Earlier quoted context omitted.
I can't say I understand why some people would consider RSS feeds to be too complex. There really are only two operations that you have to know how to do: 1) subscribe to a feed you like (so you like this web page? click the rss button in the url bar.) 2) Read their feeds, which basically consists of just scrolling down a page full of articles. Sure, there are lots of other things you can do with RSS, but when it com…
RSS readers suck. I've signed up for a abandoned Google Reader at least three times. Here's why: 1. I have maybe 20 or so sites I like to follow. 2. Adding all these into Google reader takes me 20-25 minutes or so. It's annoying. 3. Once I add them in, Google reader starts filling itself up with all their posts. 4. Suddenly I'm faced with two things: a. A rapidly growing number of unread posts I'm supposed to deal wi…
I've often felt that something like the "River of News"[1] notion that Dave Winer likes to talk about would work really well, I wonder if there are any public services that behave in that manner.
The basic idea is:
1) No read/unread counts. 2) No bold-ing/un-bolding of stuff I have or have not read. 3) No emphasis on grouping by site - should work out of the box as a single stream of posts to any of the sites I am interested in. 4) Subscribe via single-click bookmarklet, ala Instapaper's Read Later bookmarklet.