<?xml version="1.0"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
<channel>
<title>Engadget - Comments for </title>
<link>http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/09/samsung-chumby-prototype-digiframe-hands-on/</link>
<description>Engadget Comments for </description>

<language>en-us</language>
<copyright>Copyright 2010 Weblogs, Inc. The contents of this feed are available for non-commercial use only.</copyright>
<generator>Blogsmith http://www.blogsmith.com/</generator><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on ]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/09/samsung-chumby-prototype-digiframe-hands-on/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/09/samsung-chumby-prototype-digiframe-hands-on/</guid><description><![CDATA[Too little, too late?]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[Verythrax]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Jan 9th 2009 7:50PM</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on ]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/09/samsung-chumby-prototype-digiframe-hands-on/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/09/samsung-chumby-prototype-digiframe-hands-on/</guid><description><![CDATA[I bet that Samsung and Chumby ran to hide away  this thing away in shame once they took a look at what iRiver has been able to bring to the show.<br>Who is gonna want this (or anything else for that matter) once it will be possible to buy iRiver's super-uber-megacool  "Wave-home" ?<br>I can't wait to be able to bring one at home.]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[KilgoreTrout]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Jan 9th 2009 9:38PM</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on ]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/09/samsung-chumby-prototype-digiframe-hands-on/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/09/samsung-chumby-prototype-digiframe-hands-on/</guid><description><![CDATA[My bosses son is one of the developers, so he got to mess with the thing. From what he told me, I'm very surprised they showed it off.<br><br>Either, way cool to see its getting an update, too bad to hear about the performance, but really it didn't sound ready to be shown off.]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[Templarian]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Jan 10th 2009 12:06AM</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on ]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/09/samsung-chumby-prototype-digiframe-hands-on/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/09/samsung-chumby-prototype-digiframe-hands-on/</guid><description><![CDATA[This looks great! Chumby is great for internet feeds and connected music. I hope it comes with a remote. <br>Didn't Sony announce a similar product as well? <br>]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[Arvind Ganesh]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Jan 10th 2009 2:47AM</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on ]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/09/samsung-chumby-prototype-digiframe-hands-on/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/09/samsung-chumby-prototype-digiframe-hands-on/</guid><description><![CDATA[I really can't see the advantage of a Chumby over something like the Nokia internet tablets for widgets, feeds, email, web browsing and connected music. The hardware is better on the NITs and the development community is more active too. There isn't a huge difference in price either, although I guess the Chumby is cuddlier!]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[ZSX]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Jan 10th 2009 8:14AM</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on ]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/09/samsung-chumby-prototype-digiframe-hands-on/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/09/samsung-chumby-prototype-digiframe-hands-on/</guid><description><![CDATA[The Chumby is about $200 and the NITs are about $400.  That's a BIG difference in price.  If they were around $250, I'd agree with you.]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[whoster69]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Jan 10th 2009 2:54PM</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on ]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/09/samsung-chumby-prototype-digiframe-hands-on/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/09/samsung-chumby-prototype-digiframe-hands-on/</guid><description><![CDATA[Are we talking about money ?<br>... well, that is exactly the reason why i started www.mojocafe.net!<br>Why shall i buy just another digi-frame that shows me information if i can bring that<br>on my allready-bought mobile device !?<br><br>Let these things support Flash and a WiFi connection and sooner or later i will<br>port the Mojocafe to it :D]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[Carlos]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Jan 10th 2009 3:00PM</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on ]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/09/samsung-chumby-prototype-digiframe-hands-on/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/09/samsung-chumby-prototype-digiframe-hands-on/</guid><description><![CDATA[the chumby has wifi and all of it's modules are written in flash.<br><br>it also runs linux under the hood and has webserver and other software available... it's far more powerful than a simple mobile device.]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[jyee]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Jan 11th 2009 9:37AM</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Comments on ]]></title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/09/samsung-chumby-prototype-digiframe-hands-on/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/09/samsung-chumby-prototype-digiframe-hands-on/</guid><description><![CDATA[What i tried to say is that just in case that you allready own a mobile device<br>and would like to have fullscreen widgets "around you" then you won't need<br>to buy just another gadget for that.<br><br>And concerning the chumby: i LOVE the device. It's awesome but unfortunately<br>a) i can not afford it<br>and<br>b) 95% of the widgets offered are made by the community what<br><br>b.1) is very nice as open minded<br>but<br>b.2.) aweful as most of those widgets do not offer a minimum of bold design aspect<br><br>That's also the reason why framechannel.com and similliar "app stores" won't work out<br>from a certain amount of applications on.]]></description><dc:creator><![CDATA[carlos]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Feb 13th 2009 1:34PM</pubDate></item></channel></rss>