Who thought removing those features was an improvement? If you can’t see or find the content, why subscribe?

As a longtime reader (40 years!) of the AJC, I am terribly disappointed in the quality and depth of the paper since transitioning from print to digital. I had high hopes that the purely digital edition would be both more timely and robust. Instead, I have noted that the preponderance of coverage is short and shallow, more like the USA Today model. This is extremely disappointing after becoming accustomed to in depth articles which were the paper’s hallmark. After being subjected to a myriad number of reasons from the AJC as to why it made sense to abandon print, the paper has lost its way and become another typical vehicle for those with a short attention span, similar to the commercial network’s nightly news programs. I now am forced to pivot to the NY Times for adequate news coverage along with the PBS News Hour. It’s a sad to see our local paper become a shadow of what it was.

Like others have said, it’s impossible to scroll down on the main feed to read more stories because the app will automatically jump back to the top of the page every 5-6 seconds. It makes it impossible to use and I’ve stopped reading the AJC as a result. Since there’s no search function there’s no other way to find articles.It is also impossible to access the sports section in the app, because none of the choices in the top menu bar are for sports. That is really annoying because AJC publishes a ton of good articles about the Braves and I’m unable to even access them through the app.Articles in the app are also limited to those published in the last few days. If I miss a notification about an article I want to read and click on it several days later, it will tell me the article is no longer available. You’d find the same thing if you were able to successfully scroll down all the way to the bottom of each news category. I’ve never seen this happen for any other news app, or at least not with such a limited time frame of articles included.Finally, most apps now have a dark mode, but this one doesn’t. That feature would be greatly appreciated.I know there is also the ePaper app and I have also used that in the past, but that app is also filled with its own problems (some of which are the same) and isn’t really a replacement on iPhones, particularly my iPhone 13 mini.

As a big news consumer, one who subscribes to the NY Times and The Wall Street Journal, and a long time former AJC subscriber, I took a shot at the AJC digital product, and did my best to sort through the thoroughly confusing options and tiers of service before subscribing on Tuesday.By Thursday, I had had enough and cancelled. The short story is that I asked two operators if what I was buying for $9.99/mo would give me access on all my devices. I was assured that it would. It did not. Their telephone representatives were poorly informed, and poor communicators. Interestingly, the only operation that went smoothly was my cancellation. I guess that discipline is well-worn.For the life of me, I cannot understand why they have multiple digital plans. Both the Times and the WSJ offer one simple digital plan that works across laptops, desktops, tablets. ereaders and smartphones. The AJC offering is unnecessarily confusing. And the iPad app, at least the one called "Today's Paper," is clunky at best. No wonder you they’re not exactly the darling of the App Store reviewers. Their business would be better if they offered one quality product. Apparently they think that the difference between $10/mo for a single product, and $15/mo for all access is a sticking point, I would remind them of the Warren Buffet bromide: "Quality is remembered long after price is forgotten." Heck, I"d wager that if they simplified (and fixed) the product, they could just charge $10/mo and make up in volume what they lose in tiered pricing. Our community is the real loser here. It would be so much better for civic engagement if we had a reliable, elegant and simple newspaper product in the digital marketplace.