5 ms·
One can make the argument that Reader's dominance in the market helped push the decline of RSS usage. To try and compete in the same space you have to hide the
by MatthewPhillips 14y ago
One can make the argument that Reader's dominance in the market helped push the decline of RSS usage. To try and compete in the same space you have to hide the fact that you are an RSS reader; whether that be with gimmicky layouts or by integrating with social networks, or whatever else. You can't be seen as redundant with Reader.
I think we're going to see a lot of advances with RSS due to the closure of Reader and I'm excited to see those.
- mkr-hn 14y agoIt's been great for me. I switched to Feedly after the announcement, and I'm glad I did. It bridges two worlds for me. I get the classic Reader-esque view for the post-a-day people, and the magazine view with features ranked by sharing to filter the top few stories on the 400-a-day sites. I even made special folders: Tech Gaggle, Science Gaggle, Politics Gaggle. I skim these when I've got nothing else to read, and it doesn't overwhelm me with things.
- Shooti 14y agoOne counter-point is that the accessibility of Reader due to its presence Google ecosystem also grew the global user base of RSS aggregators. Which is to say its not a given that those using RSS through Google Reader would be using RSS at all if it never existed. It's also not a given that the sync back-ends built in this Never-Reader parallel universe would've matched what would got with Reader in terms of reliability and speed, since regardless of how you feel about them Google infrastructure is best in class.