<?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 for Webbrush73</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.webbrush73.com/comments/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.webbrush73.com</link>
	<description>Design Portfolio Of Igor Kasalovic</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 16 Nov 2009 06:47:35 -0700</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>Comment on Problems getting Quicktime export to web files to play online by satrap</title>
		<link>http://www.webbrush73.com/archives/2008/08/27/problems-getting-quicktime-export-to-web-files-to-play-online/comment-page-1/#comment-226</link>
		<dc:creator>satrap</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 16 Nov 2009 06:47:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.webbrush73.com/?p=49#comment-226</guid>
		<description>Thanks for the post, i enjoyed reading it. blogging is not as easy as many think it is, it&#039;s hardwork. any how thanks.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for the post, i enjoyed reading it. blogging is not as easy as many think it is, it&#8217;s hardwork. any how thanks.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Adobe InContext Editing &#8211; Simplify website editing by wow power leveling</title>
		<link>http://www.webbrush73.com/archives/2009/02/19/adobe-incontext-editing-simplify-website-editing/comment-page-1/#comment-225</link>
		<dc:creator>wow power leveling</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 13 Aug 2009 04:55:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.webbrush73.com/?p=91#comment-225</guid>
		<description>Good post! I plan to move into this stuff after I’m done with school, as most of it is time consuming. It’s a great post to reference back to. My blog needs more time to gain in popularity anyway.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Good post! I plan to move into this stuff after I’m done with school, as most of it is time consuming. It’s a great post to reference back to. My blog needs more time to gain in popularity anyway.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Adobe InContext Editing &#8211; Simplify website editing by Damien</title>
		<link>http://www.webbrush73.com/archives/2009/02/19/adobe-incontext-editing-simplify-website-editing/comment-page-1/#comment-224</link>
		<dc:creator>Damien</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 25 Mar 2009 13:22:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.webbrush73.com/?p=91#comment-224</guid>
		<description>I would develop simple sites for my clients and they nearly always ask for a content management facility. So I have been implementing different systems over the years depending on their requirements.

When InContext came out I thought that this was just fantastic. It was an easy to setup and easy to use system. Changes are made from within the actual browser and not some form that looks a million miles from what the page looks like. And of course it bypasses the upload of scripts to the hosting server that never work first time round and take days to get working correctly.

The only reason I bought Dreamweaver CS4 was because of InContext. The online videos and literature from Adobe convinced me to buy this new version. Otherwise CS3 would have done just fine for the foreseeable future. I have been working on existing sites and have priced for new work based on the InContext addition to Dreamweaver.

By chance at the weekend I found out that this service will eventually have a monthly charge that has yet to be determined. So I now have to remove the InContext work that I have already done and re-price the work that I am going for, which will probably mean that I will loose it. All the work that I have done so far with InContext are on websites that I do not host. It is once off work. So if there is an ongoing fee that I must pay and I cannot re-coup it, then I cannot use InContext. To be honest with you most of the sites that I would be using it for would contain a small amount of content that would only need to be updated every couple of months, like a newsletter section.

So the advertised new feature of Dreamweaver CS4 ends up to be an extra that will cost HUNDREDS of dollars every year into infinity. This has to be the biggest mistake Adobe have ever made. This is only going to turn people away from Adobe products and lead them to find other companies that will provide the same but give it as an included service with software.

Let&#039;s face it Dreamweaver is NOT cheap and Adobe doing this is just going to drive a wedge between Adobe and its ever shrinking loyal clientele.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I would develop simple sites for my clients and they nearly always ask for a content management facility. So I have been implementing different systems over the years depending on their requirements.</p>
<p>When InContext came out I thought that this was just fantastic. It was an easy to setup and easy to use system. Changes are made from within the actual browser and not some form that looks a million miles from what the page looks like. And of course it bypasses the upload of scripts to the hosting server that never work first time round and take days to get working correctly.</p>
<p>The only reason I bought Dreamweaver CS4 was because of InContext. The online videos and literature from Adobe convinced me to buy this new version. Otherwise CS3 would have done just fine for the foreseeable future. I have been working on existing sites and have priced for new work based on the InContext addition to Dreamweaver.</p>
<p>By chance at the weekend I found out that this service will eventually have a monthly charge that has yet to be determined. So I now have to remove the InContext work that I have already done and re-price the work that I am going for, which will probably mean that I will loose it. All the work that I have done so far with InContext are on websites that I do not host. It is once off work. So if there is an ongoing fee that I must pay and I cannot re-coup it, then I cannot use InContext. To be honest with you most of the sites that I would be using it for would contain a small amount of content that would only need to be updated every couple of months, like a newsletter section.</p>
<p>So the advertised new feature of Dreamweaver CS4 ends up to be an extra that will cost HUNDREDS of dollars every year into infinity. This has to be the biggest mistake Adobe have ever made. This is only going to turn people away from Adobe products and lead them to find other companies that will provide the same but give it as an included service with software.</p>
<p>Let&#8217;s face it Dreamweaver is NOT cheap and Adobe doing this is just going to drive a wedge between Adobe and its ever shrinking loyal clientele.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
