<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xml:base="http://www.fastcompany.com" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
<channel>
 <title></title>
 <link>http://www.fastcompany.com/member_recent_content/95852</link>
 <description>Member recent activity block for member profile page</description>
 <language>en</language>
<item>
 <title>Shipping product costs money, generating angst is free</title>
 <link>http://www.fastcompany.com/blog/kris-bliesner/loose-change/shipping-product-costs-money-generating-angst-free</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;
I was reminded again today why Microsoft as a company frustrates so many of its own customers and why standing up and being accountable for your actions is key. Disclaimer (I used to work for Microsoft). Disclaimer 2 (I&#039;m a current volume license customer of Microsoft) so I&#039;m horribly conflicted.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.fastcompany.com/blog/kris-bliesner/loose-change/shipping-product-costs-money-generating-angst-free&quot;&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
 <category domain="http://www.fastcompany.com/tag/information-technology">information technology</category>
 <category domain="http://www.fastcompany.com/tag/innovation-2">Innovation</category>
 <category domain="http://www.fastcompany.com/tag/technology-1">Technology</category>
 <category domain="http://www.fastcompany.com/tag/leadership-2">Leadership</category>
 <category domain="http://www.fastcompany.com/tag/management-1">Management</category>
 <category domain="http://www.fastcompany.com/tag/careers-1">Careers</category>
 <category domain="http://www.fastcompany.com/tag/social-responsibility-1">Ethonomics</category>
 <pubDate>Wed, 03 Sep 2008 21:26:42 -0400</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>Kris Bliesner</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">991836 at http://www.fastcompany.com</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>Pay per volume pricing scams</title>
 <link>http://www.fastcompany.com/blog/kris-bliesner/loose-change/pay-volume-pricing-scams</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;
A good deal of what we have to pay for to run our company&#039;s infrastructure is based on volume. We pay for the volume or capacity of internet bandwidth we have. We pay for the number of physical phone lines we have coming into our building. We pay rates on all the credit card transactions we do based on volume.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
&amp;nbsp;
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.fastcompany.com/blog/kris-bliesner/loose-change/pay-volume-pricing-scams&quot;&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
 <category domain="http://www.fastcompany.com/tag/information-technology">information technology</category>
 <category domain="http://www.fastcompany.com/tag/innovation-2">Innovation</category>
 <category domain="http://www.fastcompany.com/tag/technology-1">Technology</category>
 <category domain="http://www.fastcompany.com/tag/leadership-2">Leadership</category>
 <category domain="http://www.fastcompany.com/tag/management-1">Management</category>
 <pubDate>Wed, 13 Aug 2008 17:03:57 -0400</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>Kris Bliesner</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">966738 at http://www.fastcompany.com</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>Why Open Source will always lose</title>
 <link>http://www.fastcompany.com/blog/kris-bliesner/loose-change/why-open-source-will-always-lose</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;
I always like to kick off a new blog with a provocative post.  I believe Open Source will always lose.  To prove my theory I point you to the below diagram of linux distributions from 1991-2007.  What percentage of the PC market do you think each distribution could dream to achieve in the products short lifespan?
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.fastcompany.com/blog/kris-bliesner/loose-change/why-open-source-will-always-lose&quot;&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
 <category domain="http://www.fastcompany.com/tag/information-technology">information technology</category>
 <category domain="http://www.fastcompany.com/tag/innovation-2">Innovation</category>
 <category domain="http://www.fastcompany.com/tag/technology-1">Technology</category>
 <pubDate>Mon, 11 Feb 2008 20:53:34 -0500</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>Kris Bliesner</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">694669 at http://www.fastcompany.com</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>Minority Report II</title>
 <link>http://www.fastcompany.com/blog/kris-bliesner/loose-change/minority-report-ii</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;  &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.fastcompany.com/blog/kris-bliesner/loose-change/minority-report-ii&quot;&gt;read more&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
 <category domain="http://www.fastcompany.com/tag/information-technology">information technology</category>
 <category domain="http://www.fastcompany.com/tag/innovation-2">Innovation</category>
 <category domain="http://www.fastcompany.com/tag/technology-1">Technology</category>
 <pubDate>Mon, 11 Feb 2008 20:40:21 -0500</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>Kris Bliesner</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">694620 at http://www.fastcompany.com</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>Fast Talk Response - </title>
 <link>http://www.fastcompany.com/fast-talk-response/fast-talk-response-201</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;IMHO Successful implementations of flex hours/time have nothing to do with &quot;management controls&quot; or other such nonsense.  I believe it is more about the culture of performance.  If you have to engineer rules around flex staffing you have already missed a bigger problem around managing performance.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Flex Staffing is such an industrial era concept.  As technology advancements blur the lines between telecommuting and &quot;regular commuting&quot; companies will have to redefine the work week.&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
 <pubDate>Fri, 08 Feb 2008 12:45:05 -0500</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>Kris Bliesner</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">681507 at http://www.fastcompany.com</guid>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>
