2009 LDSTech Talk feedback

Post your feedback about the LDSTech Talk here. If you were unable to watch it, we'll be post it on the site as soon as it becomes available.

I thought it was short. I got excited when I saw 2 hours on the streaming player and Joel mentioned something about "in the first hour." It felt like there was an emergency or something and it just had to end suddenly.

Though it was short, it was really good. I thoroughly enjoyed the discussion and presentations. It's so exciting what doors technology is opening to the world and to the Church. I think there could have been more interaction with the community.

I was sad the only feed was using a format that supports only two operating systems. I'm hoping the delayed version (at least audio) will be in a format I am able to receive.

That reminds me, it'd be nice if the player supported Chrome.

I wish the meeting was longer. I would have like to hear more responses to questions.

Thank you for giving us a "roadmap" of the many technology projects.

Thanks for the update on the roadmap. I thought the meeting was good and informative. I am going to get more involved in helping with some of the projects. I am especially interested in the Calendar program update. We have been trying to use it but some updates should help a lot. Thanks

We are grateful for the Portuguese streaming. But the translation actors (is that the right form for "dubladores"?) isn't "IT personnel". This brothers and sisters are the same called to translate the Church conferences and other satelite programs. Because it, this brothers and sisters are not prepared for a translation like that. If Church's IT personnel can be called to translate in next Tech Talks, this brothers and sisters can help us to understand better. I like to congratulate the translators, the work for a "non Tech" person to translate "wiki", "API" and "Twitter" is always hard...!

MorettiDP wrote:We are grateful for the Portuguese streaming. But the translation actors (is that the right form for "dubladores"?) isn't "IT personnel". . . .
I like to congratulate the translators, the work for a "non Tech" person to translate "wiki", "API" and "Twitter" is always hard...!

We call them translators or, more correctly, interpreters. And you are right. It is very difficult to translate technical terms. But, I suppose the translations for "wiki", "API", and "Twitter" are a lot like the french translation for "weekend", which is, well, "le weekend".

Hope you are having a good one.

Thanks, ^_^

You're right. Thanks for the feedback on that. The translators and interpreters did a great job for the amount of prep time they were given.

McDanielCA wrote:You're right. Thanks for the feedback on that. The translators and interpreters did a great job for the amount of prep time they were given.

Of course!

I received the e-mail regarding the LDSTalk today! I look forward to download a copy of the conference. I enjoyed reading the interview with Alan! Is there a "set in stone" date when the conference will be available to download?

LEGENDARYMEMBER wrote:Is there a "set in stone" date when the conference will be available to download?

The only "set in stone" dates I know of in the history of the Church would be the September 22nd dates from 1823 to 1827. [grin]

Still, it should not be much longer.

Great meeting and very informative. I would suggest to have the meeting at least every 6 months in order to review key projects and technology initiatives. I'd don't think there would be any shortage of topics.

Thanks for taking the time. It is appreciated.

Nick D'Alessio

lajackson wrote:The only "set in stone" dates I know of in the history of the Church would be the September 22nd dates from 1923 to 1827. [grin]

Still, it should not be much longer.

Haha, of course! I should of known not to use that expression online!:D
I believe "1923" should be typed as "1823".

LEGENDARYMEMBER wrote:Haha, of course! I should of known not to use that expression online!:D
I believe "1923" should be typed as "1823".

Oops. Yes, 1823 is correct. (I never was much good at telling a joke.)
Thanks.

There is no set date. The entire event has to be reviewed by correlation. Last year it only took two weeks, but this year it may take longer due to General Conference. And, thankfully, General Conference takes priority

But, rest assured, as soon as it is approved, you will have access to it!

McDanielCA wrote:There is no set date. The entire event has to be reviewed by correlation. Last year it only took two weeks, but this year it may take longer due to General Conference. And, thankfully, General Conference takes priority

But, rest assured, as soon as it is approved, you will have access to it!

Any updates on this?

Just that it is still being reviewed. Sorry for the delay.

Might I suggest changing the wording to say something like "as soon as it becomes available" instead of "available for download here within two weeks".

Just a thought

You're right, I should change that. Last year we were able to do it in that time frame and when the announcements were posted, I hoped that would be the case again.

I missed most of the session. I was a bit late getting home, so I booted my computer using Ubuntu Linux, since it starts up so much faster than Windoze. Guess what? Firefox and Linux does not work, and no meaningful error message is given, no matter how many times I retry. Finally shut down and rebooted using Windows XP, wait an age or two while it starts up, still no good using Firefox. Try IE. Finally! Now we just need to load a video player which nobody ever heard of...
I have one word of suggestion: Silverlight. (or Moonlight on Linux.)
--
Vernon Cole

I had problems getting the link to work on the website to stream the LDSTech Talk 2009. I had to copy and paste the URL from the text document, remove the %20 and replace with an actual space, then it worked. The URL's that worked for me:

http://stream.lds.org/ICS/Tech%20Talk/T ... WMExt=.asf
http://10.100.100.74:80/ICS/Tech%20Talk ... WMExt=.asf

My media player (Real Player) translated the space and converted it to a %20, however, it couldn't understand the %20 directly as a space.