Somewhat OT: Times Co. threatens to shutter Boston Globe.

[Kevin Vahey]

Dan????

I don't see how you can say my reply to Donna was out of line as I was
simply agreeing with her. I didn't start with home computing Amiga. I
was 38 and couldn't type (and still can't) but I knew I had to get on
bandwagon to survive.

The whole gist of my post was that even though my home page is
boston.com I still buy the papers and can not imagine life without
them.

On 4/5/09, Dan.Strassberg <dan.strassberg@att.net> wrote:
> Oh, come off it, Kevin!
>
> I'm older than you, I'm sure, and I have personally owned personal
> computers for more than 25 years (the first one was an Apple ][+,
> which I still have, though I haven't powered it up in at least 15
> years). I owe my ability to do the job (writing, editing) that I have
> been doing first full-time and for the last six years as a
> semi-retired part-timer to my familiarity with personal computers. I
> still can't type, and the only reason you can read this is that using
> a computer enables me to correct the dozens of mistakes I make in
> every paragraph. My point in telling you all this is to demonstrate
> that I am conversant with personal computers, and despite my age, I am
> not computer phobic.
>
> I do sometimes read news items on-line--mostly at NYTimes.com and
> occasionally at Boston.com. But get the f!@#$ off your high horse and
> quit preaching (I'm referring here to your rather arrogant message to
> Donna); you are making an @!# of yourself! Asking people like me and
> most people 10 or 15 years younger, who still officially qualify as
> boomers, to give up newspapers and other print media and get the
> content on-line is just plain foolishness. Even though I am
> comfortable with mice, keyboards, and high-resolution color displays,
> I find reading from a screen (even a laptop screen) just not the same
> as reading from a newspaper, magazine, or book. I haven't tried a
> Kindle, so I can't speak about that experience; it might be OK. I
> gather that the Kindle is OK for reading in bed and is probably OK for
> reading while clinging to a handrail on the T.
>
> And don't tell me that the Herald is a substitute for the Globe. The
> Times might do--except that it lacks much coverage of Boston--but the
> Herald would not. However, if the Times is not to disappear from
> newsstands around Boston, the Times Company had better start now to
> set up distribution with the Herald. My newsdealer informed me this
> morning that the Globe delivers not just the Globe and the Times to
> all of the newsstands in these parts but also the Wall St Journal and
> Barron's.
>
> -----
> Dan Strassberg (dan.strassberg@att.net)
> eFax 1-707-215-6367
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Kevin Vahey" <kvahey@comcast.net>
> To: "Donna Halper" <dlh@donnahalper.com>
> Cc: <boston-radio-interest@bostonradio.org>
> Sent: Saturday, April 04, 2009 10:37 PM
> Subject: Re: Somewhat OT: Times Co. threatens to shutter Boston Globe.
>
>
>> Donna some 20 years ago I was terrified of computers because I
>> recall
>> looking at a :c prompt and wondering now what do I do...but I also
>> knew to survive I had to learn
>>
>> I got in the habit of buying the 3 morning papers late at night on
>> the
>> way home from an old man named Pete in Harvard Sq and they cost a
>> dime
>> each. In 72 it became 2 morning papers and when the afternoon Globe
>> folded I started to buy the NY Post just for something to read.
>> Big advantage for print advertising over radio-tv or internet is you
>> might decided to relook at an ad a few minutes after glancing at it.
>> I can not fathom life without newspapers
>
>