Readers Talk Back to Community Dialog

Make SQL Mag Bigger!

Reader Mark Shvarts posted a thoughtful response to my January Community Dialog, “Online vs. Print Content: Finding the Right Mix,” InstantDoc ID 97654, asking why we don’t add pages to the print magazine and raise the subscription price to cover the extra cost. Here’s what Mark says:

“You’re currently charging some $40 per year (not to mention discounts, promotions, etc.). What’s $40 to highly paid database professionals?... I think you can easily increase [the subscription price] by 25 to 50 percent, and we [in the] database community will accept it with understanding.

“I would love to see your magazine have 64 pages instead of currently 48, with all the code printed in the paper edition as well a slightly increased font size and perhaps fitting more articles. And by keeping a ratio of 30 to 40 percent advertisements, you will actually get more revenue from this source, because you’ll get some five extra pages for this.” Mark ends his comment by suggesting we survey readers and ask whether they’d be willing to pay a higher subscription price for a larger magazine.

Mark’s question makes sense. As I responded to him online, our reader survey results suggest that readers don’t really want to pay more for the magazine, but maybe it’s time to ask you all again.

Another consideration in adding pages is covering ever-increasing paper and postage costs. Adding pages could increase our production and postage costs well beyond an amount that would produce an acceptable profit margin with a 30 to 40 percent ad ratio, as SQL Server Magazine currently has. Like any business, we have to earn enough profit—if for no other reason than to keep publishing the quality material that we do! I’d like to hear from readers about this: Would you pay 25 to 50 percent more for your SQL Mag subscription, if we increased the number of pages in the magazine by, say, one-third?

Virtualization Is Viable

John Paul Cook, a SQL Mag author and one of the PASS 2007 virtualization panelists referred to the February Community Dialog, “SQL Mag Presses the Virtualization Hot Button,” InstantDoc ID 97845, has revised his views about SQL Server virtualization since the panel discussion. Regarding running a SQL Server production environment under a virtual machine, Cook said, “The answer has changed. Windows [Server 2008] Hyper-V has significantly improved I/O performance even though it’s still only in beta. More improvements are expected by the time it’s released. [Hyper-V] makes virtualization far more practical than Windows-based virtualization solutions of the past.” Readers, would you upgrade to Windows 2008 based on the promise of better virtualization?

Correction to an “Illogical” Puzzle

Readers were stymied by the solution to Itzik Ben- Gan’s January 2008 Logical Puzzle (InstantDoc ID 97759)—with good reason, as it turned out. Figures A and B were accidentally changed from the original figures that Itzik provided with the article, and the change made Itzik’s answer incorrect. Neither figure should contain the horizontal line between points J and K. The correct figures are now posted in the onlinearticle. We apologize for the error.