Author:
madcows
<
derp
>
68.61.207.71
Use
this link
if you want to link to this message and its entire thread of discussion.
Date:
10/1/2010 8:10:33 PM
Subject:
RE: I saw Robin Hood
I just got a stash of Scientific American from the mid 1960's in the mail. Unlike your Robin Hood, there are so many great things about the print, and completely un-animated images.
To start, of the 14 issues I own, they all have the same cover format with almost all of them containing well detailed, artistically-interpreted hand drawn color image pertaining to their main article enclosed in a simple white border along the top, right and bottom. Of the several articles I have read, The layouts are uncluttered, and free of potentially confusing typos. Part of this is no doubt due to their use of now obsolete printing technology, but I would guess mostly because of the attention to detail by the staff. Also, there are no advertisements disguised as some sort of review the seems so commonplace among current magazines. While I'm still on the subject of advertisements, I can't help but to smirk at some of the old IBM, NCR, etc. ads touting their computational prowess, or "timeshare" options.
Just flipping through them is like being in a time machine. Some of the knowledge is now practically useless or disproven, while other now mature knowledge which is taken for granted was at it's incubation stage. And still other information seems to have been lost in time.
If there is any similarity between the magazines and Robin Hood, it's that they stink. Yeah, they smell like old.
