4 ms·

If Google had just added comments or other social elements to their reader instead of killing it they might not have missed the boat. Instead they killed their

If Google had just added comments or other social elements to their reader instead of killing it they might not have missed the boat. Instead they killed their popular Reader and made Orkut and Google Plus.

chiefalchemist 9y ago
The same could kinda be said for YouTube. That is, Goggle had a massive and active community, but it needed some tweaks. Instead they build Google Plus and wait for they to come. We know that outcome :) I think the problem with RSS was - and still is? - is the data it provides. A social network can harvest MUCH more data (due to the endless number of connections between "the nodes.") RSS is too old school. Put another way, imagine being hired by Google - while FB and Twitter are taking off - and being told you're going to work on a new & improved RSS reader. That would have triggered a mass exit.
icebraining 9y ago
Orkut is older than Reader, and was killed off just a year later. I don't think Google ever really bet on it, it was just a 20% time project that grew organically.
sorenjan 9y ago
They did have comments and other social elements [0]. It was possible to follow people and share articles with or without adding your own note to it. They had a bookmarklet that allowed you to share any article, even if it didn't have an RSS feed. Their move to Google+ sharing wasn't exactly an improvement though [1]. I never got why people moved to Twitter, it wasn't, and isn't, as good at consuming or sharing content as Reader was. It's just one more step towards the more centralized web we have today, and hopefully we will move back to a more decentralized experience soon. [0] http://googlereader.blogspot.se/2009/03/google-reader-is-your-new-watercooler.html http://googlereader.blogspot.se/2009/03/google-reader-is-you... [1] http://googlereader.blogspot.se/2011/10/new-in-reader-fresh-design-and-google.html http://googlereader.blogspot.se/2011/10/new-in-reader-fresh-...
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]

chiefalchemist 9y ago

The same could kinda be said for YouTube. That is, Goggle had a massive and active community, but it needed some tweaks. Instead they build Google Plus and wait for they to come. We know that outcome :) I think the problem with RSS was - and still is? - is the data it provides. A social network can harvest MUCH more data (due to the endless number of connections between "the nodes.") RSS is too old school. Put another way, imagine being hired by Google - while FB and Twitter are taking off - and being told you're going to work on a new & improved RSS reader. That would have triggered a mass exit.

icebraining 9y ago

Orkut is older than Reader, and was killed off just a year later. I don't think Google ever really bet on it, it was just a 20% time project that grew organically.

sorenjan 9y ago

They did have comments and other social elements [0]. It was possible to follow people and share articles with or without adding your own note to it. They had a bookmarklet that allowed you to share any article, even if it didn't have an RSS feed. Their move to Google+ sharing wasn't exactly an improvement though [1]. I never got why people moved to Twitter, it wasn't, and isn't, as good at consuming or sharing content as Reader was. It's just one more step towards the more centralized web we have today, and hopefully we will move back to a more decentralized experience soon. [0] http://googlereader.blogspot.se/2009/03/google-reader-is-your-new-watercooler.html http://googlereader.blogspot.se/2009/03/google-reader-is-you... [1] http://googlereader.blogspot.se/2011/10/new-in-reader-fresh-design-and-google.html http://googlereader.blogspot.se/2011/10/new-in-reader-fresh-...

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]