<?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: Microsoft Speeds Release of Windows 3ME</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.scrappleface.com/?feed=rss2&#038;p=2219" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.scrappleface.com/?p=2219</link>
	<description>News Fairly Unbalanced. We Report. You Decipher.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 07 Sep 2010 23:57:37 -0400</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Mr. Gadget &#187; Blog Archiv &#187; Microsoft Speeds Release of Windows 3ME</title>
		<link>http://www.scrappleface.com/?p=2219&#038;cpage=1#comment-176079</link>
		<dc:creator>Mr. Gadget &#187; Blog Archiv &#187; Microsoft Speeds Release of Windows 3ME</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 18 May 2006 21:13:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.scrappleface.com/?p=2219#comment-176079</guid>
		<description>[...] by Scott Ott [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] by Scott Ott [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: DEALSDAQ</title>
		<link>http://www.scrappleface.com/?p=2219&#038;cpage=1#comment-167117</link>
		<dc:creator>DEALSDAQ</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 Mar 2006 02:46:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.scrappleface.com/?p=2219#comment-167117</guid>
		<description>&lt;strong&gt;Windows 2007&lt;/strong&gt;

A few years ago, I thought I figured out why Microsoft moved away from using the year to name their Windows releases.  It seemed obvious: who wanted to be using Windows 98 in the year 2001?  There is, after all, a handy way to remember Windows 95 came ...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>Windows 2007</strong></p>
<p>A few years ago, I thought I figured out why Microsoft moved away from using the year to name their Windows releases.  It seemed obvious: who wanted to be using Windows 98 in the year 2001?  There is, after all, a handy way to remember Windows 95 came &#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
