Live data from Hacker News

Google Reader shut down announced ten years ago today

googleblog.blogspot.com

281–290 of 354 posts

Re: Google Reader shut down announced ten years ago today

#281

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Inbox remains for me the best product they killed. It was in every way superior to Gmail and offered something I haven’t seen since.

What was it that made it so good? I had already degooglified my online life when it got released, so I never tried it out.

For me the killer feature was the way emails were (automatically) contextually organized. Instead of your inbox being chronological, it would create "bundles" of emails that were related based on sender, or subject line, or content. You'd have a bundle for each of: your JIRA emails, github emails, bank emails, cron messages, threads with your boss or coworkers, travel emails, receipts, etc. Bundles were created automatically and accurately. Labeling like in gmail would let you create custom bundles if needed. You could archive/label/refile/mark-read an entire bundle of emails at once. It was extremely efficient.

IMO there's too much context switching when your email is sorted chronologically. Much easier to deal with all emails of a certain type at once. You can (manually) organize your email with labels or folders, and go through each one, but it's just not the same.

EDIT: there were other neat features like pinning and snoozing that have since made their way into gmail and other apps, but IMO they worked better with the bundle system than they do without

Re: Google Reader shut down announced ten years ago today

#282

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Google Reader was a product that was crazy cheap to maintain (no way it had more than a dozen engineers working on it), It’s hard to show “scope” and “impact” by maintaining a product with declining usage. No one who cared about their career would want to work on something that was in maintenance mode.

Yes but as with roads and other infrastructure, building is easy and shiny, but what makes them useful in the long term is maintenance. A very boring and seemingly unprofitable task. But the essence of being.

And that’s why politicians never brag about maintenance. But always brag about new bridges

Re: Google Reader shut down announced ten years ago today

#283
Then I guess that also means I've now been using newsblur.com and its Android app for 10 years.

NewsBlur (and a handful of other RSS feed aggregators/reader apps) have continued to survive and offer some really useful functionality. None have really caught on in terms of discovering, sharing, commenting, and the other "social" functions of Google Reader. But they're still useful tools for those of us who like to read widely for both professional and personal reasons.

Re: Google Reader shut down announced ten years ago today

#284
post #108

I finally managed to create a habit out of RSS after years of trying. What worked was,I know this may sound obvious, using a phone based reader instead of a desktop. It's like a categorizable, algorithmless social media feed now, full of content that people spent more than a few minutes writing, and it's great. Aside from regular feeds I feed in HN through hnrss.org, YouTube directly, and the odd twitter account thro…

The only thing I would recommend is using openrss youtube feeds instead of using youtube directly:

https://openrss.org/blog/youtube-feeds

Re: Google Reader shut down announced ten years ago today

#285
Ten years on and these threads still get hundreds of comments. This must be the world’s biggest salt mine. Ten years ago, millions of nerds suddenly cried out in terror and were suddenly compelled to moan about the loss of their favorite RSS reader for eternity. The volume of the protests are out of alignment with the value that any RSS reader could possibly give, so I assume the nerds are all crying out for the loss of their innocence.

Re: Google Reader shut down announced ten years ago today

#286
post #121
post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I stopped having a positive view of Google due to their poor explanation for shutting down Google Reader. They explained they were shutting it down due to declining usage and they are pouring all of their energy into fewer product, however, as Google had a reputation for building cool and free stuff back then, it seemed reasonable to me that they could have maintain it in a frozen state or provide a longer transition…

When the first rumors of Google+ swirled I figured that Google Reader would be used to seed it. I really found it baffling that they didn't do that. It felt like they needlessly kneecapped plus's launch.

[deleted]

Re: Google Reader shut down announced ten years ago today

#287
post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When the first rumors of Google+ swirled I figured that Google Reader would be used to seed it. I really found it baffling that they didn't do that. It felt like they needlessly kneecapped plus's launch.

Google tried integrating other services with G+, including both YouTube and Google Calendar (!!!). Neither went well, or were well accepted, including especially by Google fanboiim.

Google Reader was a publish-subscribe platform with chronological/per site newsfeed whereas Google+ was a peer-to-peer platform with an algorithm newsfeed. I didn't appreciate the difference at the time, but the philosophy was completely different and I couldn't come up with any idea that could fit Google Reader into the Google+ vision.

Re: Google Reader shut down announced ten years ago today

#288
post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's like saying "how is IRC dead today" when Slack/Discord/WhatsApp/Zoom/etc exists or Yahoo style portals when Google exists (yes Yahoo is still a real business) or "how are horses a dead transportation" when cars exist in 1930s America because horses can still walk on roads (aka takes a minimal investment to support). Sure they still work and will continue to work but let's be honest it's a super niche technolog…

Why do I care if it’s a “niche” technology as far as other people subscribing if it is still supported by publishers? I can’t think of a single site that I go to and say “I sure wish this site supported RSS” and doesn’t? Using NetNewsWire and subscribing to subreddits with NNW on one half of my iPad and the Reddit app on the other half is still a great experience for instance. I click on the date on NNW and the post…

> Why do I care if it’s a “niche” technology as far as other people subscribing if it is still supported by publishers?

If it is a niche technology it will fall out from requirements docs and from CMS implementations.

One can already see that many news sites only provide headlines, not even teasers in the feed and different site generator based blogs (using Hugo and such) forget to create feeds as well.

My feed reader still provides value to me, but I regularly stumble over sites providing interesting content irregularly but no feed. (For irregularly posting blogs it is especially important as manually checking is annoying)

Re: Google Reader shut down announced ten years ago today

#289
post #9

I switched to feedly. No biggie, in retrospect. But, that was the first Google product where it really hit home, to me, how even if a product is fantastic and useful, Google will kill it without a second thought. It fundamentally changed my attitude toward Google and made me far more deliberate about what services I choose to rely on, especially from the big G. Obligatory link to https://killedbygoogle.com/

This. I also switched to Feedly, no biggie. But it made me take a hard look at what else I was dependent on Google for. About 5 years ago I excised Google from my life as much as I good, including sunsetting my gmail account.

I still use my Android phone, and use maps for navigation and browse youtube online, but I use as little 'account' features as is necessary. If I wanted to switch to iPhone tomorrow, there'd be next to zero migration headaches.

Re: Google Reader shut down announced ten years ago today

#290

I feel like killing Reader was the point at which I switched from viewing Google mostly positively to more skeptically. Which doesn't seem terribly rational, really; it wasn't the first product to be axed, it was perfectly possible to replace... Maybe it was just the first product axing that really affected me? The moment Google went from "provider of great free stuff" to "sometimes provider of free stuff, sometimes…

It was the reason they killed it for me. Google Reader was successful and growing. It wasn’t killed on its own merits. It was killed because Google decided Facebook was an existential threat to them so they had to do everything they could to make Google+ work, including killing otherwise successful and popular products like Reader because, killing it may lead to a slight increase in G+ adoption.

AFAICT Reader was a casualty of Vic Gundotra consolidating and growing his empire within Google as king of all things social.

Only two good things came out of the Google+ era: consolidated login across all Google apps, and Photos.

Post reply on HN