Re: [OT] PING

2010-09-07 Thread Dave Cragg
Thanks very much, Chipp. Greatly appreciated. Dave ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-re

Re: [OT] PING

2010-09-06 Thread Mark Wieder
That was fast... dug up: http://www.wesleyverhoeve.com/why-myspace-failed-or-when-you-kill-the-user-experience-you-kill-yourself -- -Mark Wieder mwie...@ahsoftware.net ___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this

Re: [OT] PING

2010-09-06 Thread Mark Wieder
Chipp- Monday, September 6, 2010, 5:36:38 PM, you wrote: > All three of these social networking communities have grown in an ad hoc > fashion. Changing quickly to take advantage of the trends. MySpace is an > example of one who didn't change fast enough, and now is left behind. Or one might say

Re: [OT] PING

2010-09-06 Thread Chipp Walters
Google pay per click advertisement is getting so very expensive-- esp for our client in the auto insurance business where a single ad click can go as high as $130! Yes, Geico or Progressive or other pay up to that amount just to have you click on their Google Ad when searching for "auto insurance."

Re: [OT] PING

2010-09-06 Thread Dave Cragg
On 6 Sep 2010, at 21:04, Chipp Walters wrote: > More at > http://dlvr.it/4gnsY I confess I'm totally ignorant of the social networking thing. I read the links you posted, but not knowing much about the networks they were comparing with, I didn't really follow. I was hoping you might have summa

Re: [OT] PING

2010-09-06 Thread Mark Wieder
Chipp- Monday, September 6, 2010, 1:04:50 PM, you wrote: > Our company does a lot of work in the Online Digital Marketing > space. This stuff is interesting. There are no right and wrong > answers. ...there may be a lot of wrong ones floating around out there... -- -Mark Wieder mwie...@ahsof

Re: [OT] PING

2010-09-06 Thread Chipp Walters
You're a funny guy, Dave! No trick question, just wondering how much effect PING will have. There's one theory which says this is just the beginning of social networking built around a single venue, others see it doomed to failure because it's too commercialized. Our company does a lot of work

Re: [OT] PING

2010-09-06 Thread Pierre Sahores
How would the "Social Networks" supposed notion really make sense when we are daily bused by (and about) "Ethological Networks" businesses only. Are FaceBook and Twitter in social tasks involved in any way ? iTunes Ping ? Pathetic ... Le 6 sept. 2010 à 05:04, Chipp Walters a écrit : > Any e

Re: [OT] PING

2010-09-06 Thread Richmond
On 09/06/2010 06:19 PM, Mark Wieder wrote: Chipp- Sunday, September 5, 2010, 8:04:56 PM, you wrote: Any early thoughts on Apple's new social network? It seems to be getting some concerned reviews. http://bit.ly/dn5AON Hadn't heard about Ping until your note, but I like Eric Schwarz

Re: [OT] PING

2010-09-06 Thread Mark Wieder
Chipp- Sunday, September 5, 2010, 8:04:56 PM, you wrote: > Any early thoughts on Apple's new social network? It seems to be getting some > concerned reviews. > http://bit.ly/dn5AON Hadn't heard about Ping until your note, but I like Eric Schwarz's comment (pasted here because I can't figure out

Re: [OT] PING

2010-09-06 Thread Richmond
On 09/06/2010 01:18 PM, Dave Cragg wrote: On 6 Sep 2010, at 04:04, Chipp Walters wrote: Any early thoughts on Apple's new social network? It seems to be getting some concerned reviews. http://bit.ly/dn5AON Is this a trick question, Chipp? Anyway, I agree with whatever your thoughts

Re: [OT] PING

2010-09-06 Thread Dave Cragg
On 6 Sep 2010, at 04:04, Chipp Walters wrote: > Any early thoughts on Apple's new social network? It seems to be getting some > concerned reviews. > http://bit.ly/dn5AON Is this a trick question, Chipp? Anyway, I agree with whatever your thoughts are, unless they're wrong. :-) Dave ___

[OT] PING

2010-09-05 Thread Chipp Walters
Any early thoughts on Apple's new social network? It seems to be getting some concerned reviews. http://bit.ly/dn5AON Chipp Walters CEO, Shafer Walters Group, Inc___ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to s

Re: OT: Ping timeout much longer with 10.3.7

2005-02-10 Thread Alex Tweedly
Dar Scott wrote: On Feb 10, 2005, at 9:07 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Our testers have discovered that when Revolution does a shell("ping") to a server that isn't responding, that the timeouts are much different, depending on which version of Mac OS X one is on. In Mac OS 10.3.2, we get feedb

Re: OT: Ping timeout much longer with 10.3.7

2005-02-10 Thread James . Cass
ubject: Re: OT: Ping timeout much longer with 10.3.7 On Feb 10, 2005, at 9:07 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Our testers have discovered that when Revolution does a shell("ping") > to a > server that isn't responding, that the timeouts are much different, > depending o

Re: OT: Ping timeout much longer with 10.3.7

2005-02-10 Thread Dar Scott
On Feb 10, 2005, at 9:07 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Our testers have discovered that when Revolution does a shell("ping") to a server that isn't responding, that the timeouts are much different, depending on which version of Mac OS X one is on. In Mac OS 10.3.2, we get feedback in a matter o

OT: Ping timeout much longer with 10.3.7

2005-02-10 Thread RGould8
Our testers have discovered that when Revolution does a shell("ping") to a server that isn't responding, that the timeouts are much different, depending on which version of Mac OS X one is on. In Mac OS 10.3.2, we get feedback in a matter of seconds. In Mac OS 10.3.7, it takes over 2 minute