sci.astro.amateur
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Night Sky Euthanized - S&T Next?

Subject: Re: Night Sky Euthanized - S&T Next?
From: Owen Brazell
Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2006 08:09:23 +0000
Newsgroups: sci.astro.amateur
Tom Polakis wrote:
Owen Brazell wrote:

There seems to be no indication of this on the S&T website, they are
still taking subs for NightSky. Where did the rumour that Steve O'Meara
going to Astronomy come from? There does not seem to be much about that
either....


A couple weeks back, I received a letter from Dave Eicher indicating
that Steve O'Meara would be writing for Astronomy beginning in 2007.
Unless it was a good example of forgery, it appears to be true.



Anyway as noted S&T is poor comapared to what it used to be, certainly
in terms of Deep Sky stuff. Unfortunately it is still the best of the bunch.


Examples, Owen?  Particularly in deep sky stuff, it's far better than
it ever was.  With all due respect to Scotty, "Deep Sky Wonders" was it
back in the so-called glory days of S&T.  Now there are typically
several features in each issue.  Every time I read posts about the this
or that in the hobby not being as good as it used to be, I'm reminded
that the median age of amateur astronomers is climbing every year, and
there are more grumpy old men than ever.  Other than the
ever-brightening sky, the only thing that's worse today in the hobby is
the lack of youth.  But I digress.  Here's a post of mine about S&T's
alleged declining quality from way back in 1997.

http://tinyurl.com/yx2wd8

Tom

Tom I am sorry but having a column by Sue French does not compare to either the days of Houston or when Steve Gottleib et al used to write for the magazine. If by deep sky you mean endless articles on CCD image processing then yes it has more.

As for qality the paper is thinner. I get issues now where the printing is blurred and the layout of articles is more difficlut with boxes everywhere.

Yes the world is full of grumpy old men :-)

Owen

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>