Macromedia, Full Text Feeds are your Friends

Posted on by

I would say by all accounts the acquisition of Macromedia by Adobe couldn’t have gone better for those of us from the MACR side of things. In fact the “fun” side of Macromedia seems to have permeated through Adobe and there are a bunch of exciting things going on. I mean would Adobe have released Photoshop to open beta before acquiring Macromedia? No way Jose.

But one thing gets me – the Adobe bloggers have full feeds while the Macromedia guys have partial feeds. I don’t know if this is hard wired into the TypePad system that Macromedia used or what, but it kills me. Now, I realize to 99.9% of the people who follow the blogs this doesn’t really matter, but for a guy like me watching a bunch of feeds, full text is the best way to go. And as it turns out, Adobe is getting a lot of attention from other bloggers. It’s much easier for those bloggers to follow news with full text feeds than it is to wade through he partial text feeds.

The day JD gets a full feed I will cry tears of joy. (Okay, maybe that was too much information).

[tags]Blogging, Macromedia, Adobe[/tags]

Related posts:

  1. New RSS Feeds
  2. Props to Macromedia
  3. Macromedia and Adobe Shareholders Approve Merger
  4. Why Web 2.0 Moved Microsoft and Not Macromedia
  5. I’d Like to See More Flex on Fullasagoog
  • http://weblogs.macromedia.com/jd John Dowdell

    “RSS” was originally Rich Site Summary, a compact XML listing of recently changed files with optional abstract… later it was overloaded to Really Simple Syndication as something for publishers… demand increased for multiple mediatypes, advertising, links, all like what happened to email in the 90s before it got overloaded. Two things called “RSS” today.

    Me, I don’t care, but I haven’t put any work into the blog’s structure recently… it’s got MovableType templates and Macromedia templates and republishing over 6000 items to see changes slows my testing cycles… I’ve already moved from blogspot.com to markme.com to macromedia.com and will move someday to adobe.com.

    I try to get my point across within the abstract, but XML versions have limitations with comments and updates; a browser’s a vital tool anyway.

    (The name “newsreader” was also overloaded atop an existing meaning, but it’s a good example of a class of application where people already prefer to get out of the hypertext browser.)

  • Woody

    Funny … I asked the exact same thing back in October on his blog (look in comments).

    http://weblogs.macromedia.com/jd/archives/2006/10/itax.cfm

  • http://blog.digitalbackcountry.com Ryan Stewart

    I hate to say it, but I don’t care what it was meant for, I just know what it’s purpose is now. Flash wasn’t originally suppose to be an platform for RIA, but it is now. My point is unless you are trying to force people to your site for some reason, you should publish the whole post. Just my 2 cents.

    Well said Woody. JD, it’s going to be kind of sad when you move over to blogs.adobe. Then again, 1) you’ll be using full text feeds, and 2) I’ll be higher than you in Technorati rank for a short moment in time…..so maybe it won’t be that sad ;)