I'm not saying the new RT design is perfect, but I'm glad some people recognise the thinking behind it. The Editor would not have just had a brainwave one morning and ordered substantial changes - they would, I'm sure, have been properly thought out and reseached.
A few things to consider...
*TV listings are freely available from the internet and 7 Day EPGs. The success of a premium cost listings magazine is in the added value. That added value offered by RT comes from the (excellent) feature pages, the previews and the overall depth of programme information.
*The average RT reader watches LESS television than the typical viewer and buys RT to help them choose the TV worth watching - hence the focus on previews and choices. Daytime tv details probably don't matter much to the typical RT reader.
*RT regards its competition as the 7 Day TV guides in the quality newspapers and the Daily Mail - not TVTimes, What's On TV and the like which are aimed at completely different readerships. (C2DE women who may be buying a guide purely to avoid buying a newspaper and who only want to read about soaps and celebs.)
Personally I think a better solution could be found for daytime within a 2 page spread but RT remains an excellent magazine and the only TV magazine I'd ever consider buying. As a literate, educated person who's a discerning viewer it's the only TV mag I can identify with.
I can't disagree with any of that, but some things that put me off the new look are:
* CBBC morning listings are now non-existant, which is very poor indeed
* Weekend sporting coverage now has far less space
* It is far harder to check across channels for any given time
I must be honest that I've grown used to the change, and haven't stopped purchasing the magazine, as you said, there's no real alternative. It's just the "We're right, you're wrong" attitude of the editorial team that rankled with me.