<?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"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Desktop Applications Dying, Dying&#8230;</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.pathf.com/blogs/2007/10/desktop-applica/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.pathf.com/blogs/2007/10/desktop-applica/</link>
	<description>Running commentary about agile development, user experience design and Ajax.</description>
	<pubDate>Mon, 01 Dec 2008 23:24:58 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Mark Holton</title>
		<link>http://www.pathf.com/blogs/2007/10/desktop-applica/#comment-271</link>
		<dc:creator>Mark Holton</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 18 Oct 2007 17:52:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.pathf.com/blogs/?p=222#comment-271</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;I totally agree with you, Dietrich.  For a large class of applications a solution involving a web application + Gears (or AIR) to expand offline represents a competitive advantage in terms of deployment and in many cases capability.  &lt;/p&gt;

</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I totally agree with you, Dietrich.  For a large class of applications a solution involving a web application + Gears (or AIR) to expand offline represents a competitive advantage in terms of deployment and in many cases capability.  </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
