Tux Magazine Goes Paid Model
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| devnet Jul 25, 2006 2:52 PM EDT |
Thought this was interesting...Tux Magazine went to a pay per issue model (or will sometime next year). I find this rather amusing considering the cost a magazine takes to put together is nil. I received an email announcing this as I'm sure others have...So, having a rather unused blogspot that I dump everything that isn't published on Yet Another Linux Blog...I dumped this. http://wireless-toothpicks.blogspot.com/2006/07/tux-magazine... Anyone else find this silly? |
| jimf Jul 25, 2006 3:01 PM EDT |
I wonder how successful this will be. Nothing wrong with supplying extra value for cost, but, I for one have all too much information to sift through already. I can't imagine paying for that. |
| tuxchick2 Jul 25, 2006 3:05 PM EDT |
Nil cost? Not quite. Staff salaries, office space, taxes and the usual foo blah, plus site hosting add up to a high six-figure annual budget. It's not silly at all. |
| scrawler Jul 25, 2006 3:43 PM EDT |
It isn't silly at all, Tux is a nice magazine. It's not nice enough for me to buy, though. Its main appeal is that it is created with Scribus (at least I think it is created with Scribus...) |
| devnet Jul 26, 2006 5:37 AM EDT |
I was under the impression that it was created using scribus as well. That being said...a group of 5 individuals on a shoestring budget that covers hosting could put out a magazine easy. The thing is...Tux had paid positions from the VERY START. That's what doomed them. It wasn't a volunteer effort from the get go...their parent magazine made sure of that. |
| tuxchick2 Jul 26, 2006 7:14 AM EDT |
devnet, that's such an attractive proposition I don't know why more people don't do it- work for free for the benefit of the freeloader demographic. Just one of life's little mysteries, I guess. |
| sbergman27 Jul 26, 2006 8:25 AM EDT |
Where *does* this idea come from, that we as Tax Payers, Citizens of the Planet Earth, or whatever, have a God-given *right* to get free, high quality journalistic content from the internet? If we do happen to get it, fine. But I'm not sure where it actually says that we're entitled to it in anyone's Constitution, Ammendents, or any Commandments I can find. Perhaps it was one of the 5 that got lost when Moses dropped that third tablet in Mel Brooks' "The History of the World"? Anyway, if I were looking into what it costs to run a high quality site, I'd head over to LWN and search over their history of the last few years, in which they have been trying to make ends meet without sacrificing quality and professionalism, and without actually *requiring* a subscription to view and participate on the site. There was discussion a few years back when they implemented their optional subscription model. And there have been periodic updates as to how well it has worked. Sometimes the FOSS community are cheap bastards. :-( |
| dinotrac Jul 26, 2006 8:28 AM EDT |
TC - Steve -- I thought you understood that by now: Only freeloaders have the right to make a living. Everybody else should be giving up their goods for free, living in cardboard boxes, and not starting families. |
| sbergman27 Jul 26, 2006 8:33 AM EDT |
Yeah, well, give 'em a centimeter and they'll take a kilometer. Oh, and by the way, I can't believe I mentioned the 11th commandment without also noting the 12th: 12. "Though Shalt Browse With AdBlock On." |
| tuxchick2 Jul 26, 2006 8:40 AM EDT |
LWN was within a hair's breadth of going out of business. Reader response was overwhelmingly supportive of paying for subscriptions, so that's when they started selling subscriptions. Apparently it's enough to keep them going, and I hope adequately compensated, because it is a great publication. |
| grouch Jul 26, 2006 8:47 AM EDT |
See also http://lwn.net/Articles/189074/ |
| sbergman27 Jul 26, 2006 8:52 AM EDT |
> I hope adequately compensated, because it is a great publication. Last I heard, subscriptions were still not up to the level they set as an operating minimum a few years ago. But they continue plugging on. From time to time, someone comes trolling on the site (and by this I mean *real* trolling, not "I don't agree with you so you must be a troll" sort of trolling) and a subscriber will decry LWN's policy of allowing non-subscibers to post. The response from the other subscribers usually works out to: We'd lose more in valuable posts than we gain in not having to skip over bad ones. Jonathan and the gang go with that thought and continue on that basis. I have a lot of respect for those guys. I suspect that they'd go on publishing no matter what. But that doesn't mean they have to, or that people should abuse their dedication. |
| sbergman27 Jul 26, 2006 8:55 AM EDT |
Grouch, Yes, I've been meaning to say how pleased I am to see my two favorite Linux sites working together! -Steve |
| grouch Jul 26, 2006 9:10 AM EDT |
sbergman27: Glad to hear that. It took a bit of email tag amongst Jonathan, Dave, Don and myself (I was gofer/bagboy) to get that implemented. Everybody had different schedules and worries. So far as I know, it's an LXer exclusive. :) (BTW, you sign some comments with "Steve"; do you prefer being addressed with name or with 'nym?) |
| sbergman27 Jul 26, 2006 9:41 AM EDT |
Well, I sign it when I want to give the comment a more "personal" touch. If I'm complimenting you, or insulting you, I'll usually sign it. Otherwise, I don't always bother. Whichever you like. ;-) -Steve |
| jdixon Jul 26, 2006 12:25 PM EDT |
> I have a lot of respect for those guys. Not to mention that their publication is excellent. It's the only other Linux site on the net which is on par with LX'er, IMNSHO. I can't really justify the subscription cost though, so I just read it a week late. I'm perfectly happy with that, and think it's a fair compromise. |
| Scott_Ruecker Jul 26, 2006 12:57 PM EDT |
I have to admit, I think that paying for good content is a no brainer. You guys are just spoiled by us(LXer). :-) TUX going to a pay model is alright with me, I actually understand more than half of the articles in the magazine, which I cannot say for any of the print periodicals. LWN not counting because they do not print on paper and because I really like LWN, its different enough for me not to care. Whether or not I understand every article is not my only metric in deciding if a publication is worth my money, I know I am a relative newbie when it comes to my administrator skills, but it helps if I can understand a little bit. |
| dinotrac Jul 26, 2006 5:05 PM EDT |
>I know I am a relative newbie when it comes to my administrator skills, But with a name like Scott Ruecker, you've got to be good. |
| devnet Jan 02, 2007 6:52 AM EDT |
It's been a while since I posted on this...but interestingly enough, this thread led me to proposition a magazine for PCLinuxOS (my favorite distro) and since this post, we've released 5 issues of the magazine. We use all volunteers and operate on a shoestring budget of 0 dollars. Some people will argue that the quality isn't near as professional as Tux...but I'd say, try finding us a scribus wizard :D We're all self taught volunteers. BTW, we have a staff of about 15-20 people that work monthly on the magazine doing all the various stuffs on it. http://mag.mypclinuxos.com Hope we've inspired some that it can be done :D |
| dcparris Jan 02, 2007 10:17 AM EDT |
Well, since our readers don't click on the ads, the advertisers aren't our friends anymore. I wish like hell I could make a living managing LXer. It would totally change how much I can do, from a writing and editing perspective. I really feel other team members deserve something as well. If I thought we could get away with charging a subscription, I would push for it in a heartbeat. And I think reader-supported news is much better than advertiser-supported news - fewer worries about who we're loyal to that way. Even if it was only $5/month or $50/year, I think it would be worthwhile for everyone. Heck, you guys tell me what it's worth to you. What would you be willing to do? |
| jdixon Jan 02, 2007 10:31 AM EDT |
DC: Well, I can click on ads if you want. Mind you, that's all I'll probably do, but that's a small price to pay to support LXer. Unfortunately, even $5/month is more than I can afford to pay for a website. $25/year might be workable, maybe. $19.95 is far more likely. That's my limit for magazines too, which is probably why I don't get any. |
| dcparris Jan 02, 2007 10:43 AM EDT |
jdixon, if others support the $20-25/year model, I'll work with that. |
| tuxchick Jan 02, 2007 10:53 AM EDT |
Oooo, getting readers to cough up cash! Free as in freeloader, baby! I would happily fork over $20/year, and even more. The LWN model might be worth considering: a tiered subscription rate from 'starving student' to 'moneybags'. Then add goodies for paying more, like $100/yr subscribers get a t-shirt with a picture of don and the pig, or something equally fetching. A sure-fire fundraiser would be a dunk-tank starring our favorite, and thankfully long-absent, troll. Five clams a throw, wheee! To start out why not put a PayPal button for donations? |
| bigg Jan 02, 2007 10:59 AM EDT |
Not sure if this is practical, but here goes. Although I'd be more than happy to pay $20 a year (well, I would pay $100/year, but the alimony from the divorce would be too expensive), I'm not sure how much I like subscription-only sites. They are usually a PITA and then the readership dwindles to nothing as people leave but don't enter, and then I hear "we can't do that because we don't make enough money from it." I'd feel better paying $20 a year for some kind of premium content like being able to read Dino's posts in the forums. I'd also like to be able to buy my Linux/free software books from a site that gives lxer a cut. Ditto for my brand-name computer hardware (probably wouldn't work so well for software purchases). Just my opinion, hope nobody gets too excited about it. |
| jdixon Jan 02, 2007 11:13 AM EDT |
> I'd feel better paying $20 a year for some kind of premium content like being able to read Dino's posts in the forums. Did you leave a not out of there? :) |
| tuxchick Jan 02, 2007 11:18 AM EDT |
I was wondering that, too. :D |
| bigg Jan 02, 2007 11:28 AM EDT |
What, you guys don't like having a lawyer at your disposal to comment on the fine points of your arguments for free (as in freeloader)? And almost 24/7? |
| jimf Jan 02, 2007 11:32 AM EDT |
> What, you guys don't like having a lawyer at your disposal Well, I think that's the point. You always have to pay for a lawer :D. |
| jdixon Jan 02, 2007 11:42 AM EDT |
> What, you guys don't like having a lawyer... Former lawyer, bigg, former lawyer. Let's not insult him more than necessary. |
| tuxchick Jan 02, 2007 11:49 AM EDT |
Another thought, O Great Editor, is to charge vendors to be in an online directory. The free Linux vendor database is nice- why not offer paid ads that are larger and have nice piccies? The biggest problem with online ads, IMO, is most of them are poo. Even if it's something I'm interested in, they rarely offer any enticements like sales or coupons. The fault for no-clicks is theirs, not ours. It's no different than magazine or newspaper ads- who reads those? I ignore most of those, but since there are no clicks to count, they can't complain. |
| jdixon Jan 02, 2007 11:56 AM EDT |
> It's no different than magazine or newspaper ads- who reads those? Or radio or television ads for that matter. And if you do read, watch, or listen to them, how often do they influence your buying? The number of commercials that have actually influenced my buying have probably been less than a hundred over my lifetime, and of those about half caused me not to buy the product. Advertising is overrated. |
| bigg Jan 02, 2007 11:58 AM EDT |
Perhaps this topic should be a thread of its own. (Supporting lxer, not our talking about Dino like he's not in the room.) If we're serious about providing support, which I like and believe is in our best interest, we need more than half a dozen people to know there is a discussion. Reverend, do you want to pursue this at this juncture? |
| bigg Jan 02, 2007 11:59 AM EDT |
> most of them are poo Amen to that. |
| tuxchick Jan 02, 2007 12:04 PM EDT |
Oh, I'm definitely influenced by advertising. I just lurv all the retard stereotypes that infest TV commercials: dad is a dope and slob, mom is the only one who ever cleans or cooks, and the only black actor in the universe is doing Allstate commercials. If it weren't for Netflix I might not even have a TV. |
| jdixon Jan 02, 2007 12:11 PM EDT |
> not our talking about Dino like he's not in the room. Oh, both Tuxchick and I fully expect Dino to read the posts, and probably to comment on them. :) What's the point of having online friends if you can't make fun of them? |
| jimf Jan 02, 2007 12:13 PM EDT |
> all the retard stereotypes It also seem that everyone is portrayed as retarded, iliterate, uninformed or just plain dense, except for the one telling you about the product (of course). And after insulting us, you expect us to buy your product??? Now tell me, who's the retard... |
| jimf Jan 02, 2007 12:15 PM EDT |
> What's the point of having online friends if you can't make fun of them? Absolutely! Now where is that dino :D |
| dcparris Jan 02, 2007 1:57 PM EDT |
I have initiated this discussion with Bob. I had better get the boss' views before I run off making decisions that aren't mine to make. ;-) I'm also thinking about a separate thread, or announcement article to raise the issue with a larger audience. However, it would be of little value if the boss doesn't like the idea to begin with. |
| dinotrac Jan 02, 2007 2:56 PM EDT |
> all the retard stereotypes OK, I've been a bit busy today and missed a few things. I am a bit concerned about a thread that is about, among other things, retard stereotypes and me. Not disputing the accuracy, just the courtesy. |
| dcparris Jan 02, 2007 3:20 PM EDT |
But it's so much fun talking about you behind your back. O.k., well, not near as much fun as talking about you when you're around, but still fun. :-p |
| jimf Jan 02, 2007 3:32 PM EDT |
> a thread that is about, among other things, retard stereotypes and me. You need only be concered if you are involved in advertising... Please dino, tell me you aren't ;-). |
| jdixon Jan 02, 2007 4:04 PM EDT |
> ...just the courtesy. Dino. And after I defended you. How could you? :) |
| dcparris Jan 02, 2007 5:05 PM EDT |
Come to think of it, everyone _was_ pretty courteous in talking about you behind your back. Seriously. They all took turns. No one spoke out of turn. It was a very polite affair. |
| dinotrac Jan 02, 2007 5:21 PM EDT |
>You need only be concered if you are involved in advertising... Oh...that's different, then. Isn't it? |
| dinotrac Jan 02, 2007 5:23 PM EDT |
>Dino. And after I defended you. How could you? :) It wasn't me and I don't know how that DNA got on the keyboard, either. Maybe it's magic DNA that flies. I won't rest until I track the real poster. Believe you me, won't rest a minute. You'll know I'm on the case if you see me working undercover at a golf course pretending to be a golfer. |
| dinotrac Jan 02, 2007 5:24 PM EDT |
>Seriously. They all took turns. No one spoke out of turn. It was a very polite affair. And what am I supposed to do about that, huh, Rev? Buy crumpets? You people ... you're just to darned NICE. No wonder you didn't go into law. Or car sales. |
| Sander_Marechal Jan 03, 2007 12:54 AM EDT |
With regards to an LXer subscription: I don't think it will work for LXer. Not unless you add some serious premium content to LXer. It'll fail if you only offer what you offer now. 95% of the content on LXer is links to other news sites which we can read anyway. The few LXer features + LWN link-of-the-week are not enough to warrant a $20/year subscription IMHO. So, either create premium content that people are willing to pay for, or find other ways of generating revenue. I think LXer has a *lot* of potential to do the latter -- and I'm not just talking about ads. For starters, add a big fat "donate" button. It won't bring in large wads of cash, but you know us regulars would use it to donate something every once in a while. Also, the LXer vendor database has lots of money making possibilities. From giving paying vendors a way of customising their entries (adding graphics, longer descriptions) through highly targetted ads (I'll bet ads work a lot better in the DB then on the main LXer site) to getting referral fees from sales. And you should market this DB. When it was just out, people were mentioning it everywhere. Now I only see mention in an occasional LXer feature. With the recent decline of some major Linux mags and publications, LXer is set for some major growth. Use it. Go find someone who is experienced in making money from websites and pick his brain. |
| devnet Jan 03, 2007 5:50 AM EDT |
Another good idea that kinda went away was the LUG Locator...I think enough people visit Lxer now that one could maintain a LUG Database as well. You could have LUG's register for a small donation (which of course they'd do...Lxer is invaluable) and then people could match themselves up to a LUG near them :) Yet Another way would be to make an Lxer editors blog to give insight into how articles make it to the pages, processes within, etc. Then slap advertising on that as well :D |
| dinotrac Jan 03, 2007 8:27 AM EDT |
Or...how about a page that provides a listing of banks that rely on Microsoft for security? That might attract a certain audience.
Maybe not an ideal audience, but one with money... Or, at least, one that would have money after checking the listing. |
| dcparris Jan 03, 2007 2:21 PM EDT |
Sander, in my original suggestion, I said that subscriptions - enough of them, anyway, would change what I can do as an editor. IOW, I would love to write more original content. However, I have to be able to meet my needs. No, that isn't really happening now. If you're willing to pay for more content, I'd be willing to provide more. I think the other editors probably would second the motion. In fact, I would love to do this full-time. Unfortunately, I just can't quit my day job unless I have some other source of income. :-( Again, I would love to produce more content. I just can't give away the farm. ;-) |
| Sander_Marechal Jan 03, 2007 3:12 PM EDT |
It looks like a chicken-and-egg problem then, but it's really not. How many people would buy subscriptions before all the new extra contents appears? Aside from a bunch of regulars like the posters in this thread I don't think you'd get many. Say you get 30 subscriptions from the LXer Loungers, would that be enough for you to start adding new contents? If not, how many? I'm not critcizing your plan, but the business engineer in me peeps out here. You need a business plan and crunch the numbers on it before you do this. Preferably with the help of someone who knows how to monetize on (news)websites. Perhaps the revenue from optimizing the rest of the site is enough to get you bootstrapped into adding content that people will subscribe to? Figure it out! If you have such a plan already I'd be happy to shoot some holes in it for you. I'm no expert on website monetizing, but I am a bachelor of business engineering so I have *some* relevant knowledge :-) |
| jimf Jan 03, 2007 3:24 PM EDT |
> enough for you to start adding new contents? This is not brain surgery. 40 subscribers @ $25 each will net you $1000. The question is, how many will subscribe. I really empathise with Don on this, but, I doubt that it well get him what he needs. |
| dcparris Jan 03, 2007 4:30 PM EDT |
I don't have a plan yet. I'm trying to develop one. :-) You're asking the same questions I am, just more specific. I was just curious to know if our readers would be willing to buy subscriptions, and on what basis. Then I can see how that would pan out. I'll probably write up an announcement, (with something a little more concrete to see if we can get a broader response. If I can get more than 40 people to show a willingness to subscribe, we'll take it from there. The important thing right now is to know that many of our core seem fairly supportive, assuming we keep it reasonable. I wouldn't want to go any further if you guys were screaming for our heads at the very thought. ;-) |
| rijelkentaurus Jan 03, 2007 4:44 PM EDT |
>The important thing right now is to know that many of our core seem fairly supportive, assuming we keep it reasonable. I wouldn't want to go any further if you guys were screaming for our heads at the very thought. ;-) Count me in. It makes sense to me to allow anyone to read the stories, but to require a subscription for me to rant about stupid crap no one wants to pay for. Er, or something like that. 8) |
| devnet Jan 03, 2007 4:47 PM EDT |
I'm in as well... |
| DarrenR114 Jan 03, 2007 5:08 PM EDT |
DC - LWN seems to have a model that works for them - What kind of payment methods were you considering? Then there is the issue of unique selling points: How would you differentiate LXer from say LWN, or Linux Gazette? As a non-paying subscriber, I like the news conglomeration from different sources, which is the main reason for my visiting LXer. Original content is good too - but what itch would you target for scratching? There are the flame-war fronts: KDE v GNOME VI v Emacs FSF v OSI RPM v DEB YUM v APT For opinion articles, I feel you should probably make allowances for counter-point pieces. I, for one, would love to find a column on programming the NXT from Linux. There is little in the way of documentation for using Lego::NXT, or iCommand from leJOS. (I'd write about these myself, but I can't afford quit my day job either.) Just some random thoughts from one freeloading reader. |
| Scott_Ruecker Jan 03, 2007 6:18 PM EDT |
Sorry to come in late on this one but I am of the same mind as Don. If I could do this full time or got paid at all I could devote more time to it and write more. A lot more. |
| jdixon Jan 03, 2007 8:13 PM EDT |
> The important thing right now is to know that many of our core seem fairly supportive, assuming we keep it reasonable. Well, as I noted, $25/year should be the top end. $5/year would have to be the low end, as less that that isn't worth your trouble to collect. $10-$20/year would seem to be the sweet spot. I won't be able to do anything till the Christmas bills and winter heating bills are paid off, so it'll be something this spring before I could swing any subscription. :( |
| Sander_Marechal Jan 03, 2007 9:41 PM EDT |
> This is not brain surgery. 40 subscribers @ $25 each will net you $1000. The question is, how many will subscribe. No, the question is: Is $1000 (or how many it is, depending on subscribers) enough to cut down on the day job and start adding original content so that other people except the LXer die-hards will take subscriptions as well. |
| hkwint Jan 06, 2007 6:33 AM EDT |
To be honest, I have my doubts about a paid model. Last time LXer wanted to 'earn' and grow much bigger, a lot went wrong, though we had an experienced EiC that knows a lot about how we could monetize LXer back then. We don't have that much writers at the moment, and we _really_ should find more people to write pieces for us. On the other hand, If I look at the amounts of time Scott, Don and Bob are spending on LXer, I think they deserve a serious reward for it. I came to LXer because it was free Linux news, and I think we should only ask a fee for 'premium content' (Almost makes me sick to use the word 'premium content', since I can only relate it to DRM, but I guess all it means are some nice 'features'). People should still be able to read Linux news gratis on our site, I'm convinced. Also, I think topical matters (dealing with current events) shouldn't be 'fee only', because they would be outdated by the time non-paying readers can read them, if we use the LWN subscription model. There are a lot of people that wrote pieces for us in the past, and most of them are gone. I don't even know why some of them went away, and where they did go. The last month, only Don and I created features. That's far too less to justify a paid subscription model. All our writers are very busy people, so on the other hand, if they got a reward, we might see much more articles contributed. However, we still got the chicken & egg problem. Maybe, we should tell all our (wannabe-)writers, they should first write a few stories without a reward, before actually making a chance of being one of our paid writers. Also, our site could probably distinguish from other sites, if we'd try to find writers from other continents to support, and take our globalization effort serious. There's a lot going on about open source in South-America, India and South-Africa, to name a view. Maybe we should try to find the sites where people from those countries look for FOSS news, and ask if they can help us. A nice thing is, since (AFAIK) people in the mentioned countries earn less (average), it could be cheaper to 'rent' a writer from one of those countries. Also in a practical sense, a paid model is rather hard looking at our global readership; not all readers have a credit card. For example, in my country, most people don't want to use a credit-card to buy stuff online, they are far too worried their credit-card number will be abused. For that reason I don't even _want_ to have a credit-card, and I'm not the only one. Moreover, we have a system that's far better than paying with credit-cards in my country, but I think it's unique for my country only. What I'm trying to say is, it differs from country to country, and a lot of our readers wouldn't be able / wouldn't be willing to buy a subscription if we don't give a lot of different ways to pay, we at least should have PayPal, which will cost us money. My position as a writer is rather difficult (live from an allowance, not allowed to earn), but I'll discuss that with Don. So, to give a summary, I see both problems and opportunities, though I remain a bit worried about our readers being angry. |
| Sander_Marechal Jan 07, 2007 3:40 PM EDT |
> There are a lot of people that wrote pieces for us in the past, and most of them are gone. I don't even know why some of them went away, and where they did go. Maybe you're been out-blogged. People may rather write for their own site then for someone else's. I must say I do that too, because a blog post linked from LXer will also drive some traffic to my other projects I host while a feature probably would not. |
| tuxchick Jan 07, 2007 4:52 PM EDT |
>To be honest, I have my doubts about a paid model. Last time LXer wanted to 'earn' and grow much bigger, a lot went wrong, though we had an experienced EiC that knows a lot about how we could monetize LXer back then. He also had an unhealthy addiction to sensationalism. Sites that live on sensationalism have to work a hundred times as hard to develop and retain a reader base. You don't get a loyal reader base that way- just people who need a fix. I like the current LXer very much. >a paid model is rather hard looking at our global readership.... I wouldn't worry too much about trying to be all global right away- baby steps are good. Do what you can when you can. There are two ways to support LXer that don't cost anything- submit stories, and write original articles. Perhaps this is an option that could be promoted more. |
| Scott_Ruecker Jan 07, 2007 6:20 PM EDT |
Quoting:There are two ways to support LXer that don't cost anything- submit stories, and write original articles. Perhaps this is an option that could be promoted more. LXer does promote submitting articles and news-wire items (right on the front page) and it is a good thing to mention in the context of this conversation. We receive and post them all the time. We are looking at this idea from every angle. There are a lot of things to consider and think about. We and the people who visit LXer hold us to a high standard which is the reason we are where we are in the first place. The last thing anyone wants to do is jeopardize that, in my time here I have seen LXer grow by leaps and bounds and I think it will continue to do so. I am sure that you all have noticed that there are more and more people participating in discussions yet the quality of the discussions has not decreased, which one would think might happen. I believe that the quality of the discussions has been and will continue to be central to our steady growth. The conundrum is this, if we could afford to spend more time on LXer we know that the sky would be the limit. LXer has created a unique place in the Linux Community and I know I am not alone in believing it has yet to reach its full potential in that role. Like Carla says, baby steps are good. Just look at this place..it keeps getting better and better! Isn't it great? :-) |
| dcparris Jan 07, 2007 9:20 PM EDT |
Yeah, we're still exploring. We'll see what happens. |
| hkwint Jan 08, 2007 3:37 AM EDT |
Quoting:it keeps getting better and better! I'd like to thank you for the work you are doing on LXer, Scott. You are one of the important reasons our site keeps getting better and better, so please know your work is appreciated (I know how much work it is to sift through the queues). About original articles: I saw our stats rising last month when I posted a few features, and especially when submitting them to other sites, so I'll try to continue that. I planned to write a new article, but there's this Sitecom Wireless adapter that I promised to fix under Gentoo (with a CVS-beta driver) first... (Is that a good excuse?) |
| techiem2 Jan 08, 2007 9:05 AM EDT |
Quoting:but there's this Sitecom Wireless adapter that I promised to fix under Gentoo (with a CVS-beta driver) first... (Is that a good excuse?) Only if you send me one to help you "test" it. :P I'd also like to thank all the great guys that keep all us lxer addicts coming back. Without you, what would I do all day? :) |
You cannot post until you login.