<?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: Techcrush: startup follow-up</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.chipsquips.com/?feed=rss2&#038;p=559" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.chipsquips.com/?p=559</link>
	<description>A tiny spark of wit for a highly flammable world</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 05 Sep 2010 17:08:43 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Make You Go Hmm: &#187; Misinformation, intrigue and trademark crush, another day at the blog office</title>
		<link>http://www.chipsquips.com/?p=559&#038;cpage=1#comment-7538</link>
		<dc:creator>Make You Go Hmm: &#187; Misinformation, intrigue and trademark crush, another day at the blog office</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 23 Sep 2006 18:37:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.chipsquips.com/?p=559#comment-7538</guid>
		<description></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Back on Tuesday Sterling reviewed the new TechCrush site, writing: Techcrush seems to be everything [Stowe Boyd] asked for (Stowe is listed among the site’s “Associates” as well). I think the balanced reviews and reader polls may provide a nice complement to the snarkiness of Dead 2.0 and Valleywag in the cause of relieving bubble pressure. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: apotheon</title>
		<link>http://www.chipsquips.com/?p=559&#038;cpage=1#comment-7440</link>
		<dc:creator>apotheon</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 22 Sep 2006 06:10:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.chipsquips.com/?p=559#comment-7440</guid>
		<description>It&#039;s more responsive, doesn&#039;t suck resources as much, and seems to be more stable (personal experience).  I also liked the tight integration with del.icio.us, with the exception of the lack of division of public and private bookmarks.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It&#8217;s more responsive, doesn&#8217;t suck resources as much, and seems to be more stable (personal experience).  I also liked the tight integration with del.icio.us, with the exception of the lack of division of public and private bookmarks.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: sterling</title>
		<link>http://www.chipsquips.com/?p=559&#038;cpage=1#comment-7423</link>
		<dc:creator>sterling</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 22 Sep 2006 00:53:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.chipsquips.com/?p=559#comment-7423</guid>
		<description>I haven&#039;t really looked at Flock.  In what ways is it superior to Firefox?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I haven&#8217;t really looked at Flock.  In what ways is it superior to Firefox?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: apotheon</title>
		<link>http://www.chipsquips.com/?p=559&#038;cpage=1#comment-7267</link>
		<dc:creator>apotheon</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 20 Sep 2006 08:04:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.chipsquips.com/?p=559#comment-7267</guid>
		<description>I&#039;ve had an on-again off-again relationship with Flock.  I keep coming back to give it a shot, then eventually giving up on it because as much as I like what it does, I simply must have what it does not do.  The biggest problem for me, as of the last time I tried it out, is the fact that one must either choose to share bookmarks or keep them private.  There&#039;s no middle ground.  I really want the public bookmarking capability of Flock, but I don&#039;t want to give up the ability to keep private bookmarks to get it.

Of course, I&#039;ve gotten so used to the PageRank and AdSense plugins I use for Firefox that the lack of support for them on Flock (last I checked) is a deal-killer as well.

In many ways, Flock is a better browser than Firefox.  It just doesn&#039;t do some of what I need.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;ve had an on-again off-again relationship with Flock.  I keep coming back to give it a shot, then eventually giving up on it because as much as I like what it does, I simply must have what it does not do.  The biggest problem for me, as of the last time I tried it out, is the fact that one must either choose to share bookmarks or keep them private.  There&#8217;s no middle ground.  I really want the public bookmarking capability of Flock, but I don&#8217;t want to give up the ability to keep private bookmarks to get it.</p>
<p>Of course, I&#8217;ve gotten so used to the PageRank and AdSense plugins I use for Firefox that the lack of support for them on Flock (last I checked) is a deal-killer as well.</p>
<p>In many ways, Flock is a better browser than Firefox.  It just doesn&#8217;t do some of what I need.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: sterling</title>
		<link>http://www.chipsquips.com/?p=559&#038;cpage=1#comment-7221</link>
		<dc:creator>sterling</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 19 Sep 2006 17:41:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.chipsquips.com/?p=559#comment-7221</guid>
		<description>Yes, I do like it, Lutz.  Except for the partial text feed.  That&#039;s great that Stowe plans to stay involved in his brainchild.  Good luck!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yes, I do like it, Lutz.  Except for the partial text feed.  That&#8217;s great that Stowe plans to stay involved in his brainchild.  Good luck!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Lutz.W</title>
		<link>http://www.chipsquips.com/?p=559&#038;cpage=1#comment-7220</link>
		<dc:creator>Lutz.W</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 19 Sep 2006 17:33:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.chipsquips.com/?p=559#comment-7220</guid>
		<description>Thanks for your review, glad you like the design -- or so it seems... ;)
Stowe contacted us to be a contributor to Techcrush. We&#039;re happy to have him on board.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for your review, glad you like the design &#8212; or so it seems&#8230; <img src='http://www.chipsquips.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_wink.gif' alt=';)' class='wp-smiley' /><br />
Stowe contacted us to be a contributor to Techcrush. We&#8217;re happy to have him on board.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
