<?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: The Sticky of Excitement</title>
	<atom:link href="http://theappleblog.com/2006/10/24/the-sticky-of-excitement/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://theappleblog.com/2006/10/24/the-sticky-of-excitement/</link>
	<description>TheAppleBlog, published by and for the day-to-day Apple user, is a prominent source for news, reviews, walkthroughs, and real life application of all Apple products.</description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 05 Dec 2008 00:51:22 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.3</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Robert Head</title>
		<link>http://theappleblog.com/2006/10/24/the-sticky-of-excitement/#comment-108304</link>
		<dc:creator>Robert Head</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 Aug 2007 05:25:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://theappleblog.com/2006/10/24/the-sticky-of-excitement/#comment-108304</guid>
		<description>Oh, and yes, the Apple store (and the iTunes store) run under WebObjects.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Oh, and yes, the Apple store (and the iTunes store) run under WebObjects.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Robert Head</title>
		<link>http://theappleblog.com/2006/10/24/the-sticky-of-excitement/#comment-108303</link>
		<dc:creator>Robert Head</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 Aug 2007 05:24:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://theappleblog.com/2006/10/24/the-sticky-of-excitement/#comment-108303</guid>
		<description>Personally, I'm gonna file this one under "wild, unsupported conjecture."

And I say that as a formerly happy WebObjects developer, and currently happy Ruby on Rails developer.

BTW, IMHO, yes, Rails is better for a lot of reasons.  But, WO is great, too, and I'd be enormously surprised if they switched in the next couple of years.  There is just no *need* to do so.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Personally, I&#8217;m gonna file this one under &#8220;wild, unsupported conjecture.&#8221;</p>
<p>And I say that as a formerly happy WebObjects developer, and currently happy Ruby on Rails developer.</p>
<p>BTW, IMHO, yes, Rails is better for a lot of reasons.  But, WO is great, too, and I&#8217;d be enormously surprised if they switched in the next couple of years.  There is just no *need* to do so.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nic Sarginson</title>
		<link>http://theappleblog.com/2006/10/24/the-sticky-of-excitement/#comment-71553</link>
		<dc:creator>Nic Sarginson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 28 Oct 2006 19:00:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://theappleblog.com/2006/10/24/the-sticky-of-excitement/#comment-71553</guid>
		<description>Well personally I can't see it going away that quickly as there is no technical reason why they need to take the site down to make changes or add new content, its purely a marketing ploy.

Though as it does make you think they are running a coal powered website if they really do have to take it down to make changes.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well personally I can&#8217;t see it going away that quickly as there is no technical reason why they need to take the site down to make changes or add new content, its purely a marketing ploy.</p>
<p>Though as it does make you think they are running a coal powered website if they really do have to take it down to make changes.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: matthew</title>
		<link>http://theappleblog.com/2006/10/24/the-sticky-of-excitement/#comment-70878</link>
		<dc:creator>matthew</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 25 Oct 2006 13:23:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://theappleblog.com/2006/10/24/the-sticky-of-excitement/#comment-70878</guid>
		<description>&#62; I’m much more inclined to believe that the Apple Store is built using WebObjects.

Maybe I misunderstood your post, but the ARS is built with WO.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&gt; I’m much more inclined to believe that the Apple Store is built using WebObjects.</p>
<p>Maybe I misunderstood your post, but the ARS is built with WO.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Todd Baur</title>
		<link>http://theappleblog.com/2006/10/24/the-sticky-of-excitement/#comment-70815</link>
		<dc:creator>Todd Baur</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 25 Oct 2006 05:29:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://theappleblog.com/2006/10/24/the-sticky-of-excitement/#comment-70815</guid>
		<description>"as I suspect" = I don't have a confirmed source. I just see what they are up too and this makes sense to do it. They have the money to do it, and face it - apple.com needs to be redone. It's 2.0 time...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;as I suspect&#8221; = I don&#8217;t have a confirmed source. I just see what they are up too and this makes sense to do it. They have the money to do it, and face it - apple.com needs to be redone. It&#8217;s 2.0 time&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Andre</title>
		<link>http://theappleblog.com/2006/10/24/the-sticky-of-excitement/#comment-70790</link>
		<dc:creator>Andre</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 25 Oct 2006 03:44:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://theappleblog.com/2006/10/24/the-sticky-of-excitement/#comment-70790</guid>
		<description>Core 2 Duo MacBook Pros. :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Core 2 Duo MacBook Pros. <img src='http://theappleblog.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John Truong</title>
		<link>http://theappleblog.com/2006/10/24/the-sticky-of-excitement/#comment-70747</link>
		<dc:creator>John Truong</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 25 Oct 2006 00:12:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://theappleblog.com/2006/10/24/the-sticky-of-excitement/#comment-70747</guid>
		<description>I'm much more inclined to believe that the Apple Store is built using WebObjects. It allows you to build extremely dynamic and flexible sites, so I don't think the stickies are really there because Apple's forced to use them.

You might be getting well ahead of yourself by declaring that the stickie &lt;i&gt;will&lt;/i&gt; go away because of Ruby on Rails, and that this might be the last time we see it.

It's not enough for some piece of technology to be cool or the latest thing for a sensible company like Apple to throw away their huge existing investment and start over. Especially if the payoff from switching away from WebObjects is not very big.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m much more inclined to believe that the Apple Store is built using WebObjects. It allows you to build extremely dynamic and flexible sites, so I don&#8217;t think the stickies are really there because Apple&#8217;s forced to use them.</p>
<p>You might be getting well ahead of yourself by declaring that the stickie <i>will</i> go away because of Ruby on Rails, and that this might be the last time we see it.</p>
<p>It&#8217;s not enough for some piece of technology to be cool or the latest thing for a sensible company like Apple to throw away their huge existing investment and start over. Especially if the payoff from switching away from WebObjects is not very big.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Fred&#8217;s Journal &#187; Archive &#187; Apple to rewrite the Store with Ruby on Rails</title>
		<link>http://theappleblog.com/2006/10/24/the-sticky-of-excitement/#comment-70743</link>
		<dc:creator>Fred&#8217;s Journal &#187; Archive &#187; Apple to rewrite the Store with Ruby on Rails</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 25 Oct 2006 00:01:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://theappleblog.com/2006/10/24/the-sticky-of-excitement/#comment-70743</guid>
		<description>[...] That&#8217;s a guess of The Apple Blog, the Apple Store will get rewritten using Ruby on Rails. If it&#8217;s true, that will be another big achievement for Rails and it&#8217;ll get even more serious attention. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] That&#8217;s a guess of The Apple Blog, the Apple Store will get rewritten using Ruby on Rails. If it&#8217;s true, that will be another big achievement for Rails and it&#8217;ll get even more serious attention. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Frederic Brunel</title>
		<link>http://theappleblog.com/2006/10/24/the-sticky-of-excitement/#comment-70738</link>
		<dc:creator>Frederic Brunel</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Oct 2006 23:37:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://theappleblog.com/2006/10/24/the-sticky-of-excitement/#comment-70738</guid>
		<description>If the Apple Store is being redesigned with Ruby on Rails that's a scoop. Do you have more information about this? What let you think that it would happen and why?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If the Apple Store is being redesigned with Ruby on Rails that&#8217;s a scoop. Do you have more information about this? What let you think that it would happen and why?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
