But I will note that the idea of developing and manufacturing a sophisticated piece of computer hardware is outside of our core competence, and not something most publishers are likely to pull off anytime in the near future.

And if Nature or Seed creates a market dominating device, is that likely to create a better situation than Apple doing so? Amazon clearly wants to be in the publishing business. Apple seems less interested in this as a business, more as a means to sell devices. Do you think that if Seed or NPG had a monopoly on a popular outlet that they’d make it easy for competing publishers to access? Is this something that we really want to encourage and hope for?

Also, can you tell us anything about the hardware/software that the Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery is creating?

Before that, though, making software instead of just content seems wise. And modifying business models is also sensible.

Surely you don’t expect publishers to become hardware companies. When that happens, you end up with the Joo Joo. Seriously, if HP, Palm, Sony and Dell can’t compete with Google, Apple and Amazon in this market, why do you think a small society publisher is likely to succeed by building their own device?

Your idea is reasonable, but my point is that instead of owning a casino in Vegas — the only sure way to win big — your plan feels like saving up a few thousand dollars to play at the tables you don’t control.

I am not advocating caution per se, just a different strategy, a more thoughtful strategy, with its own risks. It is interesting that you can’t see that. The real threat in technological revolutions is often confusion, not innovation. The wonderful rhyme “when in danger, when in doubt, run in circles, scream and shout” captures this very nicely.

Counselling people to go in all directions is not helpful; it is part of the problem.