<?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: Digital Bits: Camtasia for Mac</title>
	<atom:link href="http://digitalmediabiz.com/2009/08/digital-bits-camtasia-for-mac/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://digitalmediabiz.com/2009/08/digital-bits-camtasia-for-mac/</link>
	<description>The Business of Digital Content</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 24 Aug 2010 18:50:53 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Aanarav Sareen</title>
		<link>http://digitalmediabiz.com/2009/08/digital-bits-camtasia-for-mac/comment-page-1/#comment-11</link>
		<dc:creator>Aanarav Sareen</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 28 Aug 2009 13:58:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://digitalmediabiz.com/2009/08/digital-bits-camtasia-for-mac/#comment-11</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;Hi John, &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Sorry for the delay in responding. I&#039;ve been on a shoot for the past few days. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Re: Screenflow vs. Camtasia -- I prefer Camtasia. I&#039;ve found it to be more in sync with what I do and the type of content we produce. However, Screenflow does have some awesome effects that Camtasia does not. For example, in Screenflow, you can blur out the windows that are NOT in focus. If features such as those are important, then I&#039;d say Screenflow is a better tool. If you want to record and edit without any &quot;fancy&quot; effects, then Camtasia is a better tool. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Thanks, &lt;br/&gt;Aanarav&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi John, </p>
<p>Sorry for the delay in responding. I&#8217;ve been on a shoot for the past few days. </p>
<p>Re: Screenflow vs. Camtasia &#8212; I prefer Camtasia. I&#8217;ve found it to be more in sync with what I do and the type of content we produce. However, Screenflow does have some awesome effects that Camtasia does not. For example, in Screenflow, you can blur out the windows that are NOT in focus. If features such as those are important, then I&#8217;d say Screenflow is a better tool. If you want to record and edit without any &quot;fancy&quot; effects, then Camtasia is a better tool. </p>
<p>Thanks, <br />Aanarav</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John Dickinson</title>
		<link>http://digitalmediabiz.com/2009/08/digital-bits-camtasia-for-mac/comment-page-1/#comment-10</link>
		<dc:creator>John Dickinson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 25 Aug 2009 23:05:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://digitalmediabiz.com/2009/08/digital-bits-camtasia-for-mac/#comment-10</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;Hi Aanarav, thanks for the overview. Which is better in your view: Camtasia for Mac or Screenflow? Best, JD&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Aanarav, thanks for the overview. Which is better in your view: Camtasia for Mac or Screenflow? Best, JD</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
