« Bringing Darkness Into The Light | Main | Forward To The Past: Our Home Computers »

March 14, 2012


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.


When I search for information, the Wikipedia is the first place I go. I've gotten used to using them. Britannica is late to the on-line game and many younger readers may not even be familiar with the brand. At $70, I don't think they will get many subscribers. Sic transit gloria mundi.


Me too. Wikipedia is quick, accessible, and up to date. Which is why I feel pretty sure that Britannica's online offerings may struggle along for a few years, but ultimately will fizzle out.

Thanks for your comment.


What does Wikipedia have to say about the Encyclopedia Britannica, after the no more in-print annoucement?" Some artilces in earlier editions have been criticised for inaccuracy, bias, or unqualified contributors. The accuracy in parts of the present edition has likewise been questioned, although criticisms have been challenged by Britannica's management."How does Wiki summarize the Britannica's competition?" Although the Britannica is now available both in multimedia form and over the Internet, its preeminence is being challenged by other online encyclopaedias, such as Wikipedia.[citation needed]"It's interesting that the last statment (submitted in July of 2011) needs a citation.The quotes I cited are a somewhat snarky in my opinion, but the is very interesting.I wonder if the Britannica has a write-up on Wikipedia and what it states?

The comments to this entry are closed.