<?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: Google Apps Standard Edition Findable Again</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/07/07/google-apps-standard-edition-findable-again/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/07/07/google-apps-standard-edition-findable-again/</link>
	<description>Startup and Technology News</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 26 Nov 2009 21:40:33 -0800</lastBuildDate>
	
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: pete</title>
		<link>http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/07/07/google-apps-standard-edition-findable-again/comment-page-1/#comment-2849545</link>
		<dc:creator>pete</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 11 Jul 2009 08:24:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techcrunch.com/?p=80015#comment-2849545</guid>
		<description>The link is still not available to 90% of the users (Those who don&#039;t chose English/US on the top right)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The link is still not available to 90% of the users (Those who don&#8217;t chose English/US on the top right)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Zoli's Blog</title>
		<link>http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/07/07/google-apps-standard-edition-findable-again/comment-page-1/#comment-2848720</link>
		<dc:creator>Zoli's Blog</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 10 Jul 2009 20:44:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techcrunch.com/?p=80015#comment-2848720</guid>
		<description>&lt;strong&gt;Google Replaces Beta Tag With Price Tag on Apps...&lt;/strong&gt;

 Just a short note:

After 5 years Google Apps are no longer considered Beta.
They may not be free for long?  The free version is still available, but takes some digging to find &#8211; I wonder if it&#8217;s intentional&#8230;

Guess who will welcome...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>Google Replaces Beta Tag With Price Tag on Apps&#8230;</strong></p>
<p> Just a short note:</p>
<p>After 5 years Google Apps are no longer considered Beta.<br />
They may not be free for long?  The free version is still available, but takes some digging to find &#8211; I wonder if it&#8217;s intentional&#8230;</p>
<p>Guess who will welcome&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Google&#8217;s vulnerable invulnerability: &#8220;No more Freebies&#8221; &#171; Pandemonium of silence</title>
		<link>http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/07/07/google-apps-standard-edition-findable-again/comment-page-1/#comment-2847923</link>
		<dc:creator>Google&#8217;s vulnerable invulnerability: &#8220;No more Freebies&#8221; &#171; Pandemonium of silence</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 10 Jul 2009 14:03:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techcrunch.com/?p=80015#comment-2847923</guid>
		<description>[...] Google appears to be quietly seizing on the trend. Noted earlier this week that the standard free Google Apps sign-up page had  been replaced by a paid 14-day trial and annual $50 user fee. Shortly afterward, Google officials responded on the [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Google appears to be quietly seizing on the trend. Noted earlier this week that the standard free Google Apps sign-up page had  been replaced by a paid 14-day trial and annual $50 user fee. Shortly afterward, Google officials responded on the [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: David Reinhardt</title>
		<link>http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/07/07/google-apps-standard-edition-findable-again/comment-page-1/#comment-2847866</link>
		<dc:creator>David Reinhardt</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 10 Jul 2009 13:01:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techcrunch.com/?p=80015#comment-2847866</guid>
		<description>All the recent Google announcements have got me thinking that Google is consolidating its estate into an end-to-end service offering for mid-tier businesses. I think Tufan Tunc is right, Google are looking to sweat their assets into additional revenue streams. And why shouldn&#039;t they? There&#039;s nothing wrong with it.

I wrote a blog post about it here - http://davereinhardt.wordpress.com/2009/07/10/will-you-be-leaving-microsoft-for-google/</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>All the recent Google announcements have got me thinking that Google is consolidating its estate into an end-to-end service offering for mid-tier businesses. I think Tufan Tunc is right, Google are looking to sweat their assets into additional revenue streams. And why shouldn&#8217;t they? There&#8217;s nothing wrong with it.</p>
<p>I wrote a blog post about it here &#8211; <a href="http://davereinhardt.wordpress.com/2009/07/10/will-you-be-leaving-microsoft-for-google/" rel="nofollow"></a><a href='http://davereinhardt.wordpress.com/2009/07/10/will-you-be-leaving-microsoft-for-google/'>http://daverein...oft-for-google/</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Will you be leaving Microsoft for Google? &#171; Dave Reinhardt</title>
		<link>http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/07/07/google-apps-standard-edition-findable-again/comment-page-1/#comment-2847807</link>
		<dc:creator>Will you be leaving Microsoft for Google? &#171; Dave Reinhardt</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 10 Jul 2009 11:54:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techcrunch.com/?p=80015#comment-2847807</guid>
		<description>[...] Google apps standard (free edition) has been &#8216;downplayed&#8217; [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Google apps standard (free edition) has been &#8216;downplayed&#8217; [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Google on Privacy, Coming out of Beta, and (Possibly) Rethinking Free Google Apps &#171; KnowledgeForward</title>
		<link>http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/07/07/google-apps-standard-edition-findable-again/comment-page-1/#comment-2843494</link>
		<dc:creator>Google on Privacy, Coming out of Beta, and (Possibly) Rethinking Free Google Apps &#171; KnowledgeForward</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Jul 2009 14:25:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techcrunch.com/?p=80015#comment-2843494</guid>
		<description>[...] After TechCrunch reported on Google Apps Standard Edition (GASE) being buried, it partially resurfaced.&#160; There&#8217;s now a link to GASE, but without the key word &#8220;free&#8221; or a [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] After TechCrunch reported on Google Apps Standard Edition (GASE) being buried, it partially resurfaced.&nbsp; There&#8217;s now a link to GASE, but without the key word &#8220;free&#8221; or a [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: <fb:name linked="false" useyou="false" uid="789173821">Servaas Schrama</fb:name></title>
		<link>http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/07/07/google-apps-standard-edition-findable-again/comment-page-1/#comment-2842949</link>
		<dc:creator><fb:name linked="false" useyou="false" uid="789173821">Servaas Schrama</fb:name></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Jul 2009 09:24:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techcrunch.com/?p=80015#comment-2842949</guid>
		<description>actually, you can seperate using 1 apps account. The trick is to point everything in each domain to google apps, but point the @ record to different hosting accounts. You do need full DNS access to get this done though. Google has excellent docs on how to do this.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>actually, you can seperate using 1 apps account. The trick is to point everything in each domain to google apps, but point the @ record to different hosting accounts. You do need full DNS access to get this done though. Google has excellent docs on how to do this.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: <fb:name linked="false" useyou="false" uid="789173821">Servaas Schrama</fb:name></title>
		<link>http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/07/07/google-apps-standard-edition-findable-again/comment-page-1/#comment-2842901</link>
		<dc:creator><fb:name linked="false" useyou="false" uid="789173821">Servaas Schrama</fb:name></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Jul 2009 08:59:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techcrunch.com/?p=80015#comment-2842901</guid>
		<description>I was surprised by the other post about this, since I registered a second apps account 3 weeks ago. It was hard to find then as well, but during signup you could still choose it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I was surprised by the other post about this, since I registered a second apps account 3 weeks ago. It was hard to find then as well, but during signup you could still choose it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: <fb:name linked="false" useyou="false" uid="627847847">Peter Caddy</fb:name></title>
		<link>http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/07/07/google-apps-standard-edition-findable-again/comment-page-1/#comment-2842591</link>
		<dc:creator><fb:name linked="false" useyou="false" uid="627847847">Peter Caddy</fb:name></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Jul 2009 06:26:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techcrunch.com/?p=80015#comment-2842591</guid>
		<description>^_^</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>^_^</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: altrenda</title>
		<link>http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/07/07/google-apps-standard-edition-findable-again/comment-page-1/#comment-2842543</link>
		<dc:creator>altrenda</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Jul 2009 06:08:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techcrunch.com/?p=80015#comment-2842543</guid>
		<description>maybe Mike Arrington should charge for spam posts.

And maybe he should charge double for boring one&#039;s like this.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>maybe Mike Arrington should charge for spam posts.</p>
<p>And maybe he should charge double for boring one&#8217;s like this.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Google Apps Standard Edition Findable Again &#124; Technology News Update</title>
		<link>http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/07/07/google-apps-standard-edition-findable-again/comment-page-1/#comment-2841973</link>
		<dc:creator>Google Apps Standard Edition Findable Again &#124; Technology News Update</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Jul 2009 00:23:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techcrunch.com/?p=80015#comment-2841973</guid>
		<description>[...] Read the original post: Google Apps Standard Edition Findable Again [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Read the original post: Google Apps Standard Edition Findable Again [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: David Loughry</title>
		<link>http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/07/07/google-apps-standard-edition-findable-again/comment-page-1/#comment-2841891</link>
		<dc:creator>David Loughry</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 Jul 2009 23:31:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techcrunch.com/?p=80015#comment-2841891</guid>
		<description>Uncool of Google to change things without saying much, even if their terms of service allows it, which it might. However, $50/year for businesses is pretty reasonable for what Google Apps offers. Maybe they decided their ad revenue can’t cross-subsidize everything. I’ve been working on a related approach that might be of interest.

I decided I needed to charge some minimal fee for access to my creativity and innovation website ProxThink.com. But for a variety of reasons, I settled on a more hybrid approach. For $4.95 per year people can access the standard features, with some ads on pages. For $5 more, they get the option to turn ads off. There is another level with more features for $19.95 per year. Also, and this is critical, with each plan, we ask people to proxri based on their use, benefits and the proximity. A proxri might be described as a systems-thinking version of a tip, commission, contribution, thank you or bonus. It’s a way of working with the idea that if you take care of the neighborhood, or network, the neighborhood or network will take care of you. “Proxri” stands for ProxReward, and it is a reward which relates elements in the proximity. The essence of our Proxri Deal is “As you find our relationship rewarding, proxri with the proximity in mind.” It also might be a new way to think about and work with the gift economy.

The ground is constantly shifting beneath our feet. I think networks may shift the emphasis from individual people, companies and governments, to the proximity, and proximities. The proximity consists of elements related or potentially related to a situation, in physical, mental and other ways. It’s a way of taking greater account of environments and contexts. As networks continue to change our lives, I think we need to be open to new ways of doing things, including things which are hybrids, or seem to be at first. I developed the ProxThink Growth Model approach, including proxri, with the idea that it would be robust enough to be the basis of some new standards. People are welcome to adopt and adapt it. In particular, I think it might have potential for the collaborative Web 2.0 world, and fit into some of the developments that Kevin Kelly discusses in his recent Wired piece on the New Socialism.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Uncool of Google to change things without saying much, even if their terms of service allows it, which it might. However, $50/year for businesses is pretty reasonable for what Google Apps offers. Maybe they decided their ad revenue can’t cross-subsidize everything. I’ve been working on a related approach that might be of interest.</p>
<p>I decided I needed to charge some minimal fee for access to my creativity and innovation website ProxThink.com. But for a variety of reasons, I settled on a more hybrid approach. For $4.95 per year people can access the standard features, with some ads on pages. For $5 more, they get the option to turn ads off. There is another level with more features for $19.95 per year. Also, and this is critical, with each plan, we ask people to proxri based on their use, benefits and the proximity. A proxri might be described as a systems-thinking version of a tip, commission, contribution, thank you or bonus. It’s a way of working with the idea that if you take care of the neighborhood, or network, the neighborhood or network will take care of you. “Proxri” stands for ProxReward, and it is a reward which relates elements in the proximity. The essence of our Proxri Deal is “As you find our relationship rewarding, proxri with the proximity in mind.” It also might be a new way to think about and work with the gift economy.</p>
<p>The ground is constantly shifting beneath our feet. I think networks may shift the emphasis from individual people, companies and governments, to the proximity, and proximities. The proximity consists of elements related or potentially related to a situation, in physical, mental and other ways. It’s a way of taking greater account of environments and contexts. As networks continue to change our lives, I think we need to be open to new ways of doing things, including things which are hybrids, or seem to be at first. I developed the ProxThink Growth Model approach, including proxri, with the idea that it would be robust enough to be the basis of some new standards. People are welcome to adopt and adapt it. In particular, I think it might have potential for the collaborative Web 2.0 world, and fit into some of the developments that Kevin Kelly discusses in his recent Wired piece on the New Socialism.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: are google apps still free? &#8212; Business Ready</title>
		<link>http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/07/07/google-apps-standard-edition-findable-again/comment-page-1/#comment-2841784</link>
		<dc:creator>are google apps still free? &#8212; Business Ready</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 Jul 2009 22:34:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techcrunch.com/?p=80015#comment-2841784</guid>
		<description>[...] TechCrunch has posted the following update this afternoon: Google Apps Standard Edition Findable Again [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] TechCrunch has posted the following update this afternoon: Google Apps Standard Edition Findable Again [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Michael Arrington</title>
		<link>http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/07/07/google-apps-standard-edition-findable-again/comment-page-1/#comment-2841732</link>
		<dc:creator>Michael Arrington</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 Jul 2009 22:08:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techcrunch.com/?p=80015#comment-2841732</guid>
		<description>well, yeah. my comment way above: “I know I’m getting to this late and there’s already been a thread, but the short version is we aren’t killing it, we screwed up in making it hard to find, and we’re fixing it.”</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>well, yeah. my comment way above: “I know I’m getting to this late and there’s already been a thread, but the short version is we aren’t killing it, we screwed up in making it hard to find, and we’re fixing it.”</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mathias</title>
		<link>http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/07/07/google-apps-standard-edition-findable-again/comment-page-1/#comment-2841715</link>
		<dc:creator>Mathias</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 Jul 2009 22:00:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techcrunch.com/?p=80015#comment-2841715</guid>
		<description>Seriously, a HTML layout error? Don&#039;t be stupid.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Seriously, a HTML layout error? Don&#8217;t be stupid.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Web Media Daily &#8211; July 7, 2009 &#124; Reinventing Yourself...</title>
		<link>http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/07/07/google-apps-standard-edition-findable-again/comment-page-1/#comment-2841629</link>
		<dc:creator>Web Media Daily &#8211; July 7, 2009 &#124; Reinventing Yourself...</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 Jul 2009 21:28:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techcrunch.com/?p=80015#comment-2841629</guid>
		<description>[...] Google Apps Standard Edition Findable Again&#8230;   TechCrunch [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Google Apps Standard Edition Findable Again&#8230;   TechCrunch [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: disjunto</title>
		<link>http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/07/07/google-apps-standard-edition-findable-again/comment-page-1/#comment-2841546</link>
		<dc:creator>disjunto</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 Jul 2009 20:46:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techcrunch.com/?p=80015#comment-2841546</guid>
		<description>Wave is an open source protocol/platform, from the demo it appeared you could get a google apps level product and modify and install on your own server, much better</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Wave is an open source protocol/platform, from the demo it appeared you could get a google apps level product and modify and install on your own server, much better</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: htsh</title>
		<link>http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/07/07/google-apps-standard-edition-findable-again/comment-page-1/#comment-2841523</link>
		<dc:creator>htsh</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 Jul 2009 20:36:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techcrunch.com/?p=80015#comment-2841523</guid>
		<description>agreed, this was way longer than 2 weeks.  i tried to find it for a client approximately two months ago and I could not find it for the life of me.  What sucks is that he actually ended up paying money elsewhere.  

We just assumed they got rid of the free option and I missed the headline but yeah, this was sketchy.  The fact that they changed it after the story makes it even moreso.  For that important a product at that big an organization, it seeems like a strange mistake or experiment.  Seems much more like an attempt to channel customers unknowing of the free product into the paid option, at least until someone noticed.

Nice job, Michael.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>agreed, this was way longer than 2 weeks.  i tried to find it for a client approximately two months ago and I could not find it for the life of me.  What sucks is that he actually ended up paying money elsewhere.  </p>
<p>We just assumed they got rid of the free option and I missed the headline but yeah, this was sketchy.  The fact that they changed it after the story makes it even moreso.  For that important a product at that big an organization, it seeems like a strange mistake or experiment.  Seems much more like an attempt to channel customers unknowing of the free product into the paid option, at least until someone noticed.</p>
<p>Nice job, Michael.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Chris</title>
		<link>http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/07/07/google-apps-standard-edition-findable-again/comment-page-1/#comment-2841487</link>
		<dc:creator>Chris</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 Jul 2009 20:21:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techcrunch.com/?p=80015#comment-2841487</guid>
		<description>Before blaming Google, people should run the free accounts themselves to see how much it costs.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Before blaming Google, people should run the free accounts themselves to see how much it costs.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: 虚惊一场，免费的标准版 Google Apps 又回来了 &#124; 谷奥——探寻谷歌的奥秘</title>
		<link>http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/07/07/google-apps-standard-edition-findable-again/comment-page-1/#comment-2841455</link>
		<dc:creator>虚惊一场，免费的标准版 Google Apps 又回来了 &#124; 谷奥——探寻谷歌的奥秘</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 Jul 2009 20:03:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techcrunch.com/?p=80015#comment-2841455</guid>
		<description>[...] TechCrunch  本站文章除注明转载外，均为本站原创编译 [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] TechCrunch  本站文章除注明转载外，均为本站原创编译 [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Joe s</title>
		<link>http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/07/07/google-apps-standard-edition-findable-again/comment-page-1/#comment-2841437</link>
		<dc:creator>Joe s</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 Jul 2009 19:59:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techcrunch.com/?p=80015#comment-2841437</guid>
		<description>Actually, it was linked from a google page, just not the home landing page.  I signed up for the &#039;free&quot; version last week and had to dig around for it, but i found the link.  Your story &amp; headline were a bit over the top.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Actually, it was linked from a google page, just not the home landing page.  I signed up for the &#8216;free&#8221; version last week and had to dig around for it, but i found the link.  Your story &amp; headline were a bit over the top.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jay Cuthrell</title>
		<link>http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/07/07/google-apps-standard-edition-findable-again/comment-page-1/#comment-2841409</link>
		<dc:creator>Jay Cuthrell</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 Jul 2009 19:52:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techcrunch.com/?p=80015#comment-2841409</guid>
		<description>Thank you for your benevolent bull horn of tough love [tm].  

I&#039;ve recommended the free version countless times to folks (even the other day on that Aardvark thing).  It&#039;s nice to know I don&#039;t have to put in the qualifying &quot;if you only signed up last week&quot; on the end of the recommendation.

Why do people still have such an issue with Google Apps as an option?

Seriously.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thank you for your benevolent bull horn of tough love [tm].  </p>
<p>I&#8217;ve recommended the free version countless times to folks (even the other day on that Aardvark thing).  It&#8217;s nice to know I don&#8217;t have to put in the qualifying &#8220;if you only signed up last week&#8221; on the end of the recommendation.</p>
<p>Why do people still have such an issue with Google Apps as an option?</p>
<p>Seriously.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Google Apps už nie je beta a skoro nebol ani zadarmo</title>
		<link>http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/07/07/google-apps-standard-edition-findable-again/comment-page-1/#comment-2841364</link>
		<dc:creator>Google Apps už nie je beta a skoro nebol ani zadarmo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 Jul 2009 19:30:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techcrunch.com/?p=80015#comment-2841364</guid>
		<description>[...] Google Apps Standard Edition Findable Again. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Google Apps Standard Edition Findable Again. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John</title>
		<link>http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/07/07/google-apps-standard-edition-findable-again/comment-page-1/#comment-2841361</link>
		<dc:creator>John</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 Jul 2009 19:27:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techcrunch.com/?p=80015#comment-2841361</guid>
		<description>What this really mean, in the near future for sure google will start charging and eliminating it</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>What this really mean, in the near future for sure google will start charging and eliminating it</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: EH</title>
		<link>http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/07/07/google-apps-standard-edition-findable-again/comment-page-1/#comment-2841360</link>
		<dc:creator>EH</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 Jul 2009 19:27:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techcrunch.com/?p=80015#comment-2841360</guid>
		<description>Your indignance is misplaced, TC is predicated on histrionics. &quot;Not journalists,&quot; remember?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Your indignance is misplaced, TC is predicated on histrionics. &#8220;Not journalists,&#8221; remember?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
