Sky at Night vs Astronomy Now

[E621Keith]

Sorry, if my comment offended anyone. I am not saying the UK mags were bad, there are many good articles in the UK magazines, in fact I think AN is better than Astronomy (US). However, I still think S&T have larger numbers of good articles, and I put that down to more highly skilled people willing to contribute, better resource and better weather.

[ollypenrice]

I do wish people would post a warning before making statements like this..... 2nd time today I've had to wipe tea off my screen!!

I was thinking only of you, Daz!!!

Olly

[Dangerous-Dave]

Sky at Night for me. I read Astronomy Now for years, but jumped ship as I felt it got too highbrow.

[steppenwolf]

where as I often wonder whether S@N reviewer have ever used the equipment they were reviewing.

Ooh trust me, THIS S @ N reviewer uses the review kit for real so I tell what I find. I am never under any pressure to write with a bias in any direction, if I was I would decline the commission, simple as that.

The only dictate that I ever have to work to is to be aware of and comply with the BBC's mandate to 'educate and entertain' which means that although I carry out a personal in depth review, I have to distil this into a form that will appeal to a wide audience but the tests are all done to reach this point.

I buy both magazines (I am entitled to a free version of S @ N) and enjoy both. The reviewers at AN will work under a different set of rules and this is a good thing otherwise the two magazines would be too similar and then you'd have to ask, what is the point?

[ollypenrice]

Sky at Night for me. I read Astronomy Now for years, but jumped ship as I felt it got too highbrow.

Not highbrow, Dave? You?? All narrowband imagers ae high priests of the highbrow!!! The mysteries of the Mayan Long Count have nothing on you guys! And you were quoting 1930s copies of the Daily Mail the other day, you scholar, you...

Olly

[steppenwolf]

All narrowband imagers ae hight priests of the highbrow!!!

Hey, Olly, I've just started to do narrowband - surely this must be a potential conflict of interest then?

[NickH]

ROFL

[Dangerous-Dave]

Not highbrow, Dave? You?? All narrowband imagers ae high priests of the highbrow!!! The mysteries of the Mayan Long Count have nothing on you guys! And you were quoting 1930s copies of the Daily Mail the other day, you scholar, you...

Olly

Olly, I've got a degree in this nonsense as well, just felt AN was getting a bit heavy on the science and short on amateur/practical stuff.

This was 3 or 4 years ago mind.

Practical Astronomer - now there was a great magazine, shame it went to the wall.

[alowen]

Since getting keen on the hobby ive subscribed to S @ N magazine and it ticks all the boxs for me as a relative newbie.

Al

[NickH]

Dave

It's part of my (and Olly's) stuff for AN to get the amateur side well represented. The article on automating your obs this month I hope is a prime example...but this thread is good food for thought, so thank you all.

No offence taken btw by previous posts...I buy S@N, as well as S&T and used to sub to PA. They all tick different boxes, and I get on well with people who work on all of them...it's too small a hobby in my mind to get silly about A vs B, as a great friend says often to me, "it's all the same sky"

[Psychobilly]

I buy both and most of the time read neither.. they just go into the relevant carboard boxes...

Have all the issues of SAN and CD's from Issue 1 minus the moonmap

Billy...