The old debate of print vs. internet is emerging around a new print magazine called Dispatches. What's the fuss? They're trying to compete with the Internet by being more analytical; in other words, instead of hurrying to churn out another news item, they'll take their sweet time to write really smart, well-researched articles. Their site won't feature all of the magazine's content; you'll have to get the printed version to read it all.
The real problem with print as a medium, when compared to the internet, is not (only) that it's slower. The problem is that it's not linked to anything. If you have to choose between reading, for example, a motherboard review in a printed mag and on a website, very soon you'll discover that the printed review lacks so much context that any comparison is unfair. Online, you can check out what the folks on the offical forums say. You can read the comments. You can click on the links provided within the article. You can check out the gallery of images - which often has so many images that it would be impossible to put them all into a printed mag - and if all that's not enough, you can always google for more.
The printed magazine, content-wise, is just like a web page taken offline: nothing more, nothing less. Is there any hope for the print, then?
Yes. First, you have the exclusivity factor. A magazine is, simply put, cool to have; just like it's cool to have a neat wrist watch although no one really needs it anymore. Secondly, you have the noise factor, which means that sometimes, less is more. Not having all that superfluous info around the article can help you focus. And you can, of course, afford to put in extra effort in your analysis because you're not pressed for time.
