4 ms·
Removing or fundamentally disabling a service that many people depend upon is qualitatively different from merely removing a feature. Google dropping Reader ha
by saidajigumi 14y ago
Removing or fundamentally disabling a service that many people depend upon is qualitatively different from merely removing a feature.
Google dropping Reader has potential impact more like Yahoo!'s debacle with the Delicious relaunch. That change was so drastic that it was effectively a data-loss event for most users, obliterating years of carefully curated data. As Om points out, such actions are very destructive of brand trust. That's a risky position for any online services company to voluntarily put itself in.
FWIW, Evernote has removed significant features (esp. regarding Skitch) and gotten quite a bit of heat over it.
- psbp 14y agoSo what's the solution? To keep products and strategy static forever so that nobody gets perturbed? It seems like Google has given ample time and accessibility for its users and developers to adapt.
- saidajigumi 14y agoI don't think there is a solution. It's a situation of inherent conflict which the involved parties just have to deal with. On one hand, no individual or organization can be expected to support a service that doesn't align with their goals and interests. On the other, it's unreasonable to expect people who valued the project to go quietly into the night. I view that as part of the shutdown cost for a popular service. > It seems like Google has given ample time and accessibility for its users and developers to adapt. I agree. But Reader has a significant online community around it. The friction and uncertainty created by Google's decision is bound to find an outlet.