Brother (or sister (sibling?)) company Yellahoose posted this reminder about a presentation on Coda tonight at 6 at the University of Southern Maine:
http://yellahoose.posterous.com/presentation-tonight-on-coda
Packawhallop's DNS and host gurus make hot use of Coda for some web design and content management tasks. Other Packawhallop-ers use BBEdit, but Coda is very well done too!
Well this is counter-intuitive: The NYTimes.com has 100,000 paid subscribers after implementing a paid online subscription service, what people who don't like or don't feel they should have to pay for quality call, perjoratively, a "paywall." (Yes, NYT does represent, I think, a level of quality journalism, kind of like what makes the New Yorker better than most any blog.)
But is it counter-intuitive? I mean, do we, as consumers of blogs and of information from more traditional news sources both, do we really think the stuff on the blogs is as researched, objective and well written as articles on NYT? And do we think there is a worth, as our a chunk of the economy is given over to knowledge workers and skilled people who fashion content, to professional journalists?
What's this mean, long-term: Well, NYT is proving it can charge for content, even charge a premium price if it's content is of a premium quality. If you're creating great, premium content, then take note. You might not need to heed the advice that it needs to be free if it's online.
Jim here: I've complained about the killer missing feature in Panic's otherwise decent FTP software, Transmit, to a number of people. The feature is the "intelligence," or whatever you presume good programming to be (I'll call it "the smahtz"), whereby Transmit "knows" you've got a file open for editing and refuses to open or create another open, editable instance of that file. Practical example:
I'm often very busy. Because of my extremely advanced age, and my refusal to take regular vitamin supplements that would otherwise "fix" the problem, or so those who are near and dear to me would like me to believe, my memory's not what it used to be. When I'm working, which is what I do a lot, I might have a couple of web sites open, and I might be editing numerous files on these remote servers. This might sound extremely messy, but whereas I admit my memory might not be so good, my ability to multitask is fine, thankyouverymuch.
So, working, many sites, remote server, a whole lotta files files open, multi-tasking: check!, memory: umm... If I'm using my FTP software as a file browser, because that's what it is, and if I'm editing a Perl script on customer's ftp.5-piecechicken.ie site, and if I try opening cgi-bin/dinner.pl for editing when I already have cgi-bin/dinner.pl open already, then the FTP software should have the smahtz and not open another editable instance of that file. The FTP software is a file browser, like I said. Try opening may copies of the same Word file on your computer. (Perhaps a bad example, but you get the picture.) The FTP software should focus the file.
Is that too much to ask?
Panic: Please add this. I've even talked to you directly about it. A couple years ago. It was "in the works," or the feature had some other non-committal status. I am happy with Transmit otherwise, but your software needs this feature.
Thanks.
