<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: To Move from MT or Not?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.rluxemburg.com/2004/05/16/to-move-from-mt-or-not/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.rluxemburg.com/2004/05/16/to-move-from-mt-or-not/</link>
	<description>It's Latin for "Let there be light"</description>
	<pubDate>Tue, 06 Jan 2009 10:33:45 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: lux</title>
		<link>http://www.rluxemburg.com/2004/05/16/to-move-from-mt-or-not/comment-page-1/#comment-80</link>
		<dc:creator>lux</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 16 May 2004 22:21:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www25.a2hosting.com/~rslux1/2004/05/16/to-move-from-mt-or-not/#comment-80</guid>
		<description>Either I did not make myself clear or you misread me. The issue is not price per se. It's value for price. Right now there is no compelling reason for the average user to upgrade except for the fact that if they don't do it now, it will cost more to upgrade in the future. Maybe you can get away with that if you're Microsoft, but not if you're a startup like SixApart.

I would be quite willing to shell out $ for MT above and beyond what I have already paid *if* I had more information as to whether or not it's a step worth taking. Right now I don't have enough data to make a decision.

As a former product manager, I understand very well the perils of going public with your feature roadmap. But given the depth of the PR hole that SixApart has dug for itself, they would do well to show some good faith to their users and be more forthcoming about what the future will hold for MT licensees.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Either I did not make myself clear or you misread me. The issue is not price per se. It&#8217;s value for price. Right now there is no compelling reason for the average user to upgrade except for the fact that if they don&#8217;t do it now, it will cost more to upgrade in the future. Maybe you can get away with that if you&#8217;re Microsoft, but not if you&#8217;re a startup like SixApart.</p>
<p>I would be quite willing to shell out $ for MT above and beyond what I have already paid *if* I had more information as to whether or not it&#8217;s a step worth taking. Right now I don&#8217;t have enough data to make a decision.</p>
<p>As a former product manager, I understand very well the perils of going public with your feature roadmap. But given the depth of the PR hole that SixApart has dug for itself, they would do well to show some good faith to their users and be more forthcoming about what the future will hold for MT licensees.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anonymous Coward</title>
		<link>http://www.rluxemburg.com/2004/05/16/to-move-from-mt-or-not/comment-page-1/#comment-79</link>
		<dc:creator>Anonymous Coward</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 16 May 2004 21:48:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www25.a2hosting.com/~rslux1/2004/05/16/to-move-from-mt-or-not/#comment-79</guid>
		<description>Don't be cheap, the 100$ price well worth this software. They were giving away the software for free, they even deserve the 600$.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Don&#8217;t be cheap, the 100$ price well worth this software. They were giving away the software for free, they even deserve the 600$.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
