tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6525469191850690957.comments2012-05-11T09:13:03.792-07:00Mihai Parparitahttps://profiles.google.com/111567061469336027617noreply@blogger.comBlogger1278125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6525469191850690957.post-76371245657441544252012-05-11T09:13:03.792-07:002012-05-11T09:13:03.792-07:00C: You can make noredirect=1 URLs from PicasaWeb, and send them to your relatives. See http://techmeasy.blogspot.com/2011/09/download-images-in-original-size-from.html for more information (just skip the part about downloading at the end).Mihai Parparitahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12343650264888591427noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6525469191850690957.post-27017746780458773902012-05-11T05:47:10.747-07:002012-05-11T05:47:10.747-07:00Is there a way to send links to PicasaWeb albums so that the receiver can open it in Picasaweb without further tech knowledge? <br /><br />I think it was a really bad idea to make shared picasaweb albums redirect to G+ automatically. My non-tech relatives have a hard time working with G+, but are quite familiar with Picasaweb by now. Thanks in advance!Chttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06556068425887690444noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6525469191850690957.post-24904904805392467402012-04-20T09:33:04.808-07:002012-04-20T09:33:04.808-07:00grazie grazie grazie:D:D:D&lt;3&lt;3&lt;3stellegemellehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12212331522025906356noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6525469191850690957.post-74720671922958622032012-03-04T09:07:33.497-08:002012-03-04T09:07:33.497-08:00I don&#39;t mind of the UI setting. Google can do whatever they want, I also don&#39;t mind to add Google+ in Reader. BUT it is just SO WRONG to disable the share functionality in new design of Google reader.<br /><br />Ever they think of how many PEOPLE are used to share their best article, their thought and feeling through Google Reader before?<br /><br />You were telling us the history of its development, thank&#39;S, but for WHAT end? <br /><br />It is your ex-company who need to know the fact and reason of the previous functionality existence by historical basis. So Google can create a BETTER solution, not a WORSE one. <br /><br />If you are with us, please escalate our voice.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6525469191850690957.post-73368545435121021062012-02-21T21:23:37.351-08:002012-02-21T21:23:37.351-08:00Matti: As far as what algorithm is used, I&#39;m not familiar with that part of Chrome. There was a pointer to http://code.google.com/p/chromium/source/search?q=file%3Aaudio_renderer_algorithm_base.cc in the internal discussion about this, but it doesn&#39;t seem to contain anything too interesting.Mihai Parparitahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12343650264888591427noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6525469191850690957.post-84115167518032075402012-02-21T03:48:33.260-08:002012-02-21T03:48:33.260-08:00Any inside knowledge on what kind of algorithms the codecs used by Chrome use for time stretching ?<br />More importantly, how does the quality compare to eg. ScaleTempo , SoundTouch ? <br />(not to mention non-realtime semi-professional or broadcast quality solutions, or MS WMP)<br /><br />VLC (using scaletempo) has the option to change Stride, Overlap and Search lenght ,<br />so one can change/optimize quality based on type of content (speech vs. music) and <br />desired speed ( eg. 1/8 , 2.67x , 4x). Anything such (or automagical) in Chrome ?<br /><br />&gt; supports up to 3x, though I haven&#39;t made my way that high yet)<br />With video, 5x and even higher is easy, provided good subtitles/CC ,<br />fast enough connection, fast enough computer to decode the video that fast.<br /><br />Personally around 2.5x speed is pretty optimal, without having to spend <br />too much attention. At 3x can&#39;t really do anything else at the same time - <br />and any speech has to be quite clear and well articulated at 1x to begin with.Matti Nesciohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15063450784984558695noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6525469191850690957.post-2578816916888828692012-02-21T01:19:54.703-08:002012-02-21T01:19:54.703-08:00Hello, thx for this demo, im tryin to use it for a mobile web app, it works fine on iOS, but not on Android 2.3, elements rotate on Z-axe instead of X or Y axes. Do you have an idea ?Slynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6525469191850690957.post-76130770924827663512012-01-23T11:55:46.478-08:002012-01-23T11:55:46.478-08:00@Sam: You&#39;ll have to change the CSS and JS in flipboard.js and flipboard.css to use marginLeft/marginRight, rotateX instead of rotateY, etc.Mihai Parparitahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12343650264888591427noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6525469191850690957.post-76173067578797854802012-01-23T10:21:22.531-08:002012-01-23T10:21:22.531-08:00wow, great work Mihai!! <br />I have a question, how to flip it vertically instead of horizontally ?<br />Thank you!Sam Alhttp://www.iserve.menoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6525469191850690957.post-40363286339300480912012-01-13T10:33:11.243-08:002012-01-13T10:33:11.243-08:00First Google forced users to get Gmail accounts in order to use YouTube, now it&#39;s trying to force users to get a Google+ account in order to share stuff. This is the kind of crap that sends users like me in search of new services from a company that doesn&#39;t coerce users. Google thinks it can get away with this because it believes there aren&#39;t alternatives to Reader and YouTube. Eventually, however, a company will come along and provide YouTube and Reader services that don&#39;t require that you sign up for crap you don&#39;t want in order to use them. When that happens, Google will become a footnote in history.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6525469191850690957.post-73740140880507134162012-01-11T14:17:02.038-08:002012-01-11T14:17:02.038-08:00@Julien: Any hub should work, I believe I&#39;ve used it with the Superfeedr hub in the past.Mihai Parparitahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12343650264888591427noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6525469191850690957.post-61460852569908125012012-01-11T08:15:05.416-08:002012-01-11T08:15:05.416-08:00Awesome news! Do you only support Google Hosted PubSubHubbub feeds or any hub?Julienhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15217664125461160087noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6525469191850690957.post-6565696849745147452012-01-09T07:51:03.188-08:002012-01-09T07:51:03.188-08:00@Anonymous: Thanks for the feedback. I&#39;ve added more frequent updates to my todo list.Mihai Parparitahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12343650264888591427noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6525469191850690957.post-78790649850001878152012-01-09T01:39:11.243-08:002012-01-09T01:39:11.243-08:00This is a fantastic tool! I know many people are frustrated about Google Reader&#39;s inability to &quot;Mark all as unread&quot; to make reading from the beginning of the blog easier.<br /><br />Is it possible to increase the frequency of the playback, or even give total access to the entire feed archive initially? I can understand how if you&#39;re learning a language, one post a day would be sufficient, but for something like a webcomic, or for people like me who like to skim, this would be great.<br /><br />Thanks so much for Feed Playback, I love it!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6525469191850690957.post-76653150624883795702011-11-10T10:37:27.043-08:002011-11-10T10:37:27.043-08:00I hate, *hate* having to switch over to Google+ and peruse my stream just to see if anyone shared an interesting blog article.<br /><br />I understand Google&#39;s desire to put G+ at the center of all social features of Google&#39;s products. The ability to share Reader articles with different circles makes a lot of sense. But the ability to *read* shared articles within Reader itself *also* makes a lot of sense, and I now find myself missing half the articles my friends share because I don&#39;t visit G+ nearly as often as Reader.<br /><br />I was a fiercely loyal fan of almost all Google products right up until the last few months, with the butt-ugly &quot;New Look&quot; they&#39;ve insisted on, and all the half-baked Google+ integration.<br /><br />Google, it&#39;s not too late to turn this around, but you need to issue a major Mea Culpa and listen to your users.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6525469191850690957.post-4194572666576917542011-11-07T15:00:40.604-08:002011-11-07T15:00:40.604-08:00Well, it&#39;s nice to be back to September, 2005. If all of this has happened before and all of this will happen again, we&#39;re only a year from the introduction of basic social features in Google Reader!Robbyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02888531829520078050noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6525469191850690957.post-20947123098428098522011-11-07T05:53:18.471-08:002011-11-07T05:53:18.471-08:00New reader suxx, i use FeedDemon now, sharing gone, design is ugly, evolution ?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6525469191850690957.post-77797502778783823592011-11-05T15:18:04.745-07:002011-11-05T15:18:04.745-07:00&quot;We Hate Google-Reader Redesign&quot; page on facebookAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6525469191850690957.post-13103535674123740562011-11-05T13:28:38.485-07:002011-11-05T13:28:38.485-07:00What Google have done here is really disgusting. I&#39;ve been using Google Reader for some years, using the &#39;shared items&#39; both as a very powerful archive of things I need to keep in a searchable place, and as a way of keeping the many websites that I work with updated. Using the RSS feed from my shared items page updates loads of websites and email services that I provide to others.<br /><br />At a stroke, without warning, Google have removed the main tool I use for my work and removed my access to my archive. This creates huge problems for me in my work and I&#39;ve lost a lot of time I&#39;ll never get back. There are weasel words on their site about how I can download by archive in the JSON file, but seeing as there&#39;s not an application that I can load it up into, it&#39;s a useless offer.<br /><br />Sure - I can use MobileRSS on iPhone for now, and someone has created a Google Chrome plugin that lets me do a lot of what I used to to - but for how long? MobileRSS may even go along with the new GR at their next release. Google have already shown that they&#39;re quite capable of being total pricks and I suspect they&#39;ll soon turn off the &#39;shared items&#39; archive and get rid of the legacy &#39;shared items&#39; page.<br /><br />This is a really nasty abuse of Google&#39;s market dominance (after all, the RSS reader market has been long-since cleaned out by the dominance of GR) and if it isn&#39;t illegal for them to turn off services like this with (almost?) no warning, then it should be.Pauliehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15234456385928668896noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6525469191850690957.post-60800364814200221622011-11-03T02:56:11.011-07:002011-11-03T02:56:11.011-07:00The current transition locks in all our sharing within the Google-territory for simple reason that there is no RSS feed for 1+ items. If you have a service based on RSS feeds, you should really think twice before you break the RSS interoperability. We can no longer output directly our intra-Reader activity to extra-Google services. That&#39;s bad, that&#39;s no reciprocity, that&#39;s no netiquette: It does not care for the ecology of the internet, it cares only for the ecology of Google.tmedakhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08004217408809784023noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6525469191850690957.post-30677738307754227392011-11-02T15:22:57.733-07:002011-11-02T15:22:57.733-07:00@S.L. Æris: Which timespan? Most of the events that I cite are public releases (and point to posts on the Reader blog), so the dates shouldn&#39;t be too surprising.Mihai Parparitahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12343650264888591427noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6525469191850690957.post-62095334443511050262011-11-02T13:50:45.710-07:002011-11-02T13:50:45.710-07:00Honestly, I am shocked at this timeline. I was under the impression Reader was nearly completely ignored during that timespan.S.L. Ærishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13232378383366968549noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6525469191850690957.post-78245992470879665622011-11-01T21:52:03.155-07:002011-11-01T21:52:03.155-07:00@dp: Unfortunately public tags are gone too. The help center article was missed during the update, but it should be gone now.Mihai Parparitahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12343650264888591427noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6525469191850690957.post-24353628483408140912011-11-01T07:21:55.009-07:002011-11-01T07:21:55.009-07:00Today is the day after Google launched a new version of Google Reader. Am I correct that we can no longer tag items and then share the tagged feed URL publicly? The Google Help files still show that you can change the sharing to public and view the url - but all of that is missing from the actual settings page. Any thoughts? Please tell me I&#39;m wrong!<br />-dpdPhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16793160416301504994noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6525469191850690957.post-78376360455084050802011-10-31T18:54:22.733-07:002011-10-31T18:54:22.733-07:00Giving feedback in the comments section of this post is not productive; I&#39;m no longer on the Google Reader team.<br /><br />Please give feedback in either the forum (http://www.google.com/support/forum/p/reader?hl=en) or on Google Plus (feel free to + reference Louis Gray - https://plus.google.com/100535338638690515335).Mihai Parparitahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12343650264888591427noreply@blogger.com