I agree on that.
I think it can gratly help increasing the "market value" of a writer who publishes in this mag.
Unfortunately I didn't have the time to write an article some years ago when I was asked by Martin Eccles.
Another advantage of mags like that is that you can publish ideas that you have and that you intentionally want to release into the public domain. I assume as soon as it is published in such a mag it is definitely public domain and therefore regarded as prior art and thus not patentable anymore. I doubt if this is also true for boards like this.
Regards
Charles
phase_accurate said:
Definitely. After you publish in EW, no judge will ever agree that it wasn't prior art.
Jan Didden
In the glory days EWW used to pay £100 per published page, maybe more, but that's what I got for my last article. Payment at that level gave you some incentive to write. Academic journals have never paid for papers as the contributors need the publicity to fuel their careers - maybe EWW is getting delusions of grandeur! Its a great pity but I reckon the days of both EWW and AudioXpress are numbered - I subscribe to both and will probably continue until the bitter end. The only thriving electronics magazine that I know of is Silicon Chip in Australia. I subscribe to that as well. It amazes me that such a small population can host such a well produced magazine with plenty of editorial content. Its a little bit lightweight for my taste but with some more international support who knows?
Yep it's gone so far downhill it's about to land on the sea bed!
I have copys from the late '70s that are 3 times as thick as the recent ones and have much better articles. When I saw thar they were reviewing computer games I thought "is that the best April fool they can do?".....it was not a joke....I am not laughing and will probably not renew my subscription.
I agree about George Galloway Mikak! make him primeminister!
I have copys from the late '70s that are 3 times as thick as the recent ones and have much better articles. When I saw thar they were reviewing computer games I thought "is that the best April fool they can do?".....it was not a joke....I am not laughing and will probably not renew my subscription.
I agree about George Galloway Mikak! make him primeminister!
Just seen the posts about prior art and patents. Not sure what you say is true janneman. I can remember seeing a Circuit Idea in 1974 which embodied all of the ideas incorporated in the "Alexander" power amp. I understand this topology was successfully patented by Analog Devices. Maybe there was a difference in legal terms but there wasn't from an engineering standpoint. There's just so much information in so many languages that patent examiners cant really be certain to have covered all of the bases, no matter how hard they try.
chalky said:
"Successfully patented" means it stood up in court against a challenger. That hasn't happened yet afaik. Anybody can patent anything, the real test comes in court. That will happen if the stakes are high enough. For the Alexander amp, there aren't any stakes. Who cares? If that sounds a bit ironic, sorry, that's the real world out there.
Jan Didden
It is indeed true. This is public disclosure. Is an examiner likely to find it? No. A patent might issue. Is it likely to be found in the event of litigation? Absolutely. The patent will not hold up.
I have the conditions for Elektor and they aren't very attractive. I don't see it attractive at least.Samuel Jayaraj said:
Mike, if you really want money for your work, you could publish a pdf with password.
Why don't you first deside WHY you want to write? Do you want money or be famous or...?mikeks said:Folks will recall that i promised to write a simple article on amp. design here:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=484688#post484688
I contacted Svetlana Josifovska (editor) with the obvious view to getting it published...
...only to be told by the worthy that Electronics World no longer pays authors for their work!!
In other words, send your work in...if we like it, we shall publish...and you wont get a penny..!!😀:
No, but his avatar is Naomi Campbel, which definitely is a she.quasi said:
http://www.naomicampbell.com
JEZ
"When I saw thar they were reviewing computer games I thought "is that the best April fool they can do?".....it was not a joke...
Were Graham Maynard's articles not an april fool too ? This was one of the lengthiest series ever published in EW. It is interresting to read an about an hypothesis (without leaving a bit of circumspection) but nothing justifies the extension on so many pages. It was written in an awful, almost unreadable, style (just compare with D. Self's articles and book, how vivid and easily understandable, ....based on measurable facts...).. But the former editor found it excellent (EW, august 2004). I think Graham's series did a lot of harm and that a lot of people did not renew their subscription, being fed up of reading so low redactional quality in so great lengthes.
To pay authors, EW needs money.
To get money, EW needs advertisers.
To get advertisers, EW need readers and suscribers.
To get readers ans suscribers, EW needs good articles.
To get good articles, EW needs good authors.
To get good authors, authors must be paid.
The question for EW is : where to start ?
~~~~~~ Forr
§§§
"When I saw thar they were reviewing computer games I thought "is that the best April fool they can do?".....it was not a joke...
Were Graham Maynard's articles not an april fool too ? This was one of the lengthiest series ever published in EW. It is interresting to read an about an hypothesis (without leaving a bit of circumspection) but nothing justifies the extension on so many pages. It was written in an awful, almost unreadable, style (just compare with D. Self's articles and book, how vivid and easily understandable, ....based on measurable facts...).. But the former editor found it excellent (EW, august 2004). I think Graham's series did a lot of harm and that a lot of people did not renew their subscription, being fed up of reading so low redactional quality in so great lengthes.
To pay authors, EW needs money.
To get money, EW needs advertisers.
To get advertisers, EW need readers and suscribers.
To get readers ans suscribers, EW needs good articles.
To get good articles, EW needs good authors.
To get good authors, authors must be paid.
The question for EW is : where to start ?
~~~~~~ Forr
§§§
EW (and its previous life as WW) has has some excellent long series on audio design from Baxandall and Linsley-Hood in the past as well as the well-known series from Self. These were all of a much higher quality than the bizarre and long-winded set of unsupported conjectures from Graham Maynard.
I doubt if the mag will survive another year. The problem is that there is no UK electronics magazine aimed at the market that WW used to serve. Perhaps these days, the market is no longer there.
I doubt if the mag will survive another year. The problem is that there is no UK electronics magazine aimed at the market that WW used to serve. Perhaps these days, the market is no longer there.
Oops, now I understand where do these double spacing, endless references and milling the wind come from ...
janneman said:
Thanks...i'll send him an e-mail in a few minutes..
janneman said:
BIG mistake....
janneman said:
You are right...i will not publish on the forum....that would be a profound waste of time..
jez said:
Samuel Jayaraj said:
Do have the editor's e-mail address?
peranders said:
What are the conditions?
peranders said:
Mike, if you really want money for your work, you could publish a pdf with password.
As i indicated earlier, i do not expect vast amounts....a nominal sum in recognition of work done is surely reasonable....
After all, the magazine gets PAID for publishing...
On the pdf idea...i look into that if all else fails...
Ouroboros said:
EW can only hope to attract quality submissions by returning to its roots....and remunerating (at least nominally) its contributors...
- Status
- Not open for further replies.