2 ms·
I think some pretty impressive mental gymnastics are required to see web search replacing even a tiny portion of the functionality of RSS, particularly when com
by wutbrodo 13y ago
I think some pretty impressive mental gymnastics are required to see web search replacing even a tiny portion of the functionality of RSS, particularly when compared to other "feeds" like FB, G+, Twitter, Instagram, etc.
- verbin217 13y agoWell that's certainly true but it doesn't contradict his point. A free RSS tool prevents a lot of otherwise would-be searches. Especially since Google Search basically replaced URL input.
- icebraining 13y agoDoes it really? I can't imagine anyone tech savvy enough to use an RSS reader, just switching to manually searching for each site. It's not like free RSS readers stopped existing with the death of GReader, and there's Twitter and even just bookmarks.
- wutbrodo 13y agoIt 100% contradicts his point. Google loses more from the massive amount of people who would be pushed to spend more time on Facebook and Twitter than they do from the microscopic amount of extra searches you think RSS displaced. And I still don't see how that even makes any sense: Googling something is an active search for a specific piece of content (even as broad as one site) and feeds of any kind are passive consumption of content which is brought to you. I can't imagine a universe in which someone loses their feed of content and increases their web search activity instead of switching to another (perhaps less-useful) feed of content.