Fixes for WordPress Twitter Updater by Ingoal

April 17, 2010
1 minute read

I’ve fixed up the WordPress Plugin Twitter Updater by Ingoal and a number of others (Eric Austin Lee, Victoria Chan). Here’s my changed to the plugin.

Edited by

Jordan Trask (April 17th 2010 – http://geektank.net (v2.09)

– ZZ.gd broke with 403 forbidden error, fixed with setting different user agent.

– Move menu to “Settings”.

– Added option under configuration to choose ZZ.gd or TinyURL. Added 1 function.

– Re-worked the code for url shortening services, change in one place instead of three. Created a function instead.

which makes it easier to add more services if necessary. Bit.ly support in the future?

Edited byJordan Trask (April 17th 2010 – http://geektank.net (v2.09)- ZZ.gd broke with 403 forbidden error, fixed with setting different user agent.- Move menu to “Settings”.- Added option under configuration to choose ZZ.gd or TinyURL. Added 1 function.- Re-worked the code for url shortening services, change in one place instead of three. Created a function instead. which makes it easier to add more services if necessary. Bit.ly support in the future?

You can download the new version, I’ve renumbered the version number and hope to have bit.ly setup as well.

I’ve removed the download and placed all relevant information on the Twitter Updater page.

Did you like this article?

— Previous article

Twitter App for Facebook is Broken! But Twitter Support is Non-Existant!

Next article —

What Music I Listen To While Working (Getting Down and Dirty Mix)

AMD 64 2000+ vs Intel’s Atom: AMD’s 8-watt processor outperforms Intels Atom

byJordan
August 18, 2008

Intel's Atom processor and AMD's 64 2000+ were pitted against each other. And the results were for once in favor of AMD.

In our Munich lab’s duel of the energy-savers, the AMD Athlon 64 2000+ beats the Intel Atom 230 in energy consumption and processing power. Each of the systems was based on a desktop platform. The Achilles heel of the Intel system is its old system platform with the 945GC chipset, while AMD offers a more modern 780G platform. The energy-saving solution from AMD offers more possibilities: it has three times as many SATA ports, possesses better onboard graphics performance, and can also support two monitors. Unlike the Intel solution, an HD resolution (1920x1200) with high picture quality is possible through DVI/HDMI ports. And early information suggests that the AMD Athlon 64 2000+ should cost close to $90.

Read the full article at tomshardware.com

UUncategorized