DV World.

I don't know David.

They did have a little stand at Video Forum yesterday but I don't know if it was there today.

When I found it I stopped to enquire why, in a recent group review of DV cameras; they didn't seem to make any substantial mention of compatibility with any DV editing equipment. In fact I don't believe they made any mention of their having connected the cameras up to any non-linear editing equipment at all.

I also thought it would be a good chance to ask why, in an article discussing a mainboard with integrated FireWire, didn't they mention what manufacturer, or type, of CPU the mainboard supported...

The polite and helpful girl who was there said that there were meant to be members of the Editorial team there but they didn't turn up and they didn't know where they were.

The Computer Video/DVdoctor stand was real busy with Crabtree, Pete Wells, Ray Liffen, our John Ferrick and Hendrik Dacquin, plus other members of the CV team, offering advice and answering questions in between holding some excellent Seminars & Technical Workshops.

I don't think that CV bought them out; I'm not sure what value there would be in that anyway.

DV world is still going as far as i know, i bought Feb edition recently.
Hop they are still around,as it's a great mag.
What gives you the impression that they are no longer ?

>What gives you the impression that they are >no longer ?

The fact that the mag is no longer in the shops - not in Smiths anyways.

Wavey

DV World is most definitely still around. I purchased the latest edition in Smiths this week. I dont know if Smiths are having distribution problems but Computer Video appeared, and was sold out, in one local branch before it even appeared on the shelf in another. Incidentally, DV World, has a fully functional 15 day version of EditStudio on the cover. Good bit of software if you have a powerful machine.

DVWorld moves from shelf to shelf in whsmiths .... usually find it faster in an independant's shop than the whsmith.

WHSmith only stock magazines with a better than average sales figure ..... they may not be selling enough to be bothered stocking them

I think this may partially prove a point
http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/7/16969.html

( thanks to dr solly for the pointer )

[This message has been edited by sepulcre (edited 18 February 2001).]

Lets get something straight about Future publications.

Very glossy, very impressive looking articles, good graphics that leave CV for dead.

Now look at the content, compare articles on the same kit or software.

You should see that CV is miles ahead in the quality of its articles.

So buy what you want:- glossy or accuracy, the choice as always is with the punter.

Try one of their other mags, one with a tutorial and CDROM, I have and generally they are very poor, I challenge anybody to say that they are anywhere near as good as those in CV!

I agree with Col, the discs that appear free on the cover of magazines are usually free because they are about 4 versions old or they are just infested like hell with bugs. CV magazine is great, I also think DV world is great, last issue had great interview with the guy that did Midge Ure's latest pop video for under £1000. Camcorder user and What camcorder are a pile of crap. Out of 129 pages in camcorder user 52 of them where adverts in last issue and they charge £3500 per page to advertise, i know because i was going to put a full page ad in myself, so work that out, thats £3500 multiplied by 52 not to mention the 65,000 coppies they sell every month at £2,95 serious monthly income considering the pittence that they pay there staff (about 25 people) somebody is getting rich out of the suckers that buy the rag.

[This message has been edited by Louis (edited 11 February 2001).]

Louis,
And how pages of adverts and repeated pages from previous months are there in CV, or more to the point how many pages of new stuff.
If i wanted to buy a camcorder i would look in Camcorder User mag, but i don't, my interest is in Computer video editing so i would hope that CV gives me what i want,but it doesn't on most occasions.
Its a tough world, but you have a choice, if you flick through the mag before you buy it you can see whether it's worth your cash or not.
Needless to say CV have not profitted from me in the last six months.

I wrote a semi autobigrahical story for Bob on my experiences with computers and video. The advice I gained from Magazines was used as a pivotal example of how not to make purchase decisions, this dated back to the early 1990s. It was based on experience with the Amiga and the related magazines which were not totally unconnected with Future publishing. Since buying a pc and reading Cv I feel that I am less likely to make the same mistakes but still keep my eyes open. I guess that the lawyers suggested to Bob that he didn't print my article.

Chris

Louis,

Are you having a laugh?

1/ Cam User does NOT charge anything like £3500 per page. I'd guess its "Book rate" - the theoretical page rate - is at least £1000 less than that - and probably a lot less still. The amount companies actually pay, being, I suspect seldom more than £1500 (and, for series bookings, very considerably less).

What I do know is that Cam User, What Cam and Computer Video get, on average, about twice (or more) what DV World gets per page - because no one wants to advertise in DVWorld, because, as a number of would-be advertisers told me only last week at Video Forum, they don't get any response from the ads in DVWorld.

The upshot of that is that DVWorld, which doesn't sell many copies (heck, they were touting free subs, not long ago), effectively will have a negative revenue, cos they can't be getting much money on sales or advertising.

And, sadly, since it is the advertising revenue that is most important, I can't see how DVWOrld can be kept going for much longer, especially with its parent company having major financial problems, as a result of poor profit figures.

But, please don't think I'm gloating - I think the market needs a serious rival to CV. It's just that DVWorld, as is, is not such a rival, and can't realistically, be expected to be here for long unless it bucks up the quality of its editorial and sells more copies - things which advertisers do know are critical.

2/ I can't believe that anyone to do with Cam User told you that the mag sells 65K units per month - no one who knows anything about publishing would believe that so there would be no point at all telling that to anyone. Cam User is a niche magazine and, like all niche mags, doesn't have sufficient retail distribution to stand a chance of selling that number of issues. Halve that and you're getting nearer, but would still be some way off I'd guess (and it is only a guess - I don't see their sales figures).

3/ Are you seriously suggesting that, as a reader, you judge a magazine on the number of advertising pages it has (or doesn't have), rather than the number and quality of editorial pages?

If so, you must despise the BIG PC mags, even the ones that are vital reading, such as PC Pro.

4/ The cover price you quote - £2.95 - is what the magazine sells for. It is NOT how much we receive. The distributor and newsagent each gets a cut, and on average, the publisher gets roughly 50% of the coverprice (this sort of stuff is all down to negotiations with the disti and the retailer).

5/ Yes, someone is getting a lot of money out of Cam user, What Camcorder and Computer Video - the shareholders of our parent company, Highbury House Publications - but it is NOWHERE near the amount you are suggesting. And, yes, the people who work on the mags would all like to get more money. However, while the people lower down the pecking order aren't exactly overpaid, editors can (if they are any good, and able to argue the toss with management) get something that is far more than a pittance.

And, since it doesn't take that long to pass up the ranks to become an editor, the situation is nowhere near as dire as you say.

That said, I DO think that most of our editorial staff should receive better salary and conditions packages - but I suspect that most editors, on most titles, in most companies believe that about their own publications.

6/ You talk about there being "25 people". Do you mean the total on one mag, two mags or three mags; and are you talking about staffers (ed and ad) or all the people whose names are credited?

These lists include our freelancers and all the people who have some partial responsibility for or input into the mags, including the md, the publishers, the ladies who work on sending out back issues etc - and whose workload is spread across multiple mags.

The full-time staff of CV consists of four editorial - me, Pete, Hugo Frazer (sub editor) and Marc Miller (designer); plus one advertising manager (with a further sales person joining us today - Monday). Cam User and What Cam have similar staffing.

Frankly, Louis, your comments are VERY wide of the mark.

Bob C

quote:Originally posted by Louis:
I agree with Col, the discs that appear free on the cover of magazines are usually free because they are about 4 versions old or they are just infested like hell with bugs. CV magazine is great, I also think DV world is great, last issue had great interview with the guy that did Midge Ure's latest pop video for under £1000. Camcorder user and What camcorder are a pile of crap. Out of 129 pages in camcorder user 52 of them where adverts in last issue and they charge £3500 per page to advertise, i know because i was going to put a full page ad in myself, so work that out, thats £3500 multiplied by 52 not to mention the 65,000 coppies they sell every month at £2,95 serious monthly income considering the pittence that they pay there staff (about 25 people) somebody is getting rich out of the suckers that buy the rag.

[This message has been edited by Louis (edited 11 February 2001).]

[This message has been edited by bcrabtree (edited 12 February 2001).]

Chris,

I hope there was a smiley missing there.

If not, how can you possibly say something like, "I guess that the lawyers suggested to Bob that he didn't print my article"?

There is NO other mag in the computer or consumer electronics field that is as utterly scathing about duff products and poorly behaved companies as CV is.

Just read the last few issues, for goodness sake.

Bob C

quote:Originally posted by ChrisG:
I wrote a semi autobigrahical story for Bob on my experiences with computers and video. The advice I gained from Magazines was used as a pivotal example of how not to make purchase decisions, this dated back to the early 1990s. It was based on experience with the Amiga and the related magazines which were not totally unconnected with Future publishing. Since buying a pc and reading Cv I feel that I am less likely to make the same mistakes but still keep my eyes open. I guess that the lawyers suggested to Bob that he didn't print my article.

Chris

-Without Prejudice-
Thats a mighty bean your drinking Bob, but generally fair commnet.

However whilst on the quality theme; as a one time subscriber to CV and now an occasional buyer Ive just flicked through the February edition and I have to say it's content light. If you take out the very beautiful but very large pictures and not counting CV on the net I'd say you have 25, 30 tops, sides of copy.

Thats over 10p a side!

Rob

Definitely a smiley or two Bob, it was intended as praise of your magazine to the detriment of others who had cost me money with pooor reviews in the past. If it didn't come across that way many apologies. If the irony was not glinting through the surface then maybe that is why I ain't a journalist.

Chris

I've always found CV to be up front and honest. To the point where some suppliers must have cringed for putting out dodgy gear. In fact I recently took out a subscription because of your approach and I couldn't find the mag every month!

However, when I picked up a recent copy and found out that the Pinnacle Studio DV plus had a terrific review even though it doesn't have the basic essential of Insert Edit, I began to ask questions on the validity of other comments made in the magazine.

Being a computer expert is only half the story of computer editing. Does anyone at CV actually make videos?

If ANYONE making videos out there were to go out and buy a piece of kit which doesn't allow the basics to be performed ie Audio Dub and Insert Edit then they would be wasting their time and money and would be severely disappointed with this restrictive piece of rubbish. The requirements for editing videos are the same whether it's linear or non-linear - just the kit's different.

I edit using EZDV after seeing it at a friend's house. It went in my PC without any problems. Edits what I want to edit and does what it is supposed to do - make editing easier! As a result of this, three other members of our video club are also considering purchasing it - I'm only glad we were able to save them from the Studio DV Plus!

So come on BobC, we like you getting at those dodgy suppliers but speak to the guys at Cam User to find out what it is we really need for editing.

ps What ever happened to Doc Sol? Disappeared without a trace............

Must admit when I read the crit that CV gave to a Pinnacle product Studio DV+, I thought that Bob was away on holiday again to Greenland, or perhaps he was on valium, or was it "Sunday Night at the London Palladium"?

I learned about 30 years ago, "Never get into a knobs and tits comparison with you competitor".

If I can tell a little story here. Cousin Chris from Australia is Head Pastry Chef at a 5-star hotel in London, therefore he does the duty roster, therefore he rotas his own leave days as 4 or 5 sequential.

He wants to visit every European capital so he gets on the net and bucketshops the cheapest airfare.

The other week, en route to Madrid, sitting 3-across, with a "smart-ass" Cockney in the middle, Cockie asks window-seat what she had paid for her return ticket. She replies £250 or so.

Cockie asks his Antipodean cousin, (actually my cousin) what he had paid and Chris says, "None of your business". Cockie is now double-cockie and says, "I paid £130 - it's great the deals that you can get if you know where to go, come on Oz, what did you pay?"

Personally, I thought that Chris handled it well when he said, "The lady from the North thought that what she paid was good value otherwise she wouldn't have paid that price. You obviously thought that your price was good value or you wouldn't be here now. I paid £35 and it was good value to me!!!!!!".

Now why are we talking about DVWorld on CV's web-site.

Get a life BC!

I have been talking about DVWorld on this site because i find it amazing that a magazine which claims to answer users problems and inform them, has such an arrogant answer when corrections should be made. 'we all make mistakes ' is the classic answer from them..... yes we do , but , we don't get paid to get it right and if we do ... we fix it.

Some people out there will buy equipment etc on that magazines review ..... they have made a few blunders and can't even get definitions right on 10 year old linear editting statements.

Sorry if this sounds off , but i make my living from video in education ..... some of our students actually believe everything they read ..... i have to tidy up after these problems.

------------------
Gary MacKenzie
Audio Visual Technician

I think it is highly unprofessional of Computer Video/DV Doctor's staff to discuss a rival publication on their forum. You can think what you want of DV World, but you should not make comments that will prejudice readers against it.

Umm..well what if we were talking about a book perporting to explain video editing. Would CV be justified in giving a bad review? I think everyone is entitled to point out the shortcomings of equipment, software or publications. DVWorld can give ComputerVideo a bad review on their web site if they like.

Paul

Thanks for voicing your opinion Merton, I sure wish you would endorse letting me do likewise.

------------------
Paul

Paul Dutton
DVdoctor R&D

Merton,

There is NOTHING unprofessional about criticising a duff product - whether it is a camcorder, an editing card or an eding magazine.

What genuinely IS unprofessional is for a magazine, such as DVWorld, to claim to help people make wise buying choices, and then totally fail to do so, by having wrong, or incomplete information.

Here's what DVWorld's website says about the magazine,

"DV World is the definitive authority on software, hardware and peripherals. The accurate, informative and balanced reviews are written by people who have been in the DV industry since its conception. They combine their technical knowledge with the working practices you'll all find common in DV filmmaking, meaning there's only one magazine to read for the clearest DV picture..."

Pull the other one, matey!

It might have been more diplomatic of Paul Dutton not to comment, since DVdoctor could, conceivably, have wished to try creating a relationship with DVWorld similar to that that exists with Computer Video.

I think the fact that Paul chose to comment should actually be commended, since it shows that he puts the truth before his and DVdoctor's commercial benefit.

That said, I really can't see DVWorld being around for long anyway those readers and advertisers who have not already seen through the magazine will do so soon, I'm sure.

Bob C

quote:Originally posted by scottishcam:
I've always found CV to be up front and honest. To the point where some suppliers must have cringed for putting out dodgy gear. In fact I recently took out a subscription because of your approach and I couldn't find the mag every month!

However, when I picked up a recent copy and found out that the Pinnacle Studio DV plus had a terrific review even though it doesn't have the basic essential of Insert Edit, I began to ask questions on the validity of other comments made in the magazine.

Being a computer expert is only half the story of computer editing. Does anyone at CV actually make videos?

If ANYONE making videos out there were to go out and buy a piece of kit which doesn't allow the basics to be performed ie Audio Dub and Insert Edit then they would be wasting their time and money and would be severely disappointed with this restrictive piece of rubbish. The requirements for editing videos are the same whether it's linear or non-linear - just the kit's different.

I edit using EZDV after seeing it at a friend's house. It went in my PC without any problems. Edits what I want to edit and does what it is supposed to do - make editing easier! As a result of this, three other members of our video club are also considering purchasing it - I'm only glad we were able to save them from the Studio DV Plus!

So come on BobC, we like you getting at those dodgy suppliers but speak to the guys at Cam User to find out what it is we really need for editing.

ps What ever happened to Doc Sol? Disappeared without a trace............

You're right. I gave StudioDV plus a good review, and it doesn't do insert editing.

What could have come over me?

Let's have a look at the main competing entry-level editors for windows:

Ulead Video Studio 4 - Assemble editing only - no insert editing.

MGI Video Wave 4 - No insert editing there either.

That said, Studio does offer draft capture, batch re-capture and real-time software previewing that the others don't. It's also a beautifully designed and genuinely intuitive program.

That, coupled with the benefit of analogue output makes Studio DV plus a very good buy at an entry level price point.

Things are changing, however. iMovie 2 for the Mac offers far more in the way of editing tools, and we're about to see some huge improvements to Ulead Video Studio with Version 5. All this will mean that Pinnacle needs to update Studio, and the result will, I'm sure, be quite special.

As for EZDV, I also seem to remember raving about that one too. If I'm correct, the main reason for my excitement was down to its good, no-nonsense editing tools - insert editing in particular.

Cheers,

Pete

Beautifully put Paul. Minimum wordage, maximum clout. Less is more.

Cheers Tom.

Regards,

------------------
Paul

Paul Dutton
DVdoctor R&D

I think it is rather amazing that discussing a rival magazine is unprofessional and yet stating that you are experts in the field and giving out inaccurate and misleading information is not.

I live and learn

Regards

Lui

I have to add, that although everyone is entitled to discuss what they wish, the underlying effect, to me anyway, is that for DV world to be commented on by their competition, they obviously _are_ considered competition and a significant threat to CV.

Why doesn't the BBC slag me off? Cos they haven't even heard of me, never mind consider me to be competition. I would be way flattered to be mentioned by the BBC in any context!

I must say, that I think it ought to be beneath the CV management to run down a competitor, but it seems to me that CV is obviously a small volume (relatively) publication, and they need all the sales and advertisers they can get.

Are we going to get into slagging off the BBC?

Now there is an organisation that needs to get into the real worls with regard to cost effective activities. As a contractor if we operated in the manner of the Beeb no one would use us we would just be to expensive and just as off the mark reagaring productions and target audience as they are.

There are Millions out here outside the
12 to 35 age group who get nothing from the Beeb except for the Wildlife documentaries

quote:Originally posted by ChrisBitz:
I must say, that I think it ought to be beneath the CV management to run down a competitor, but it seems to me that CV is obviously a small volume (relatively) publication, and they need all the sales and advertisers they can get.

It's strange how myself and I am sure many readers of CV don't see it that way, in fact I applaud people like Bob Crabtree, Paul Dutton, Pete Wells and others that are involved in CV magazine as they are not just interested in the money and a 9 to 5 job, but genuinely want to help fellow enthusiasts in the Video Editing world with their problems and do everything possible to make sure that their readers don’t make expensive mistakes through bad advice and inaccurate information.

I certainly know who I would trust for advice.

Regards

Lui

Speajing as one who has yet to see DVWorld, I'm not prepared to make any comment on it, but I fully support anyone who has in making comments. Freedom of speech is pretty sacred hereabouts, provided we stick within the laws of the land on libel and sedition. It seems to me that CV is entitled to comment on any product or service within the interest remit of its audience, and that includes magazines. In exactly the same way, DVWorld can do the same. Competition is usually healthy for all concerned.

I thought it time I got myself a copy of that thar DV World. Issue 5, Feb 2001 tests the Panasonic 3 chip MX300. This ultimate capture device is given two pages, four photos, a wet writeup and 9/10. It's said to have a 1x zoom - a typo I know, but come on, let's mistake the battery type if mistakes are to be made.

This camcorder is criticised for having no built in flash gun(!) No mention is made (even in passing) about the new optical image stabiliser, a selling point that Panasonic surely need after the dismal EIS fitted to the 100 and 110.

This camera is compared (in the text and the "other Options") with the Sony PC110. What?? I blink thrice and refocus; haven't they had the two cameras side by side, and haven't they heard of the TRV900? It's 250 quid cheaper - surely worth a look?

And are we going nuts? How can you test a camera and not even devote one of the photographs to an actual image the camera has produced? As the words say: "Another Sony beating feature is the still picture quality". Excuse me, but hasn't the MX300 been designed as a movie camera that happens to take stills? Let's not loose track of the design intent here, guys.

All in all a feeble, wimpy "test". I know and appreciate that editorial direction will say 2 pages max, but representing a near two grand camera in this wet way colours the whole magazine.

tom.

Tom,

Did you notice how carefully they tested the camcorder with DV editing systems?

Pete

Thanks for the support guys, you really are righteous people…

Y’know Computer Video magazine has its faults and as far as I can see every single one of them is directly attributable to the publishers unwillingness to finance Bob’s vision in earnest.

Although I know a lot of you do, because he has gone to every length to make him self available at every feasible opportunity, for those of you that don’t know Crabtree personally my experience is that this is not some sort of crusade to satisfy some egoistic motive, it is just that he is a genuinely helpful guy. Whether he knows you or not, whether you need technical support or have been fleeced by some supplier or whether your car breaks down in the rain in rush hour traffic and screws up his whole evening in the process, he is there; most often at his direct cost, to try and help out, and not just after the event. On a personal basis I have also found he is constantly looking out for your best interests.

Having dealt with mainstream and IT specific journalists for a lot of my professional life what endeared me to him was his honesty. He is open about his limitations and when he is in doubt or just plain wrong he wastes no time in putting his hands up to say so. I tell you now, CV doesn’t always reach the right conclusions but every word that Bob Crabtree and Peter Wells write in that magazine is exactly what they believe. Furthermore although they don’t always get it right believe me they have tried their best, more often than not working on their own time every night of the week.

Yeah just like me they’ve got faults aplenty (some of which you just don’t want to know about! Well you probably do, but I’m not telling here… Email me privately and I’ll give you the skinny on *that* action!) but you know…, you know exactly where you stand with them and this is directly reflected in the copy that you read.

This might seem like over the top support and for the cynical they may say ‘yeah but Paul you’re a contributor’ and yes I am; I am also a person who believes in personal commitment above damn near everything *but* anyone who knows me is in no doubt that I tell it exactly like it is.

I haven’t written this to show you how great an evangelist I can be for Bob and Pete but to provide a bit more insight into why I believe there is a value in what you read in Computer Video magazine that you just can’t buy anywhere else.

Part of the reason you don’t see more stuff from me in CV is that I find it difficult to put my name to something that I know does not cover every angle. Sure not everyone is technical and probably won’t see the limitations but I don’t want someone who does have a detailed understanding to ever be in doubt that I have not considered everything; for those that wouldn’t know differently I still want to give you 100%, especially as you might make a purchasing decision based upon something that I have tested and reported upon.

Blending perfectionism with commercial realities is a battle I’ve not always won.

Some months ago I failed to deliver some copy to Bob on Ultra-ATA/100 RAID and I apologise to those of you that were looking out for that, but I really couldn’t deliver it as a half-assed compromise and if I had worked within the parameters that were available to me and met that deadline then you would have read something that could not be relied upon. Again I apologise to Bob and to you (and to the hardware manufacturers involved) maybe he’ll pass that ball back to me; if he does I promise you’ll get a definitive guide on what really delivers for your money.

Hopefully you’ll understand that I am passionately scathing about the dilettantes that masquerade as professionals in all areas of IT, whether they be mainstream or NLE systems dealers, video editing and capture card manufacturers that do not give you the product support they promised, or publications that purport to give you reliable advice.

So despite the lack of investment, it is the commitment and expertise of the individuals I have mentioned (along with several that I have not) that in this fishpond, makes Computer Video magazine the best your money can buy anywhere. Simple as it is.

This is the reason DVdoctor chooses to support Computer Video magazine with these message boards, technical equipment and resources, promotional activities and blood, sweat, swearing and tears.

If DV World magazine was everything that their website purports they are then we’d be supporting them too.

------------------
Paul

Paul Dutton
DVdoctor R&D

Paul,

The cheque is in the post.

;)

Oh, and you forgot to tell them that Pete and I are both happily married cat-lovers who started our academic lives as biologists (well, it makes it a more well-rounded story if you include those sorts of facts).

You also forgot to tell them that I am very handsome (if you ignore the pot-belly, squint, greying hair, and gappy smile), whereas Pete is right ugly, even if he is half my age, straight-eyed, and fully toothed. Mind you, he's bald as a bald-thing that's been taking hair-reducing tonic for years.

Bob C

quote:Originally posted by bcrabtree:
...Pete is right ugly, even if he is half my age, straight-eyed, and fully toothed. Mind you, he's bald as a bald-thing that's been taking hair-reducing tonic for years.

You obviously don't know about the thick forest of dreadlocks on my back.

Pete

Just as a matter of interest:

This thread, and the one headed "See you at the Computer Video stand at Video Forum? You know it makes sense!" appear to have more messages between them than the entire DVWorld forum can muster.

Statistically significant?

Almost certainly.

Bob C

Well, you know, I'm a pretty straight kinda guy - would I mislead you?

As I was saying to Cherry (actually her name is Norma, but we call her Cherry because she's always picking on other people) last night, when it comes to the crunch, our voters with their pension money (well, they're actually voting with their pocket money) really will stand by us.

It's easy to be in opposition (or let's face it, to be in power), because no matter what we tell them, they'll lap it up! Er, that's if they like us! Er, well any way, we have more readers than they have! Er, and we're preaching to the converted! Er, hasn't Melinda Messenger got bigger knockers than us and it hasn't hurt her has it? (Apologies to all female members of the messageboard)

Hasn't this all got a bit silly?????????

Time to draw this one to a close chaps. Alan's right, we're getting silly. Not that I mind, but it's taking too long to download the thread here at home where I have to pay to do this.

Well it realy does sound like DV World has you worried, if they realy are so small and insignificant then why does everyone at CV keep harping on about them. By the way I happened to discover DV World thanks to this site and i think it is a realy good read, great articals, reviews, minimum ads etc etc.
One more thing, all this slagging off about other magazines (that you are obviosly jelouse as hell of) makes all you guys at CV come across as a realy dislikable, unpleasent and disrespectfull bunch of plebs on power trips. Try growing up a bit guys and stop letting the (small) competition get to you.
I bet you even answer this with some clever or smarmy remark.

[This message has been edited by Louis (edited 19 February 2001).]

WHHHAAAAAA!!! mommy that nasty man is saying bad things about as WHHHAAAAAA!!! (jumps up and down stamping feet and crying)

Regards

Lui

Also get a spellchecker, you're spelling is awfull.

I love the "catch-all" ending in your posting that tries to put us in a lose-lose situation.

If we don't respond, your comments go unchallenged; if we do respond, we are being clever or smarmy. Oh, and don't you mean smart-arse, not smarmy?

quote:Originally posted by Louis:
Louis,

I bet you even answer this with some clever or smarmy remark.

[This message has been edited by Louis (edited 19 February 2001).]

Oh, and Pierluigi, your spelling of awfull is awful.

Oh (2), Alan - now you have the perfect excuse to get ADSL! Giant threads such as this one come over in a few seconds.

Bob C

[This message has been edited by bcrabtree (edited 21 February 2001).]

Yet another child !

yet another child !

yet another child

Louis,

Shouldn't you have set "Echo off"

quote:Originally posted by bcrabtree:

Oh, and Pierluigi, your spelling of awfull is awful.

Bob C

It was intentional

Regards

Lui

quote:Originally posted by Louis:
Yet another child !

Ah I see the old "I have no witty or clever comeback so I'll just repeat myself until they just give up out of frustration and I win by default." response.

Ever thought of going into politics?

Regards

Lui

I bought a copy of DV World just to see what all the fuss is about.

It's a bit shallow isn't it?

All gloss, all style-over-content. Not even witty like other Future titles, PC Format etc.

Looks like they are going for the Snowboarder/Pepsi Max/Titanium Mac Powerbook market. Not the balding, anorak clad members of Anytown Film and Video Society.

Hopefully DV World is just a passing fad.

They seem to have a bit of clout though, I get the impression that they wouldn't have trouble getting any kind of kit in for review.

Chris,

The companies who supply the kit don't know any better.

Despite the fact that Future is giving away subs and selling ads dirt cheap, the companies seem to think that:

a/ They'll get any easy ride (in that, one regard, they may be right)

b/ They are reaching an upmarket audience (when they aren't reaching any audience as best as I can tell).

c/ The mag has some credibility

Bob C

I don't see why we need to get all excited about competition. That's the way things are done these days; competition either increases the market size or forces the weakest to the wall. Only time will tell, but there's no point in getting all worked up about it, CV has a competitior and seems to be maintaining its position ahead of the field. That seems a healthy situation to me, provided we're magnanimous enough to clear up the mess left behind by others (I've spent enough years doing that so far, I see no reason to stop yet ).

I'm guessing that Bob's original reason for running this thread was to see what Computer Video readers thought about the competition, knowing what we like or dislike about rival mags can only be a good thing for improving CV surely.

I'm also in absolutely no doubt that someone connected to DV World will read this forum, and perhaps even post the odd comment, maybe with really bad spelling to make them look less like a professional writer.......

Watch out, there are spies about....

I'm sure Bob has only two real worries:

1 that CV circulation may drop if the competition gets ahead

2 that competition may give false or misleading information

Time (and Bob's bank account) hold the answer to the first, and we, here, provide the answer to the second.

------------------
alan@mugswellvillage.freeserve.co.uk. Delete village for a spam-free diet.

Actually, it wasn't Bob who ran this thread, it was me.

Wavey.

P.S. Who is fed up of it now.

Sorry Dave, it's ages since I looked at page one and I'd forgotten.

Was there once an earlier DVW thread when that magazine was first launched?

Apparently Future's latest title is going to be called "What Bandwagon", with pages of advice to would-be magazine publishers trying to get a foothold in niche markets, mp3, dvd etc.

Lui, your spellchecker is awful if it includes "awfull"

[This message has been edited by Alan Francis (edited 23 February 2001).]

I know this is now an "old" topic, and that it's probably uncool to add to it at this stage, but speaking as a newbie, (who after 1 year reading the mag is only now beginning to find out what he doesn't know, let alone commencing the actual learning process), I find my self agreeing passionately that you should tell it like it is.
In law there is a concept known as negligent misstatement which crucifies those who hold themselves up as experts, in the full knowledge that others might act on the B*** S*** being propounded, masquerading as fact.

More power to your elbow B.C. Even though I am not big into kicking someone when they are down, I am even less into spending the hard earned on someone elses badly researched recommendations. Like others on this thread I have now had a few dealings with B.C. by email and despite my evident inexperience he has been unfailingly helpful.

Peter,

Here rests my infamous spelling mistake

[This message has been edited by Dave Currie (edited 28 March 2001).]

Did you mean AWFUL?
i.e. not AWFULL (sic)

Use a dictionary - NOT a spell-checker - if you can't spell (all right...alright..write or wright!!)

Dave C
ps OK Bob I admit it - I've lost the plot too!

That's AWFUL

Memo to self:

"Dave,
Please engage your brain before having a go at someone about spelling...otherwise you will look a right smart-arsed twit."

"OK brain - will do!"

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Bob...
Now I remember what subs do!

Just read all these messages...Very enjoyable...however, I was looking for some nle support. However after all this I think I am gonna go ask the man at Dixons!!!

Only joking...keep up the good flaming...I mean work

p.s. I subscribe to both

I grabbed my work bag on the way out the door today to find that my beloved cat had chosen to pee all over it during the night.

That bag contained press releases, notes, and a CD I'm rather fond of.

Fortunately, all the important stuff came out untouched by Bucket's toxic emissions. The full extent of the damage was seemingly taken by a surprisingly absorbant copy of DV World.

Well, it's good for something after all!

Pete

Pete,

A cat knows a "litter" tray when it sees one! Better to pee on cue...than on you!

Dave

I know when I have added something meaningful when it turns the topic towards cats piss!

I can take a hint.

Peter

quote:Originally posted by Peter Golden:
I know when I have added something meaningful when it turns the topic towards cats piss!

I can take a hint.

Peter

Peter!

Please don't say 'piss' on the messageboards!!!

Pete

I wish I could CLOSE THIS THREAD!