4 ms·

As someone who started an RSS-based company (that's now defunct) I think the issue isn't just a lack of a default client, it's a lack of a tangible conceptual m

by mikepk 15y ago

As someone who started an RSS-based company (that's now defunct) I think the issue isn't just a lack of a default client, it's a lack of a tangible conceptual model for people. I spent years explaining the RSS concept, testing lots of different metaphors, and almost always got the "blank stare" or "nodding along so you think I understand". I think the deeper problem is that it takes a kind of abstract thinking, that content and presentation are different things and that the content of a website or blog can be a resource as much as a particular presentation of it, that's just not normal for non-technical people. I think most people still think of websites as "places" you "go" to, and the idea of the content/data packaged in a format for easy syndication is a mental leap regardless of the metaphor you use.

sluckxz 15y ago
Reading your second paragraph made me chuckle. Your point is likely spot on but I couldn't help thinking how most of that paragraph involved jargon that most people I know would get glossy eyed over. I wonder if rewording it to laymans or non 'geeks' terms might help. Information on a webpage and 'the' webpage are not exactly the same. Rss uses information from the webpage to create a title and a short description in a way that you can view hundreds of titles and descriptions very quickly. When you find a title and or description that interests you a single click delivers the webpage in its authors intended form... I think you're correct. If somebody said that to me before I had used Rss I might have glossed over as well. edit: Sorry about the defunct company part.
- mikepk 15y ago
  Heh, I was intentionally not using any of the explanatory metaphors. :) Trust me, in the many years we were at it I tried lots and lots of non-jargony, more-concrete, ways to get the concept across. I never found the one that seemed to click with everyone. We also had the additional problem of trying to be the "next generation" of using RSS (application platform, dynamic filters, etc...) before anyone other than tech-inclined people "got" the first generation. Learned lots of painful lessons from that company. :)
- maigret 15y ago
  Also agree with the main points of the parent and yours. But I must admit, as a technician myself, it has always troubled me that a feed is bound to a webpage, thus I never used the RSS icon in the navigator bar. For me, a RSS feed is linked to some kind of information, a topic, a person. What is the CNN main page RSS feed about? The TV program? Breaking news? ALL news? No clue.
bluekeybox 15y ago
> I think most people still think of websites as "places" you "go" to Not arguing against you -- just pointing out -- who is it to blame for making people think of websites as places? I don't think it's the people themselves, it might well be us. When the web was popularized in the 1990s, "place" was the metaphor that was pushed onto people. It wasn't a natural metaphor nor it was a necessary one. You don't "go to" a TV channel -- you "turn on" a TV channel. For some reason, though, you "go to" a web "site". Why?

by mikepk 15y ago

sluckxz 15y ago

Reading your second paragraph made me chuckle. Your point is likely spot on but I couldn't help thinking how most of that paragraph involved jargon that most people I know would get glossy eyed over. I wonder if rewording it to laymans or non 'geeks' terms might help. Information on a webpage and 'the' webpage are not exactly the same. Rss uses information from the webpage to create a title and a short description in a way that you can view hundreds of titles and descriptions very quickly. When you find a title and or description that interests you a single click delivers the webpage in its authors intended form... I think you're correct. If somebody said that to me before I had used Rss I might have glossed over as well. edit: Sorry about the defunct company part.

mikepk 15y ago
Heh, I was intentionally not using any of the explanatory metaphors. :) Trust me, in the many years we were at it I tried lots and lots of non-jargony, more-concrete, ways to get the concept across. I never found the one that seemed to click with everyone. We also had the additional problem of trying to be the "next generation" of using RSS (application platform, dynamic filters, etc...) before anyone other than tech-inclined people "got" the first generation. Learned lots of painful lessons from that company. :)
maigret 15y ago
Also agree with the main points of the parent and yours. But I must admit, as a technician myself, it has always troubled me that a feed is bound to a webpage, thus I never used the RSS icon in the navigator bar. For me, a RSS feed is linked to some kind of information, a topic, a person. What is the CNN main page RSS feed about? The TV program? Breaking news? ALL news? No clue.

bluekeybox 15y ago

> I think most people still think of websites as "places" you "go" to Not arguing against you -- just pointing out -- who is it to blame for making people think of websites as places? I don't think it's the people themselves, it might well be us. When the web was popularized in the 1990s, "place" was the metaphor that was pushed onto people. It wasn't a natural metaphor nor it was a necessary one. You don't "go to" a TV channel -- you "turn on" a TV channel. For some reason, though, you "go to" a web "site". Why?