<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Seesmic buys a Twitter client: a big step for desktop micro-broadcasting</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.overthecounterculture.com/2008/seesmic-buys-a-twitter-client-a-big-step-for-desktop-micro-broadcasting/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.overthecounterculture.com/2008/seesmic-buys-a-twitter-client-a-big-step-for-desktop-micro-broadcasting/</link>
	<description>Staring at the sun</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 13 Jan 2012 16:55:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Philippe Bradley</title>
		<link>http://www.overthecounterculture.com/2008/seesmic-buys-a-twitter-client-a-big-step-for-desktop-micro-broadcasting/comment-page-1/#comment-467</link>
		<dc:creator>Philippe Bradley</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 Apr 2008 16:08:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.overthecounterculture.com/2008/seesmic-buys-a-twitter-client-a-big-step-for-desktop-micro-broadcasting/#comment-467</guid>
		<description>On the one hand, I agree with you - as I said, they get a get what is probably a good inhouse AIR developer (though they could probably have hired him without buying his existing projects, so that can&#039;t be the only motivation). &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;But then again, as I said, there are plenty of alternative Twitter clients, including AIR ones, that are equally as good, if not better. Just as people assume Twurl is a better client because everyone uses it, being first on scene does not make something inherently better. Credit to him for being an early-early adopter, and coding through a beta phase of a framework; that&#039;s proof that he&#039;s not a *bad* coder - but it&#039;s not evidence that he&#039;s logically any better than what&#039;s out there at the moment</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On the one hand, I agree with you &#8211; as I said, they get a get what is probably a good inhouse AIR developer (though they could probably have hired him without buying his existing projects, so that can&#39;t be the only motivation). </p>
<p>But then again, as I said, there are plenty of alternative Twitter clients, including AIR ones, that are equally as good, if not better. Just as people assume Twurl is a better client because everyone uses it, being first on scene does not make something inherently better. Credit to him for being an early-early adopter, and coding through a beta phase of a framework; that&#39;s proof that he&#39;s not a *bad* coder &#8211; but it&#39;s not evidence that he&#39;s logically any better than what&#39;s out there at the moment</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Philippe Bradley</title>
		<link>http://www.overthecounterculture.com/2008/seesmic-buys-a-twitter-client-a-big-step-for-desktop-micro-broadcasting/comment-page-1/#comment-315</link>
		<dc:creator>Philippe Bradley</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 Apr 2008 09:08:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.overthecounterculture.com/2008/seesmic-buys-a-twitter-client-a-big-step-for-desktop-micro-broadcasting/#comment-315</guid>
		<description>On the one hand, I agree with you - as I said, they get a get what is probably a good inhouse AIR developer (though they could probably have hired him without buying his existing projects, so that can&#039;t be the only motivation). &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;But then again, as I said, there are plenty of alternative Twitter clients, including AIR ones, that are equally as good, if not better. Just as people assume Twurl is a better client because everyone uses it, being first on scene does not make something inherently better. Credit to him for being an early-early adopter, and coding through a beta phase of a framework; that&#039;s proof that he&#039;s not a *bad* coder - but it&#039;s not evidence that he&#039;s logically any better than what&#039;s out there at the moment</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On the one hand, I agree with you &#8211; as I said, they get a get what is probably a good inhouse AIR developer (though they could probably have hired him without buying his existing projects, so that can&#39;t be the only motivation). </p>
<p>But then again, as I said, there are plenty of alternative Twitter clients, including AIR ones, that are equally as good, if not better. Just as people assume Twurl is a better client because everyone uses it, being first on scene does not make something inherently better. Credit to him for being an early-early adopter, and coding through a beta phase of a framework; that&#39;s proof that he&#39;s not a *bad* coder &#8211; but it&#39;s not evidence that he&#39;s logically any better than what&#39;s out there at the moment</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: awilensky</title>
		<link>http://www.overthecounterculture.com/2008/seesmic-buys-a-twitter-client-a-big-step-for-desktop-micro-broadcasting/comment-page-1/#comment-314</link>
		<dc:creator>awilensky</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 08 Apr 2008 11:40:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.overthecounterculture.com/2008/seesmic-buys-a-twitter-client-a-big-step-for-desktop-micro-broadcasting/#comment-314</guid>
		<description>It&#039;s easy to say that the acquiring costs for the twhirl client should not have been more than the nominal development costs for an identical AIR client, but I beg to differ - there should be an offset. One reason, really, is that the developer, Frederick, was an early adopter of AIR, and predictably fought through many of the teething issues of AIR&#039;s memory leaks. We can argue  the size of the offset, but in the end, he delivered a superior handling client, and gained some critical experience in an immature  platform - taking that in-house (they hired him, as well, I gather) is not trivial.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It&#39;s easy to say that the acquiring costs for the twhirl client should not have been more than the nominal development costs for an identical AIR client, but I beg to differ &#8211; there should be an offset. One reason, really, is that the developer, Frederick, was an early adopter of AIR, and predictably fought through many of the teething issues of AIR&#39;s memory leaks. We can argue  the size of the offset, but in the end, he delivered a superior handling client, and gained some critical experience in an immature  platform &#8211; taking that in-house (they hired him, as well, I gather) is not trivial.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Dynamic Page Served (once) in 0.359 seconds -->

