Domain: raelity.org
Stories and comments across the archive that link to raelity.org.
Comments · 9
-
Re:What a great list!
=)
I actually chuckled out loud.
It's funny, though, that a large amount of the people on that lists are pundits, opinionators, journalists, popularizers, evangleists and the like, not really what I think of as tech people, like you and a few others. Why isn't Rael Dornfest on the list? There's not enough people that actually program there. David Pogue is technical? Because he writes/edits the Missing Manuals? -
Blosxom and Pico, baby!
Call me old fasioned... Blosxom works pretty well for me... here's a link: http://www.raelity.org/apps/blosxom/
It's php based. Sure, it's a bit old-fasioned and isn't all webby-schmebby, but who cares. I SSH to my server and add entries as I see fit. Yes, there are probably easier, better, more fun and geekerific ways to do it, but that's how I do it.
Also, I started doing what kids today call blogging back in 1994... periodic diary-type entries on my webpage. Looking back, maybe I should've kept copies of it all, but that would've been a pain in the ass without something like Blosxom, which keeps things in tidy little directories. Oh well. -
Re:95% of which is crap
This blog post (and especially the comments) discusses pinging yahoo.com, the switch to pinging google and what else do other people ping.
Incidentally, this is the 2nd result when searching for "ping yahoo" on Yahoo! and only the 9th result when searching on Google (the first 8 are much less relevant).
This is typical example of real-life "ping yahoo.com to check if you're online" suggestion.
P.S. And personally I do ping yahoo.com. The are the Internet and compared to them Google is insignificant. :) -
As with everything, it dependsIt really depends on what the purpose of the weblog is, what you expect to convey, how you need to display it, etc. Since you've provided us with few indications of what you're thinking (other than a large number of users), it's hard to say for sure.
From a geek standpoint, one of the best weblogging programs that I've used is blosxom. It's by Rael Dornfest, who edited the Google Hacks book, among others. I use it for my web sites, and it's a very simple, powerful, and flexible tool. Depending on how you need to use it, this may be a good way to go.
I have not used Moveable Type, so I can't comment on that. But I've had good experiences with blosxom.
=Brian -
Re:Just how many sites need to be dynamic?
Or better yet a set of simple, concise data files and a batch method for converting it to static HTML after updates for display on the web.
Sounds like you're talking about Bloxsom.
-
Re:Authors Website with some examples from the boo
-
Re:Authors Website with some examples from the boo
-
Re:I dunno why I would want to but...
-
Try Bloxsom...
I'm looking at using a weblog for process documentation purposes, and have looked at the usual suspects: Movable Type, Grey Matter, etc.
But the one that really stands out so far as a great mix of power, simplicity, and a wonderfully non-intrusive license is Bloxsom. If you're looking for blog software, check it out.
It's straight Perl (very small, simple, and streamlined) but offers the most important power features of the others.
Even better, it fully leverages the underlying power of your OS, web server, or environment/tools - use and leverage whatever editors and text processing tools you like. All in all, a simple, powerful, and elegant solution in a world of bloated, complex, and overengineered alternatives.