Bite my bytes

What I learn by day I blog at night - A blog from Microsoft Consultant working from Ljubljana, Slovenia

  Home :: Contact :: Syndication  
  999 Posts :: 7691 Comments :: 235 Trackbacks

Search

Most popular posts

Categories

My Projects

Archives

Stuff


Copyright © by David Vidmar
 
Contact me!
 
LinkedIn Profile
 
 
 

It was a really pleasant surprise when I read that new version of my favorite desktop blogging tool BlogJet came out today. It was long time since they updated this excellent tool. When Microsoft published their free Windows Live Writer they threw a glove to all other producers of desktop blog publishing tools. So I was expecting small revolution or at least big evolution.

BlogJet 2.0

But even before the installation the excitement faded away. My $30 (or was it $40?) license for 1.X version is no longer valid. They say I need to pay another $20 to upgrade.

I though to myself during the installation – 2.0 will have to blow my mind for $30 + $20 bucks. To make a short story even shorter – it doesn’t. I’m not buying.

Although 2.0 looks really sweet and it does sport some new features, there is nothing really grand compared to 1.6 I’m using. I would gladly upgrade for free, but for $20 I’ll keep on using 1.6 and certainly look towards Windows Live Writer…

We’ll coding monkeys, you do have a cool new company name and a logo that quite “seen that before” – I’m giving you thumbs down. Sorry.

PS: Posted from Blogjet 2.0.

PS2: It crashed after I posted this. And when I hit CTRL + Y (Edit Last Post) I gave me wrong post. <exhales>

BlogJet20Crash

PS3: Tags are cool.

Posted on Wednesday, January 24, 2007 9:35 PM | Filed under: Software Blogging |

Feedback

# re: BlogJet 2.0 is a disappointment 1/24/2007 10:47 PM Dmitry Chestnykh
David, thanks for your feedback!

I'll look into the problem with posting. It seems like SubText doesn't accept strings as post ids.

# re: BlogJet 2.0 is a disappointment 1/24/2007 10:57 PM Dmitry Chestnykh
A few additions:

Previous versions didn't use this method (getPost), that's why they didn't throw the error message. This method is required to get the post for local cache, and because it failed, you didn't receive it in the local database, so Ctrl+Y gave you another post.

Actually, this is not what I though (SubText doesn't accept strings as post ids) -- it's BlogJet doesn't accept anything other in postid than strings in response. According to MetaWeblog API specs (http://www.xmlrpc.com/metaWeblogApi), postid must be a string.

Anyway, I'll fix this in the next update, but I hope Subtext guys will fix this as well :-)

Again, thanks for discovering the bug!

# re: BlogJet 2.0 is a disappointment 1/24/2007 11:14 PM David
Dmitry, you're welcome. I'm somehow involved with SubText project so I posted your thoughts on SubText dev mailing list.

# re: BlogJet 2.0 is a disappointment 1/24/2007 11:32 PM Haacked
Thanks for the heads up. However, I think Dmitry might be mistaken. If you go to your MetaWeblogAPI page:

http://vidmar.net/weblog/services/metablogapi.aspx#metaWeblog.getPost

You can see that GetPost indeed does take a string for the posted. However, the *value* of that string does need to be an integer that corresponds to the post id. Because the ID in the Subtext database, is an integer.

So if BlogJet sends anything other than a int, I’m not sure what subtext is supposed to do with it.

Consider that this feature works with Windows Live Writer. If you have Fiddler, you can watch the requests go over the wire to see what's happening.


# re: BlogJet 2.0 is a disappointment 1/24/2007 11:52 PM David
Tnx for clarification, Phil. I hope Dmitry comes back to read this follow up.

# re: BlogJet 2.0 is a disappointment 1/25/2007 11:10 AM Dmitry Chestnykh
Phil,

Yep, I was wrong in my first comment -- see my second comment.
Actually, BlogJet sends string as ID (and the value, is of course, integer -- or, more precisely, the value sent by Subtext's getRecentPosts method) and Subtext accepts this properly.

However, Subtext returns ID as integer in Post struct. And this is why BlogJet reports it as error.

Well, to fix this, BlogJet just need to accept integers :) But what I said about specs is that Post struct must contain string as ID (no matter what you store in db).

# re: BlogJet 2.0 is a disappointment 1/25/2007 3:28 PM Dmitry Chestnykh
Actually, I have already updated BlogJet with the changes: http://blog.codingrobots.com/2007/01/25/a-few-things-related-to-blogjet-20/
;)

Comments have been closed on this topic.