<?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: Look at My Neato Lollipop Chart &#8211; Widgenie</title>
	<atom:link href="http://flowingdata.com/2008/08/27/look-at-my-neato-lollipop-chart-widgenie/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://flowingdata.com/2008/08/27/look-at-my-neato-lollipop-chart-widgenie/</link>
	<description>Strength in Numbers</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 20 Mar 2010 01:47:02 -0400</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: jerome</title>
		<link>http://flowingdata.com/2008/08/27/look-at-my-neato-lollipop-chart-widgenie/#comment-14028</link>
		<dc:creator>jerome</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 01 Sep 2008 12:44:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://flowingdata.com/?p=929#comment-14028</guid>
		<description>the point of premium visualization web apps is to offer relevant visualization types that don&#039;t exist in traditional tools, in a format which is compatible with web publishing, and in a way that takes advantage of an interactive environment. 

so how does widgenie fare? there&#039;s nothing really new about the types compared to, say, many-eyes. the technical solution used, flash hosted on their server and easily embeddable, is IMO the best. I have issues with interactivity though. I find the animations annoying. There&#039;s no point in having an animated graph if it doesn&#039;t deliver something a static graph couldn&#039;t. Also I find the style too glossy. That wouldn&#039;t be a problem if it were possible to select styles and keep a more sober approach, but that wasn&#039;t possible when I last tested the service which was a while ago. 

that being said I see lots of potential in the service if those glitches were ironed out.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>the point of premium visualization web apps is to offer relevant visualization types that don&#8217;t exist in traditional tools, in a format which is compatible with web publishing, and in a way that takes advantage of an interactive environment. </p>
<p>so how does widgenie fare? there&#8217;s nothing really new about the types compared to, say, many-eyes. the technical solution used, flash hosted on their server and easily embeddable, is IMO the best. I have issues with interactivity though. I find the animations annoying. There&#8217;s no point in having an animated graph if it doesn&#8217;t deliver something a static graph couldn&#8217;t. Also I find the style too glossy. That wouldn&#8217;t be a problem if it were possible to select styles and keep a more sober approach, but that wasn&#8217;t possible when I last tested the service which was a while ago. </p>
<p>that being said I see lots of potential in the service if those glitches were ironed out.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
