<?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: Quality, Price, Time</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.justinpowelldesign.com/blog/2010/02/quality-price-time/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.justinpowelldesign.com/blog/2010/02/quality-price-time/</link>
	<description>Interaction Design and Digital Strategy</description>
	<pubDate>Sun, 01 Aug 2010 07:01:39 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7.1</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Dave</title>
		<link>http://www.justinpowelldesign.com/blog/2010/02/quality-price-time/#comment-22634</link>
		<dc:creator>Dave</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 08 Mar 2010 23:23:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.justinpowelldesign.com/blog/?p=268#comment-22634</guid>
		<description>Have always been a fan of the Good, Fast, Cheap philosophy.  And, I agree with your evaluation of it.

Onya Justin.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Have always been a fan of the Good, Fast, Cheap philosophy.  And, I agree with your evaluation of it.</p>
<p>Onya Justin.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kent Stones</title>
		<link>http://www.justinpowelldesign.com/blog/2010/02/quality-price-time/#comment-22107</link>
		<dc:creator>Kent Stones</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 07 Feb 2010 14:38:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.justinpowelldesign.com/blog/?p=268#comment-22107</guid>
		<description>Beautiful statement of priorities. I too have come to the conclusion that it is far better to reduce scope and do something really, really well. This applies to the design of anything - be it physical or abstract. It raises an interesting conundrum for those of us advising or creating. How strongly do you (or can you) confront a client with this choice? Do you stand on principle or accept the reality of business deadlines and corporate decision-making?

I don't think there is a correct answer because it all rests in you particular circumstances. I think the key is knowing what you want and then working like he'll to get yourself in a position where how you work, think and speak are all in harmony. 

Thank you for a post that has me recommiting to quality.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Beautiful statement of priorities. I too have come to the conclusion that it is far better to reduce scope and do something really, really well. This applies to the design of anything - be it physical or abstract. It raises an interesting conundrum for those of us advising or creating. How strongly do you (or can you) confront a client with this choice? Do you stand on principle or accept the reality of business deadlines and corporate decision-making?</p>
<p>I don&#8217;t think there is a correct answer because it all rests in you particular circumstances. I think the key is knowing what you want and then working like he&#8217;ll to get yourself in a position where how you work, think and speak are all in harmony. </p>
<p>Thank you for a post that has me recommiting to quality.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
