Reading The Presence of Magazines on the Internet --The Bivings Report I find it a bit shocking the Bivings group counts features, as if features were somehow equal to quality (excuse me, Web 2.0 features!) This report could lure magazines into the kind of moronic featuritis software has been prey to.

"it should be recognized that magazines have taken on a more effective general strategy than newspapers when it comes to the Internet. Instead of replicating printed content online, as newspapers do, magazines have made efforts to publish unique, Web specific, and easily digestible materials on their websites. "

I'd like to know how "effective" was measured-- I saw no sign of quantitative comparing of circulation, revenue, etc., as relating to strategic feature choices.

I guess I shouldn't take too seriously a report that, when you download the word doc, track changes and comments are still there.

Okay, admittedly I’m stirring the pot here, but I was just thinking: why do we care so much about RSS?

• The vast majority of folks can’t use it
• A large majority of those who can, set it up then ignore it
• It doesn’t filter, it just puts all the crap in one place
• It kills a content provider’s ability to survive, if they provide full feeds
• It annoys customers if it only provides teasers
• Adding feeds is typically a painful, annoying process, even with myyahoo, feedburner, etc