[Previous] Bloggers Blog on Powerbooks...

 [Next] Musical Interlude...

Some slightly related from Technorati and Google.

[The Speckled Band] Jumping The Shark And Other Tales: It’s a reply to Sarah’s email and I figure that Amy has just BCC’d it to me as she does most times when she emails our mutual friends. I reply to it in the positive, saying that I thought it was a cool email and that I also bought some software for her from eBay because she wanted a paint program to do her website images that would work on her parents PC (we exclusively use Macs here and we’re proud of it). I’ve reproduced the email below:

[Fizzy's Nuthouse] A Grizzly Fizzy: However,A cartoon/imaged frog with it's bits swinging in the breeze (which BTW played on all day TV all the time for ages and now has a black square dangling there for modesty during the daytime), anyway this cartoon/imaged frog with his you-know-what etc sitting on a motor bike riding it through the street to music that belongs to a 20 year old police acaemy theme tune....That is music? That is passion?

 [Arachna.com] What's That Noise?! [Ian Kallen's Weblog]: I'd prefer that BitMover focused more on innovating the platform (perhaps "application lifecycle management" is excessively hi-falootin but it's not freakishly off-base), there's a lot of room for SCM products to add value or integrate with other pieces adding value elsewhere in the application development chain. Closing the door to third party client innovation is a failure of imagination. Larry is pretty much counting on his internal team (talented though they may be), to be wiser than the community at large about how clients should function, how product specification should interoperate with SCM, how bug and issue tracking should work with SCM, etc. Open client development and derivative works is where it's at.

 [Arachna.com] What's That Noise?! [Ian Kallen's Weblog]: I'd prefer that BitMover focused more on innovating the platform (perhaps "application lifecycle management" is excessively hi-falootin but it's not freakishly off-base), there's a lot of room for SCM products to add value or integrate with other pieces adding value elsewhere in the application development chain. Closing the door to third party client innovation is a failure of imagination. Larry is pretty much counting on his internal team (talented though they may be), to be wiser than the community at large about how clients should function, how product specification should interoperate with SCM, how bug and issue tracking should work with SCM, etc. Open client development and derivative works is where it's at.

 [Arachna.com] What's That Noise?! [Ian Kallen's Weblog]: (yea, what'd Forrest Gump say about stupid?). A few years later, when Aaron Swartz wrote about baking content he was insistent that he didn't care about performance, which is cool. The other benefits of baking that he mentions are perfectly valid. In fact, the publishing system at Salon.com distributes baked goods (HTML::Mason components generated with HTML::Mason components) to the web servers akin to Aaron's call to have something you can just do filesystem operations on.

 [Arachna.com] What's That Noise?! [Ian Kallen's Weblog]: I'd prefer that BitMover focused more on innovating the platform (perhaps "application lifecycle management" is excessively hi-falootin but it's not freakishly off-base), there's a lot of room for SCM products to add value or integrate with other pieces adding value elsewhere in the application development chain. Closing the door to third party client innovation is a failure of imagination. Larry is pretty much counting on his internal team (talented though they may be), to be wiser than the community at large about how clients should function, how product specification should interoperate with SCM, how bug and issue tracking should work with SCM, etc. Open client development and derivative works is where it's at.

 [Arachna.com] What's That Noise?! [Ian Kallen's Weblog]: I'd prefer that BitMover focused more on innovating the platform (perhaps "application lifecycle management" is excessively hi-falootin but it's not freakishly off-base), there's a lot of room for SCM products to add value or integrate with other pieces adding value elsewhere in the application development chain. Closing the door to third party client innovation is a failure of imagination. Larry is pretty much counting on his internal team (talented though they may be), to be wiser than the community at large about how clients should function, how product specification should interoperate with SCM, how bug and issue tracking should work with SCM, etc. Open client development and derivative works is where it's at.

Reflected tags on Technorati: Blog, Technorati, Technorati, Powerbook, Os, Love The Mac