Good luck with the changes - they sound exciting.
And keep up the good work.
We launched as an email newsletter in 1994, hit the web four years later and are now a multinational media entity operating on three continents. Millions of people read us every month, which is humbling. We may have missed our birthday, but did do some proper “we've turned 21 and that means we're probably quite grown up now” …
So, to summarise the changes, you've gone all corporate on us? The one thing most people come here for is that you aren't corporate, you're a bit disrespectful, a lot cynical, but now you want to throw those USPs out of the window, take down the red flock curry house wall paper, and paint it all beige. This of course is consistent with the "over-boarding" of several popular contributing authors over the last couple of years.
It's as if you were going to sell out. But who's going to hang around to read if the Reg is reduced to a collection of dull-as-death articles on storage, containerisation, flash, storage, containerisation, storage, flash, more flash.....?
Absolutely this. There were indeed several changes recently and I can't remember a single positive one. I also can't help but feel that you guys are seriously misjudging (and methodically abandoning) the strengths of your "brand" but hey - it's not my ship to wreck. I can get "grown up" and politically correct news coverage on whatever I want anywhere else on the net - that's not what I come here for. And if you're reporting on homeopathy, I fully expect you to mock it into oblivion and back, "science" or not. Oh, and the dockerdockerdockerflashdocker thing is dead on - do people really read all that stuff?
DropBear, please be assured we'll be "Biting The Hand That Feeds IT" as ever. And while the former London Homoeopathic Hospital is but a 10-minute trot away from our London offices, our Laystall St team won't be looking to diluted flower essences to mend our ills... though of course we'll be happy to refer the BOFH's victims there.
"So homeopathy will be exactly as effective as actual medicine, which some insane people will regard as proof of something."
Then there are the people who will try to convince us that even that is not final - and that there is even physical resurrection.
I have been a regular (daily) reader of The Reg for many years, commenting now and then. I did notice a shift in style over the past few months, and was disappointed with the loss of some excellent writers.
Not to put too fine a point on it, I do not like the changes. In fact, I have been considering removing the register from my browser. If this ridiculous "grown-up" thing continues then That's what i will do.
The Register has always been the most "grown-up" of any tech site on the web, and especially "grown-up" in its "no bullshit" approach to the industry.
One tech principle that seems to be forgotten in all of this is: If it ain't broke then don't fix it. get the good writers back, dump the politically-correct "grown-up" BS, and bring back the old register. I don't know what you expect to accomplish with these changes, but it certainly will not be the retention of loyal readers.
As above... I read El Reg because I liked it *as it was*. I too have noticed the change, though it's nothing I could have put my finger on.
I see that my posting rate has dropped in line with my appreciation of recent changes and my eagerness to read.
So thanks for what you have been, but it'd be rather nice if you could return to the status quo ante. Perhaps you need one of these -->
@ The Dude
I agree with you 100%. The last 4-6 months or so, The Reg seems to be going to the Crapper.
I've been "reading" posts for the past 3 or 4 years or so. As of late, they do suck. This is coming from a has-been, years ago, old fart, that's trying to keep up of what's "in", and why where because and the WTF of IT in the wacky-world of the US.
El. Reg. - PLEASE stop the cut-n-past from the "conservationist" It may be a Brit rag/tech/sci type of mag/site (honestly don't know), but atleast give us YOUR spin on it!
Exactly so - El Reg is shifting away from the demographic of us whingeing old gits, no doubt in an attempt to stay relevant and appeal to advertisers. My own comment activity has dwindled of late, due to fewer contentious articles and decreasing levels of good comment. I've been visiting El Reg for around 10 years and the recent changes have me worried: who are the new owners?
Apparently, getting rid of Worstall and Page are part of the "improvements" - which doesn't promise anything good for anything else that the Reg is also going to label an "improvement".
Is that like when you see 'new and improved recipe' on a sticker on your favourite thing from the supermarket, which guarantees that 'new' = 'cheaper' and 'improved' = 'worse than before'?
"It's as if you were going to sell out."
I don't wake up in the morning to write and edit boring articles. There is scandal, death, cockups, lies, and firings every step of the way in technology - that's what we want to uncover. The Reg started out as the Private Eye of IT and that's what we're gonna be.
Of course, we're still going to have fun with headlines, and of course, we're still going to stand up to corporate goliaths and governments.
PS: no, we're not doing video reports (TTBOMK) because most of us have faces for radio, as they say.
I can't say that I'll miss Worstall. For those who liked his content, he'll still have his other hangouts.
And to a lesser extent the same goes for Lewis. He'll be OK.
In fact I've only just noticed (prompted by comments on another article) the absence of those two, and on arriving here I see Weekend Edition has gone too. I'm afraid I can't even remember what was in it (did it include Dabbsy? I'd miss him a bit).
I haven't read the remaining comments after yours so apologies if this is already covered (hmmmm, how about a multipage search facility at some point?)
I had however already noticed that I'm liking much of what I'm seeing from Alex Martin in recent months (is the J important? Will I be banned for life for omitting it?)
That's my viewpoint. Amazingly, other commentards and other readers may vary. How are you going to find out (ASAP) what's working and what's not?
If you're planning to change things, can I humbly suggest that during A Period Of Transition, you reintroduce Rate This Article, so you get rapid feedback on what's popular and what's not?
Please would you also consider re-introducing proper timestamps instead of (or as well as) the "1 week" or whatever ridiculousness which was introduced in a previous round of "improvements".
A belated but sincere Happy New Year.
"We're also conscious that the web can now host any form of content, but we rely heavily on the written word."
Please, $DEITY, don't start doing video articles, at least not without a transcript. I can scan a page of text and get the pertinent points from it far more easily than I can watch a video.
I come here for the snarky humour, commentard flamewars and the fact there's stuff to _read_ in actual articles rather than tiny bits of text introducing videos etc.
I'm one of the few that use the mobile site in preference even on the desktop as it is far more text based. I appreciate I'm probably in a tiny minority in these days though.
Will continue to visit, whatever changes you make, but whether that's more or less often remains to be seen.
"Please, $DEITY, don't start doing video articles,"
On a similar note, please ask your editors/subs to choose the option to NOT fill the screen with a "hero" image if they can't use a directly relevant one. As IT Pros we really don't need a huge photo of an RJ45 plug to introduce an article on networking. We can get that from the BBC news web site.
This would have been nice 2 months ago when you made the changes.
Frankly as it stands El Reg is currently a less interesting place than it was 2 months ago.
Whilst I applaud the intent and look forward to the change in direction I think you have set yourselves a big task which is made harder by the fact it seems you threw the old stuff out without having any new stuff in place.
Right now the Reg of today is a more boring place than it was 2 months ago - so you have set yourselves a fairly big task to even get back to where you were. I've even had to slink off to the inquirer the odd time to get my cynical tech fix.
Snigger, yes, that is very amusing. But I think Gordon 10 has it right there, it's the end of the Weekend Edition.
There's also an amusing difference between the active and passive to be noted, between "were moved on" and "decided to move on".
Getting rid of Page was something El Reg had to do, if it was to retain any credibility. He was using it to push his ideological agenda about climate change, which was ludicrously anti-science and completely undermined every other science or technology based article which was published here.
As part of your New Year's resolution, I hope you give that issue a wide berth.
Page had it exactly right on the "climate change" nonsense. Seeing the register bend over for this scam is a serious disappointment. Obviously, the pressure is on - I get it - but jettisoning a thoughtful skeptic with excellent writing skills is simply not the way to keep loyal readers. And where the hell is Alistair Dabs anyway?
The Dude: "Seeing the register bend over for this scam is a serious disappointment"
Remind me what the IT angle was on his sermons from the mount?
Or why, if there was some tech aspect to the sermon at all, it was acceptable for his beliefs to always override honest, accurate critical reporting? Although it was always entertaining tracking down real expert commentary when he used to spout BS about naval affairs ;)
Paul Shirley: RE:"The tech angle"
The Tech Angle of the thermageddon scam is well-known. The entire ponzi-esque house of cards is predicated on computer models that are inadequate to the task, possibly even falsified to maintain a constant flow of government dosh. Skeptics and critics are routinely censored, silenced, 'moved on' and generally given short shrift by the likes of you. When I see people being censored and silenced in that manner then I smell a rat.
Having been a programmer working on such models in a past life, I know exactly what kind of 'science' goes into them. They are interesting and I enjoyed working on them, but they are simply not reliable, and far too dependent upon various "constants" discovered in a researcher's arse. Setting government policy and taxing people or transferring wealth between nations, on such unreliable models, is madness.
There's also the general science angle. There's a quite good description of Köppen climate classification here:
Those who "believe in climate change" are usually abysmally ignorant of the science. If you peruse the maps maintained by Peel, M. C., Finlayson, B. L., and McMahon, T. A. at the University of Melbourne, you will see that Tasmania is currently Temperate/mesothermal, dry winters, warmest month averaging below 22 °C, but with at least four months averaging above 10 °C (Cwb). A century ago, before "unprecedented climate change" it was also Cwb. If it's the same now as a century ago, how can it be an "unprecedented change"?
Three thousand years ago, the northernmost forest limit throughout North America, Europe and Asia was hundreds of kilometres north of the present. See Climate, vegetation and forest limits in early civilized times by HH Lamb, Phil Trans R Soc Lond A 276, 195-230 (1974). This would appear to indicate much warmer climates in those regions than present, yet we are told that it's warmer now than in "millions of years".
Additionally, I can find no mention whatsoever in the many tertiary-level texts on climate in my collection that include any mention of CAGW theory other than a passing reference to some people "believe" in it.
Lewis Page was terrible. Utter bias from someone without any qualification in the area. He was ok talking about defence stuff, but bad on anything else. Remember him saying how well the nuclear power stations were holding up in Japan following the tsunami? Laughable!
The positive to his articles was that I often clicked on them to see how biased and ridiculous he was going to be on that day. The negative was that it made The Register look like an amateur propaganda blog from a university politics student.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019