Commodore Remix

As some of you prolly noticed by now there's now an RSS feed of the latest 10 tunes added. Is that enough, and if not how many tunes should it list?

And no, a direct download feed won't happen. So don't ask.

Jan,

Methinks the last ten should suffice for most people, to be perfectly honest. It also means that the RSS feed isn't bloated, either.

Now you just have to convince people to drop IE and use Firefox. Incidentally loads of people are complaining to Logitech about their iTouch drivers (see Firefox forum!) so hopefully they'll do something about it for you.

wazzaw wrote:Now you just have to convince people to drop IE and use Firefox.

Well, Firefox/Thunderbird aren't the only RSS readers out there. Although it is even easier to check RSS feeds with the sage extension for Firefox.

ok.. whats an RSS feed? <stupid internet noobie person here>

"Real Simple Syndication", its a kind of easy XML for bringing webcontent to your webpages - you can send or recieve RSS feeds, but you gotta pay for sending it, far as i know theres no free version as yet... not that id know how to set it up anyway....

The basic idea is that regular fresh content bring the google spider bot more often and increases your google rank.

Matrix wrote:"Real Simple Syndication", its a kind of easy XML for bringing webcontent to your webpages

Or to an RSS reader. Which means that rather than zoom around the various sites to check for new content you have the reader pull in headlines from the sites you subscribe to. Not to mention rendering headlines from cluttered news pages like The Registers in a readable fashion.

Matrix wrote:you can send or recieve RSS feeds, but you gotta pay for sending it, far as i know theres no free version as yet... not that id know how to set it up anyway....

Wrong. All you have to do is write the XML according to the publicly available RSS specifications and make it available through your site.

Matrix wrote:The basic idea is that regular fresh content bring the google spider bot more often and increases your google rank.

Wrong again. While loadsa people linking to your RSS feed on their webpages would of course increase the google rank for the feed, just having end-users add your feed to their RSS readers doesn't increase Googles awareness of your site as it never sees that traffic. PostNuke (used on soundwavers.com) and other site engines that have the ability to incorporate RSS feeds all do so by including the contents of said RSS feeds in the HTML that they produce - so once again; Google isn't aware of it.

I strongly suggest that you read up on the subject before you shoot off about something you obviously have no idea about next time.

Actually i did read up about it before i posted:
http://www.internetmarketinghere.com/RSS-Index.html
http://www.stampedesecret.com/?hop=watersaffl

Maybe he's wrong, or maybe i understood it wrong, but you could maybe be a bit more polite ?

"I strongly suggest that you read up on the subject before you shoot off about something you obviously have no idea about next time"

If you could see that 3 ppl ticked "what is RSS on the poll" why didnt you explain sooner... ? It's quite arrogant to expect everybody knows what you know.

Jeesh...

Matrix: I think you just fell foul of Jan's off-the-wall sense of humour... you should probably have imagined him saying that sentence while putting his arm round your neck and buying you a beer (typical behaviour for the boy, I've found!) Er... so, play nicely boys.

Chris

Matrix wrote:Actually i did read up about it before i posted:
http://www.internetmarketinghere.com/RSS-Index.html
http://www.stampedesecret.com/?hop=watersaffl

Maybe he's wrong, or maybe i understood it wrong, but you could maybe be a bit more polite ?

Right, I just read those two pages. Both are clearly written from a marketing perspective. Both claim that RSS feeds and Blogs are an untaped resource for endless riches.

"And very few marketers know about RSS Feeds. Let alone how to use it to make money. So far I know only of two people besides Laura and me. One of them made $1,080,496.37 on the Internet in less than 24 hours a short while ago (why do you think he uses RSS Feeds?)"

I (politely) suggest that had you tried reading up on RSS from a factual perspective rather than a marketing one we wouldn't even be having this discussion now.

The opening paragraph of http://www.xml.com/pub/a/2002/12/18/dive-into-xml.html has a good impartial brief of the various applications of RSS. Found it by googling for "rss" and following the first hit. The second result for said search being the official page for the RSS 2.0 specs.

Matrix wrote:If you could see that 3 ppl ticked "what is RSS on the poll" why didnt you explain sooner... ? It's quite arrogant to expect everybody knows what you know.

I don't expect everyone to know about RSS - that's why I included the "RSS?" option in the poll in the first place.
And my reason for not explaining RSS to those 3 people is that neither of them claimed it to be something it isn't.

I'll admit to having a dislike for misinformation, but arrogance isn't one of my traits.

Fair enough then, so i misunderstood, SORRY, was just trying to help, after all, you werent offering up any assistance were you.

"I'll admit to having a dislike for misinformation, but arrogance isn't one of my traits."

- Maybe you should work on it a little harder then in the future before...

shouting your mouth off

...at forum members, simply putting them right is enough without the insult.

My involvement in this thread is concluded.

Come on Matrix, Jan's comment wasn't that bad, was it? Especially with an attached.

God, it's one of those days. Perhaps we should close the forum down for today? Everybody's tetchy and jumpy. Especially me. You BASTARDS!

Chris

Matrix wrote:Fair enough then, so i misunderstood, SORRY, was just trying to help, after all, you werent offering up any assistance were you.

Eh... I just read through two webpages of marketing-speak trying to pass RSS of as snake oil in order to better inform you of any shortcomings of the sourcematerial you originally quoted - as per your own request.

And obviously informing you of two incorrect claims and setting the record straight isn't conisddered helpful either. Maybe I shouldn't have used the word "Wrong", and maybe I should have sugar-coated the rest of my post to make it easily digestable.

Matrix wrote:- Maybe you should work on it a little harder then in the future before...

shouting your mouth off

...at forum members, simply putting them right is enough without the insult.

Eh... That's quoting out of context and you know it.

I put a big fat winking smiley in the original post for the reason that I meant no harm by said statement (as both Chris and Markus also pointed out). Didn't mean for you to ignore it in order to strengthen your impression of me as a supposedly arrogant person.

Maybe im feeling kinda jumpy today, lets get married and show Arvid n Makke how its done

The RSS world seems to be rather fragmented [1]. There are multiple more or less compatible specs from different sources. Then there are the alternatives like the ATOM spec.

Of course the word "marketing" should be a sign of warning for everyone searching for technical information.

[1] http://web.resource.org/rss/1.0/spec
From W3C and based on RDF
(Oh, I see the XML.com article has a nice table of the different "versions".)