4 ms·

People who don't use RSS say it's dead, and they won't be convinced otherwise. People who use it every day know that it's not dead at all. Firefox's decision

People who don't use RSS say it's dead, and they won't be convinced otherwise. People who use it every day know that it's not dead at all. Firefox's decision will not make the slightest bit of difference for either group of people.

cortesoft 8y ago
It is all about how you define 'dead'. Some people mean 'dead' as in 'not one single person is still using it' and others mean 'dead' as in 'it is declining in popularity and is no longer mainstream' RSS is dead for the latter people but not the former.
- craftyguy 8y ago
  Another definition of 'dead' is "I don't use it, and no one I know uses it (or if they do I don't hear about it)"
  - sergers 8y ago
    Agreed. I used RSS 10 years ago. Even bought a keyboard with a LCD to have my RSS headlines always available. I have no need for that functionality for years. I know noone in person who uses RSS anymore. I would call it dead (but obviously as per other comments here, people still need/use them).
    - craftyguy 8y ago
      > Even bought a keyboard with a LCD to have my RSS headlines always available Woah, what keyboard was this?
- mirceal 8y ago
  Agree. If you define 'dead' as is 'rare' and/or 'have not heard of anyone still using it' it's pretty much dead. It's a shame that it died (as consuming RSS feeds was an extremely efficient way of staying up-to-date without mindlessly browsing the web and checking tens/hundreds of sites). If you ask me Mozilla didn't kill RSS, they just updated their browser to reflect a reality. The reality is that most people don't use RSS and don't care about it. Who killed RSS? Going to go out on a limb here and say Google. Anyone remember Google Reader? That thing was amazing - I remember the days I used to go through all my feeds in under 10 minutes. .I guess it did not really fit Google's business model or it wasn't big enough to worth investing in, but if you ask me it was the closest Google came to having a social network.
jasonthevillain 8y ago
Bigger than both of those groups are the people who don't realize they use RSS but listen to podcasts.

cortesoft 8y ago

It is all about how you define 'dead'. Some people mean 'dead' as in 'not one single person is still using it' and others mean 'dead' as in 'it is declining in popularity and is no longer mainstream' RSS is dead for the latter people but not the former.

craftyguy 8y ago
Another definition of 'dead' is "I don't use it, and no one I know uses it (or if they do I don't hear about it)"
- sergers 8y ago
  Agreed. I used RSS 10 years ago. Even bought a keyboard with a LCD to have my RSS headlines always available. I have no need for that functionality for years. I know noone in person who uses RSS anymore. I would call it dead (but obviously as per other comments here, people still need/use them).
  - craftyguy 8y ago
    > Even bought a keyboard with a LCD to have my RSS headlines always available Woah, what keyboard was this?
mirceal 8y ago
Agree. If you define 'dead' as is 'rare' and/or 'have not heard of anyone still using it' it's pretty much dead. It's a shame that it died (as consuming RSS feeds was an extremely efficient way of staying up-to-date without mindlessly browsing the web and checking tens/hundreds of sites). If you ask me Mozilla didn't kill RSS, they just updated their browser to reflect a reality. The reality is that most people don't use RSS and don't care about it. Who killed RSS? Going to go out on a limb here and say Google. Anyone remember Google Reader? That thing was amazing - I remember the days I used to go through all my feeds in under 10 minutes. .I guess it did not really fit Google's business model or it wasn't big enough to worth investing in, but if you ask me it was the closest Google came to having a social network.

jasonthevillain 8y ago

Bigger than both of those groups are the people who don't realize they use RSS but listen to podcasts.