<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"><channel><title>Disqus - Latest Comments for marcusgrimm</title><link>http://disqus.com/people/marcusgrimm/</link><description></description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Tue, 19 Feb 2008 07:15:32 -0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Re: Fever hit 103.8 last night.  B&amp;#8230;</title><link>http://mturro.disqus.com/fever_hit_1038_last_night_b8230/#comment-159526</link><description>I had about two good days on Friday and Saturday of last week... this is stomach flu and regular flu back to back.  Not recommended.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">mturro</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 19 Feb 2008 07:15:32 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Fever hit 103.8 last night.  B&amp;#8230;</title><link>http://mturro.disqus.com/fever_hit_1038_last_night_b8230/#comment-157636</link><description>Whoa - you're still sick? youch - those kids aren their germs. Hope you recover soon.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">marcusgrimm</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 18 Feb 2008 11:10:10 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Good print design is bad browser design</title><link>http://mturro.disqus.com/good_print_design_is_bad_browser_design/#comment-135799</link><description>"Maybe that's a place where designers can practice thinking about screens instead of pages."&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;That's really a great idea. A big piece that's missing right now is print designers having the freedom to experiment with the layout. That would go a long way - I think - to helping publishers realize the possibilities</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">marcusgrimm</dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 08 Feb 2008 16:45:46 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Good print design is bad browser design</title><link>http://mturro.disqus.com/good_print_design_is_bad_browser_design/#comment-135645</link><description>Hi Michael,&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;It's not often I'll defend Texterity, but I think your criticism is a bit harsh this time around. In this case, SPIN added iTunes and web links to the bands' websites and MySpace pages. I think this has value... Every week, I read People magazine (blame my wife) and sometimes see cool bands. Because it's in print, I rarely actually look them up online. Hence, I don't interact with the content nearly as much as I could.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;But also - the costs for SPIN to do this instead of creating something entirely different would've made it counter-productive (imo). That's 1 fact that digital edition bashers consistently overlook: that the product provides a decent ROI with minimal investment. While other products could conceivably provide a higher return in terms of visitors and engagement, they'd do so at considerable expense and using resources that most publishers already lack.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Curious if you checked out Issuu yet? They're still "shoving" a portrait onto a landscape, but the UI is nice. Curious of your opinion.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">marcusgrimm</dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 08 Feb 2008 15:48:16 -0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>