Comments on: Can someone build this for me? http://wrapping.marthaburtis.net/2005/10/04/can-someone-build-this-for-me/ tales of swimming upstream Tue, 27 Jul 2010 15:19:00 -0600 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6 hourly 1 By: Pedablogy: Musings on the Art & Craft of Teaching » Blog Archive » Rage Against the Machine http://wrapping.marthaburtis.net/2005/10/04/can-someone-build-this-for-me/comment-page-1/#comment-100 Pedablogy: Musings on the Art & Craft of Teaching » Blog Archive » Rage Against the Machine Mon, 10 Oct 2005 17:39:48 +0000 http://wrapping.marthaburtis.net/?p=75#comment-100 [...] 217;t You Submit Meta 2? Rage Against the Machine The other week Martha posted a wish for an idealized type of software. Here’s a recent column from the Wall Street [...] [...] 217;t You Submit Meta 2? Rage Against the Machine The other week Martha posted a wish for an idealized type of software. Here’s a recent column from the Wall Street [...]

]]> By: Jerry http://wrapping.marthaburtis.net/2005/10/04/can-someone-build-this-for-me/comment-page-1/#comment-96 Jerry Sat, 08 Oct 2005 05:01:19 +0000 http://wrapping.marthaburtis.net/?p=75#comment-96 Sometimes I agree that it would be great to have an all-in-one tool, but it seems that what one person wants in their all-in-one tool is different from person to person. After all, if someone is used to AIM, why do you need a tool with a unfamiliar chat feature that doesn't work as well as AIM? If you agree that AIM does chat pretty well, everyone (almost) knows how to use it and has an account, and you can run it in a window next to your wiki, why reinvent the wheel for the sake of an all-in-one solution? It just seems that when someone tries to build in lots of features, they make the whole thing more complicated than it needs to be. I think a "best of breed" approach might have some value too. By the way, one more wiki tool to look at is <a href="http://www.writeboard.com/" rel="nofollow">Writeboard</a> from 37signals - easy to use and has a commenting feature! Sometimes I agree that it would be great to have an all-in-one tool, but it seems that what one person wants in their all-in-one tool is different from person to person. After all, if someone is used to AIM, why do you need a tool with a unfamiliar chat feature that doesn’t work as well as AIM? If you agree that AIM does chat pretty well, everyone (almost) knows how to use it and has an account, and you can run it in a window next to your wiki, why reinvent the wheel for the sake of an all-in-one solution? It just seems that when someone tries to build in lots of features, they make the whole thing more complicated than it needs to be. I think a “best of breed” approach might have some value too. By the way, one more wiki tool to look at is Writeboard from 37signals – easy to use and has a commenting feature!

]]> By: Martha http://wrapping.marthaburtis.net/2005/10/04/can-someone-build-this-for-me/comment-page-1/#comment-90 Martha Wed, 05 Oct 2005 12:12:12 +0000 http://wrapping.marthaburtis.net/?p=75#comment-90 Thanks for the information Christopher. I should have noted this difference in my original post. The open-source nature of Synchroedit is enticing--and bodes well for future features and developments. I'm definitely looking forward to seeing it in it's full (non-alpha) version. In the meantime, since for our particular project time is of the essencce, these other products may just have to do ;) Thanks for the information Christopher. I should have noted this difference in my original post. The open-source nature of Synchroedit is enticing–and bodes well for future features and developments. I’m definitely looking forward to seeing it in it’s full (non-alpha) version.

In the meantime, since for our particular project time is of the essencce, these other products may just have to do ;)

]]> By: Christopher Allen http://wrapping.marthaburtis.net/2005/10/04/can-someone-build-this-for-me/comment-page-1/#comment-89 Christopher Allen Tue, 04 Oct 2005 20:22:23 +0000 http://wrapping.marthaburtis.net/?p=75#comment-89 There is a big difference between synchroedit and the others -- we are developing it as open source, with a public protocol, good developer documentation, etc. This means there may be ultimately lots of services that use synchroedit, not just one. There is a big difference between synchroedit and the others — we are developing it as open source, with a public protocol, good developer documentation, etc. This means there may be ultimately lots of services that use synchroedit, not just one.

]]>