Live data from Hacker News

Please Add RSS Support to Your Site

kevq.uk

231–240 of 305 posts

Re: Please Add RSS Support to Your Site

#231

I completely agree with this sentiment. Mastodon, or whatever, is fine but RSS is the backbone of blogging. It always annoys me when sites request permissions to send me notifications - hey idiots, if I like your site I'll subscribe using your RSS feed and read at my pleasure. You don't have one? Bye then. In my perfect world browsers have RSS support built in and aggregators like Facebook would allow RSS feeds to be…

The main difference between web push notifications and RSS is that as the name implies, notifications are pushed to you on the publisher's schedule, whereas you pull down RSS on your own schedule.

Push has several advantages - one is background power consumption (less work for the device to just sit around and wait, vs constantly firing up the network and polling a server). Another is that you get your notifications in real-time.

However, I think push is way overused. Think about all the notifications you receive (way too many, probably). How many of these did you really need to see immediately? An impending food delivery or Uber arrival, sure (but we could also just use phone calls and SMS for these geoimmediate use cases). Online chats, maybe some of them. CNN publishing "breaking news" that's probably wrong anyway because the event is 5 minutes old? Loan offer #257 from the PayPal app? No thanks.

I'd much rather have the latter class of "notifications" batched up and pulled down once every hour or three, with no sound, vibration or visual interruption.

RSS is actually a great solution for that and I think the mobile operating systems should have built it in from day one, with "harass me via beeping and shaking and pushing" as an escalated level of permission that apps need to request specifically.

They didn't because no one is trying to develop user friendly experiences, not Google, not particularly Apple, least of all the people who have been building the browsers. There is a long history of large companies trying to cram push notifications down our throat, starting with Active Desktop and Active Channels in Internet Explorer 4.0. Publishers have wanted this since the dawn of personal computing, because their ultimate dream is to push advertising into your eyeballs without your explicit grant of permission.

Apple, Google, and the people developing the modern Web platform have all failed utterly at preventing them. (Truth be told it has never been a priority, they have always focused on "empowering developers," which really means empowering the publishers that those developers work for.) With phones and garbage like the ads in the Windows 10 Start menu, they finally achieved their dream and we're living in their dystopia today.

Re: Please Add RSS Support to Your Site

#232

I completely agree with this sentiment. Mastodon, or whatever, is fine but RSS is the backbone of blogging. It always annoys me when sites request permissions to send me notifications - hey idiots, if I like your site I'll subscribe using your RSS feed and read at my pleasure. You don't have one? Bye then. In my perfect world browsers have RSS support built in and aggregators like Facebook would allow RSS feeds to be…

The main difference between web push notifications and RSS is that as the name implies, notifications are pushed to you on the publisher's schedule, whereas you pull down RSS on your own schedule. Push has several advantages - one is background power consumption (less work for the device to just sit around and wait, vs constantly firing up the network and polling a server). Another is that you get your notifications…

You know what they call advertising where the user decides when they receive it? QVC and junk mail. We have a century of advertising practice that is based on interruptions, and giving people control over the (commercial) information they receive is anathema to the entire industry.

Re: Please Add RSS Support to Your Site

#234

RSS seems to have died off as social networks decided that they wanted to capture the users and vertically integrate. RSS turns them into commodities, and that's the opposite of what they want. Plus it's difficult to monetize an RSS feed.

Social networks did not decide to capture users. Users have decided that social networks are what they prefer and then the site publishers optimised for where most people are.

Re: Please Add RSS Support to Your Site

#235

How do you sell an RSS feed addition to a profit-only minded manager? How can they make money by paying me to do something that allows their customers to read their articles without advertisements spliced all throughout them as they demand?

Hey boss I have this great way to publish content to our users that works without Facebook getting in the way of showing half our stuff. We can provide a snippet of our article and people will never miss when we have something new for them.

Re: Please Add RSS Support to Your Site

#236
Absolutely agree, RSS feeds help save so much time for end-users, and makes contextual skimming much easier in one place.

* Shameless plug *: Our little service, Feedity - https://feedity.com, helps create RSS feeds for any public webpage, even JS/XHR/SPAs, and social networks (Facebook, Instagram, Twitter), via a visual feed builder and REST API.

Re: Please Add RSS Support to Your Site

#237
post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To address #3, provide only the title and a very brief excerpt in your feed with a link to the full monetized post.

Except now your readers have to click out of the RSS reader, rather than stay in there and read. I find it jarring and obtrusive to do that, and prefer just to visit the site instead if they RSS did this.

I usually prefer that as well, but if the choice is no RSS and headline+excerpt RSS, I’m absolutely fine with the latter. Without RSS I won’t read any regular content.

Re: Please Add RSS Support to Your Site

#238

Earlier quoted context omitted.

RSS isn't dead. Smart bloggers will always expose an RSS feed, because readers following your RSS feed are more likely to read your blog than traffic from other sources. Having an RSS feed is the slightly weaker version of the mailing lists. Mail which is also going strong — and the easiest way to build a mailing list btw, is to connect your RSS feed to Mailchimp. And RSS feeds are mandatory for podcasts too. Some bl…

RSS died when Google Reader died.

RSS switched from life-support to being alive when Reader died. Before there were a few apps and sites. With Reader’s death we got a resurgence and many new tools.

Re: Please Add RSS Support to Your Site

#239

I completely agree with this sentiment. Mastodon, or whatever, is fine but RSS is the backbone of blogging. It always annoys me when sites request permissions to send me notifications - hey idiots, if I like your site I'll subscribe using your RSS feed and read at my pleasure. You don't have one? Bye then. In my perfect world browsers have RSS support built in and aggregators like Facebook would allow RSS feeds to be…

The main difference between web push notifications and RSS is that as the name implies, notifications are pushed to you on the publisher's schedule, whereas you pull down RSS on your own schedule. Push has several advantages - one is background power consumption (less work for the device to just sit around and wait, vs constantly firing up the network and polling a server). Another is that you get your notifications…

Dear god web push is such cancer

Re: Please Add RSS Support to Your Site

#240

Sites don't offer RSS because - they are developed by hipsters who were in elementary school when RSS was in its heyday and don't know what it is. - sites operators want to human users to interact with their site specifically, and not be able to skim the highlights through a remote interface. They want users to view all of the content (including advertizing) in its fully rendered form, and not some clipped version th…

Dear site operators: enjoy obscurity
Post reply on HN