The more things change, the more they seem the same. Opponents of digital magazines like to pick on the "page flip" aspect of them, calling it a gimmick and saying it offers no value. We’ve always maintained that the page flip creates a more tactile experience and increasing reader engagement times, though testy bloggers sometimes think otherwise. In light of that, quotes like this can sound like they came from 2005:
"Love the concept because it approximates how we browse magazines €¦ we can keep “moving on” to the next page/article by repeatedly clicking on the next arrow. Unlike normal web pages where we need to hunt for the “next page” link. This makes the experience much more fluid."
Except that quote isn’t from 2005. It’s a comment made about Google’s new Fast-Flip product and rather than panning the page flip, bloggers seem giddy about the experience. Keep in mind, we’re not saying the Nxtbook operates the same as Fast-Flip or that Google’s revenue strategy will be a winner, but it does seem as if Fast-Flip has the potential to bring the page flip back into vogue among the fickle blogosphere.
That being said, every new technology brings with it some confusion. In this post, the author compares Fast-Flip to Nxtbook (and others), but aside from the animation, there’s no similarity. One brings animation to PDF’s and the other brings animation to websites. Kudos to FOLIO for covering this in’s and out’s better:
"Google is essentially testing Fast Flip as an online equivalent of the vented wide-mouth beer can, allowing more readers to consume more content more quickly."
September 15th, 2009 by Marcus Grimm