New Scientist - Us Edition

NewScientist is a lot of fun to read and keeps you up to date with some of the newest science being done. It's a nice laypersons' coverage. It doesn't approach Scientific American in its depth, complexity, or "sciency" language, but it's popularized rather than dumbed down. The writing is always clear and concise. I'd say it probably is not as simplified or "newsy" as Discover (which I also read and enjoy), putting it in a nice middle category of science for laypeople magazines. It comes weekly, which I really appreciate.It has a "this week" section which covers a few topics in short fashion (1/2 to 1 page articles), then an "In Brief" section which covers more topics, um, in brief (usually 1/4 page articles). There are a few pages of brief Technology articles (1/3rd to 1 page articles), a science-based editorial, an interview or two, and then several longer, in-depth articles, including the cover article. These are usually 3 or 4 pages with the cover article 4-6 pages. Recent cover topics have been the Higgs, Memory, Neutrinos. The magazine closes with some book reviews, a feedback section, and a question-to-the editors section. I write and I find myself often clipping out articles of interest or of use. Even better, a subscription gives you their entire on-line archive, as well as regular email updates. It's expensive, no doubt, mostly obviously because it's a weekly I admit I hem and haw each time I renew (three times so far), but I always do.

I subscribe to Science, Nature, Scientific American, Popular Science, Science News, MIT Technology Review and a few others.I don't find time to read them all, but the one I pick up first is Science News.It is a lot more expensive, but I find it a lot more relevant.I'm not a big fan of the publisher, Reed, but they do publish a lot of scientific journals, and perhaps for that reason, Science News seems to be aware of what's big news in a lot of areas.Terrific writing, and terrific judgement on what to cover.Weak on LENR, but the competition is mostly weaker, although Discover and Popular Science are stronger.Covering things like the "Seasonal nature of beta decay" which I found gob-smakingly important, is something Scientific American might do 5 years later... Trust Science News to keep reminding you that there is this giant hole in Physics that is big enough to drive a LENR powered truck through...

I've been a NS subscribed direct but they decided to jack prices up. Now the Kindle version is the best deal I could find. Works well...just as well as the original app. The only difference is with the original app, you get access to all back issues...with Kindle, it's one at a time. So if you want to do backissue research with the magazine, pay more and get the full app version.

Annoyed that I can't see articles on the website with the mailed subscription.

Excellent magazine. Really is current and nice still in magazine format. Worth the $154 for 52 issues if you are a science buff. Covers almost all areas of scientific inquiry and latest research. Only knock is too much politics, mostly left-wing in my opinion. I do agree with them on climate change.

Like the frequency, interest appeal, and current information of the magazine articles. Don't like the European tendency to talk down about the United States. That's probably not avoidable, but I don't believe that U.S. stubbornness and tenacity are totally detrimental. We have bad, good, and great potential.

Julian Barbour's discussion of his book" Janus Point: A New Theory of Time " should be of wide interest tothe readers of New Scientist.

Diverse range of topics, brought at the right level of detail to get a good feeling about them.