 page computer programming book only to find three misspellings and a technical error in the first paragraph of Chapter 1, and things usually go downhill from there. Peer review does no good if both author and reviewer are illiterates.

---

Absolutely!! In that case, I'd really have to question the publisher's quality control. Or rather, the lack thereof. That sort of thing is inexcusable.

Closer to home, I know of a publisher of many an amateur astronomy book whose in-house proofreading is about as poor as your computer programming book. Further, their printing quality, especially illustrations, is horrible. But none of that prevents them from charging top, top dollar for their product.

But I digress. One thing that I think both magazines should do to bring them into the electronic age -- and this idea has already been mentioned here, so I'll just cast my supportive vote -- is to produce electronic archives of past issues, perhaps as searchable PDF files. Maybe market them in per-decade bundles. I can tell you from a research point of view, I would find that invaluable. Rather than having to thumb through piles of back issues that I have in boxes in my basement, it would be so much easier just to type in a title or phrase and have related articles pop up.

Perhaps Tony or Sean could discuss S&T's resistance. Possibly projected cost versus return?

--------------------
Phil Harrington
"Binocular Universe" Columnist, Astronomy magazine
Author: Star Ware || Star Watch || Touring the Universe through Binoculars || et al...
http://www.philharrington.net
http://www.observingsites.com
"Two eyes are better than one!"

Post Extras