<?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: Touch Screen Blackberry&#8230;  The myth lives on&#8230;</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.rimarkable.com/touch-screen-blackberry-the-myth-lives-on/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.rimarkable.com/touch-screen-blackberry-the-myth-lives-on</link>
	<description>The Unofficial BlackBerry Weblog</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 09:11:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: arick wierson</title>
		<link>http://www.rimarkable.com/touch-screen-blackberry-the-myth-lives-on/comment-page-1#comment-107823</link>
		<dc:creator>arick wierson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 03 Jan 2008 14:38:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.rimarkable.com/?p=784#comment-107823</guid>
		<description>A Blackberry without a Qwerty keyboard is not a Blackberry.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A Blackberry without a Qwerty keyboard is not a Blackberry.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: bigdogg</title>
		<link>http://www.rimarkable.com/touch-screen-blackberry-the-myth-lives-on/comment-page-1#comment-103440</link>
		<dc:creator>bigdogg</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 28 Sep 2007 17:54:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.rimarkable.com/?p=784#comment-103440</guid>
		<description>this is one ugly BB</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>this is one ugly BB</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: zhs2</title>
		<link>http://www.rimarkable.com/touch-screen-blackberry-the-myth-lives-on/comment-page-1#comment-9824</link>
		<dc:creator>zhs2</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 17 Jul 2006 07:12:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.rimarkable.com/?p=784#comment-9824</guid>
		<description>as a matter of fact, qwert keyboard is convinient for Chinese as well, at least for me. I prefer entering Chinese charactor through PinYin by typing on keyboard, but not &quot;drawing&quot; on a touch screen. It is faster and easier. And there is another disadvantage when the touch screen is used to often: it will make abrasion on the screen.
the only problem, i think, of the phone with qwert keybroad is that the size of the cell phone is too big. Many people prefer to a smaller cell phone that fits asian&#039;s palm size.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>as a matter of fact, qwert keyboard is convinient for Chinese as well, at least for me. I prefer entering Chinese charactor through PinYin by typing on keyboard, but not &#8220;drawing&#8221; on a touch screen. It is faster and easier. And there is another disadvantage when the touch screen is used to often: it will make abrasion on the screen.<br />
the only problem, i think, of the phone with qwert keybroad is that the size of the cell phone is too big. Many people prefer to a smaller cell phone that fits asian&#8217;s palm size.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Thought</title>
		<link>http://www.rimarkable.com/touch-screen-blackberry-the-myth-lives-on/comment-page-1#comment-8232</link>
		<dc:creator>Thought</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 13 Jul 2006 00:59:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.rimarkable.com/?p=784#comment-8232</guid>
		<description>I agree that the article is in some respects written in a sloppy fashion.

Unfortunately, this is more the norm with the press.  I know I grew up thinking that the writings of those in the major media were almost infallible...only to realize over time that this was not so.

Many writing in the media have no particular expertise on what they write...they are simply journalism majors with a very shallow understanding of what they are covering.  Consider the reporting on science...it is abysmal.  Media writers exhibit no understanding whatsover of that subject matter.

We really don&#039;t know what qualified this writer to be their &quot;technology correspondent&quot;...maybe they happened to be the one who knew a little bit more about using Word in the office.  You never know.  

So it&#039;s not surprising that the media would get this report confused.  That is one reason why blogs like this one give out more accurate information...they are written by people who actually have an  interest and experience in what they are writing about.  Bloggers care about the details; too often, those in the traditional media do not.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I agree that the article is in some respects written in a sloppy fashion.</p>
<p>Unfortunately, this is more the norm with the press.  I know I grew up thinking that the writings of those in the major media were almost infallible&#8230;only to realize over time that this was not so.</p>
<p>Many writing in the media have no particular expertise on what they write&#8230;they are simply journalism majors with a very shallow understanding of what they are covering.  Consider the reporting on science&#8230;it is abysmal.  Media writers exhibit no understanding whatsover of that subject matter.</p>
<p>We really don&#8217;t know what qualified this writer to be their &#8220;technology correspondent&#8221;&#8230;maybe they happened to be the one who knew a little bit more about using Word in the office.  You never know.  </p>
<p>So it&#8217;s not surprising that the media would get this report confused.  That is one reason why blogs like this one give out more accurate information&#8230;they are written by people who actually have an  interest and experience in what they are writing about.  Bloggers care about the details; too often, those in the traditional media do not.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

