RichardHallas: "Drobe is not a magazine: it serves a different purpose and covers different material in a different way."
I'm not sure I agree. I've written a fair number of articles for Drobe, for Acorn User, and for Foundation RISC User; plus a smaller amount of material for Archive magazine. Whilst the articles have been on different topics, my approach to what content to provide and how to provide it has been basically the same. My articles for Drobe have not been as long as some of those I wrote for AU and Foundation RISC User (normally less than 1500 words), but I've seen articles in all the magazines of equivalent length.
I've greatly enjoyed AU, FRU and Archive over the years, and I'm certainly not suggesting that Drobe replaces them. But it's wrong to suggest that Drobe is not doing part of the same job.
Drobe has the advantage of being an on-line magazine, so news can appear immediately - a big difference to printed magazines. But it's often covered in the same depth. It also means that feedback to the news can appear immediately, and with far less editorial interference (in some ways a good thing, in some ways a bad thing).
Drobe is also freely accessible to everyone. That means it can't pay contributors (except with pizza). But that hasn't prevented some very in depth articles on a regular basis (including technical ones), which all goes to show - money isn't everything.