<?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: Editing FastCompany.tv</title>
	<atom:link href="http://scobleizer.com/2008/02/27/editing-fastcompanytv/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://scobleizer.com/2008/02/27/editing-fastcompanytv/</link>
	<description>Searching for world-changing technology</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 24 Mar 2012 05:14:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: nusret</title>
		<link>http://scobleizer.com/2008/02/27/editing-fastcompanytv/comment-page-1/#comment-118130</link>
		<dc:creator>nusret</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 17 Aug 2009 07:50:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://scobleizer.wordpress.com/?p=4099#comment-118130</guid>
		<description>thanks very</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>thanks very</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Shakir Razak</title>
		<link>http://scobleizer.com/2008/02/27/editing-fastcompanytv/comment-page-1/#comment-95855</link>
		<dc:creator>Shakir Razak</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 29 Feb 2008 04:22:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://scobleizer.wordpress.com/?p=4099#comment-95855</guid>
		<description>Hi,

Experience shows that content wins over quality (as long as its adequate).  Anyway, as most of Roberts stuff will probably be talking-heads and pointing his cameras to computer screens, it really isn&#039;t worth the investment.


Yours kindly,


Shakir Razak


P.s. @ pete,
I get confused, but didn&#039;t Fast Company have that logo/style first?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi,</p>
<p>Experience shows that content wins over quality (as long as its adequate).  Anyway, as most of Roberts stuff will probably be talking-heads and pointing his cameras to computer screens, it really isn&#8217;t worth the investment.</p>
<p>Yours kindly,</p>
<p>Shakir Razak</p>
<p>P.s. @ pete,<br />
I get confused, but didn&#8217;t Fast Company have that logo/style first?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Shakir Razak</title>
		<link>http://scobleizer.com/2008/02/27/editing-fastcompanytv/comment-page-1/#comment-222443</link>
		<dc:creator>Shakir Razak</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 29 Feb 2008 04:22:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://scobleizer.wordpress.com/?p=4099#comment-222443</guid>
		<description>Hi,

Experience shows that content wins over quality (as long as its adequate).  Anyway, as most of Roberts stuff will probably be talking-heads and pointing his cameras to computer screens, it really isn&#039;t worth the investment.


Yours kindly,


Shakir Razak


P.s. @ pete,
I get confused, but didn&#039;t Fast Company have that logo/style first?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi,</p>
<p>Experience shows that content wins over quality (as long as its adequate).  Anyway, as most of Roberts stuff will probably be talking-heads and pointing his cameras to computer screens, it really isn&#8217;t worth the investment.</p>
<p>Yours kindly,</p>
<p>Shakir Razak</p>
<p>P.s. @ pete,<br />
I get confused, but didn&#8217;t Fast Company have that logo/style first?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Pete</title>
		<link>http://scobleizer.com/2008/02/27/editing-fastcompanytv/comment-page-1/#comment-95857</link>
		<dc:creator>Pete</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 Feb 2008 10:53:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://scobleizer.wordpress.com/?p=4099#comment-95857</guid>
		<description>Wtg on ripping of that HP-font. Your Fastcompany is personal again.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Wtg on ripping of that HP-font. Your Fastcompany is personal again.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Pete</title>
		<link>http://scobleizer.com/2008/02/27/editing-fastcompanytv/comment-page-1/#comment-222445</link>
		<dc:creator>Pete</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 Feb 2008 10:53:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://scobleizer.wordpress.com/?p=4099#comment-222445</guid>
		<description>Wtg on ripping of that HP-font. Your Fastcompany is personal again.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Wtg on ripping of that HP-font. Your Fastcompany is personal again.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nickcast</title>
		<link>http://scobleizer.com/2008/02/27/editing-fastcompanytv/comment-page-1/#comment-95856</link>
		<dc:creator>Nickcast</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 Feb 2008 06:40:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://scobleizer.wordpress.com/?p=4099#comment-95856</guid>
		<description>Hey Robert,
I&#039;ve never posted a comment here but I wanted to talk about content distribution. I have no doubt HD is the way to go, like Aaron said above there are many free ways to distribute content and for me higher quality video often means the difference from seeing and loving something. As a technology lover I feel the difference of HD and non-HD is like I was watching the Kennedy-Nixon debate in Chicago in 1960. The reason people try to downplay streaming HD is mainly the fact as you pointed out it uses too many bits, but once Youtube adopts high quality like Vimeo.com this really won&#039;t be an issue.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hey Robert,<br />
I&#8217;ve never posted a comment here but I wanted to talk about content distribution. I have no doubt HD is the way to go, like Aaron said above there are many free ways to distribute content and for me higher quality video often means the difference from seeing and loving something. As a technology lover I feel the difference of HD and non-HD is like I was watching the Kennedy-Nixon debate in Chicago in 1960. The reason people try to downplay streaming HD is mainly the fact as you pointed out it uses too many bits, but once Youtube adopts high quality like Vimeo.com this really won&#8217;t be an issue.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

