Admiral says:

Paying to be advertised to is silly. Also the information in the mags is old news and for some part completely wrong. With the internet and “instant information” one should pray for all print media.

gnomic says:

I disagree. ZD has a lot of good content and its generally well-organized. For a professional, its handy to have it in a format that facilitates quick review. I think ZD simply has too much overlapping content and has been competing with itself and all its competitors. A little cost-cutting will be a good thing for them.

Andrew says:

In fact — and I guess this makes sense — a large portion of magazine readers get them for the ads. This is especially true of computer, photography, and bride’s pubs, but it’s a common thing.

Odd, yes, but when you think about it you realize that it’s the best way to learn of new products.

Admiral says:

I would buy a mag for its content. Now if people like to learn about new products then they should have a mag with nothing but ads. Maybe they do… :-)

I disagree with gnomic. The information in the mag is about a month or more old when the mag goes out. Not to mention the inaccurate information.

So, why pay my money to be advertised to? Thats not why I would buy a mag.

So, why pay my money to receive old information? Thats not why I would buy a mag.

So, why pay my money to get inaccurate information? Thats not why I would buy a mag.

I guess a lot of people agree with me. Or else ZD would still be in business.

The internet trumps all print media.

Perhaps ZD would have done better if they named the mags “Ads for Products” or “Month Old News” or “Partially Correct Information”. ;-)