Home ›

Linux Journal Survey Results

Issue 2

From Issue #2
April-May 1994

Apr 01, 1994  By Phil Hughes
 in
When we were first kicking around the idea of Linux Journal, we decided that a survey posted to the comp.os.linux news group on Usenet would be the best way to find areas of interest. In April, 1993 we posted that survey to the Internet and tabulated the answers.

The initial answers told us two things:

  • Linux Journal was needed

  • People knew what they wanted to see in Linux Journal

In order to make sure we were still on track, we posted the same survey to Ascent in December, 1993. The letters column comes from answers to question two of the survey, “Are there any other topics you would like to see covered?” The table below shows average responses to question one of the survey.

Survey question 1 answers:

Rate your interest in the following features:

(1=not interested, 2=possible interest, 3=interested, 4=very interested, 5=that's my subject!)

Based on the results of this survey, we have tailored the content of LJ and will continue to tailor it based on reader feedback.

With regard to advertising (question 3), about 90% of those who responded supported the policy. People who felt we should let anyone advertise outnumbered those who felt that having advertising was a mistake. Many of the readers felt that advertising would help them locate new products and saw that as an advantage.

Virtually everyone who returned the survey said they would like to subscribe and about 10% offered to write articles. Interest in advertising was lower (about 3%), but that was to be expected. We thank you all for your support.

When we first started getting subscribers, about 85% were from the United States. Survey results were running more like 65% from the US. We then made an offer of free copies of LJ for user groups to give out to their members and, the response was about 50% non-US.

Our conclusion was that our higher non-US subscription rate was the problem. So, we negotiated with international distributors and now offer the same subscription rate ($19/year) anywhere on the planet. We expect this change will get our subscriber base more in line with the survey results.

Linux Journal Survey Results

Distribution of Linux Journal Subscribers March 1994

______________________

Phil Hughes

White Paper
More Resources
Fabric-Based Computing Enables Optimized Hyperscale Data Centers

Today’s modular x86 servers are compute-centric, designed as a least common denominator to support a wide range of IT workloads. Those generic, virtualized IT workloads have much different resource optimization requirements than hyperscale and cloud applications. They have resulted in a “one size fits all” enterprise IT architecture that is not optimized for a specific set of IT workloads, and especially not emerging hyperscale workloads, such as web applications, big data, and object storage. In this report, you will learn how shifting the focus from traditional compute-centric IT architectures to an innovative disaggregated fabric-based architecture can optimize and scale your data center.

Learn More

Sponsored by AMD

White Paper
More Resources
Red Hat White Paper: Using an Open Source Framework to Catch the Bad Guy

Built-in forensics, incident response, and security with Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6

Every security policy provides guidance and requirements for ensuring adequate protection of information and data, as well as high-level technical and administrative security requirements for a system in a given environment. Traditionally, providing security for a system focuses on the confidentiality of the information on it. However, protecting the data integrity and system and data availability is just as important. For example, when processing United States intelligence information, there are three attributes that require protection: confidentiality, integrity, and availability.

Learn more about catching the bad guy in this free white paper.

Learn More

Sponsored by DLT Solutions