Chief Architect of Google+ requests clarification on Google Reader
1–10 of 131 posts
Re: Chief Architect of Google+ requests clarification on Google Reader
#2Anyone know what happened to G+'s Sparks? I think it was touted as a reader replacement.
Re: Chief Architect of Google+ requests clarification on Google Reader
#3"Comments which disregard the previous paragraph will simply be deleted. Comments complaining about my deleting those comments will result in me blocking and/or mercilessly mocking you for failing to read instructions. Comments complaining about that will lead to some interesting replies in a combination of languages, probably starting with Yiddish and moving on from there."
I just love this offensive/defensive writing style: Nicholas Nassim Taleb does the same, all the time, throughout his books (and I'm a big Taleb fan).
I've noticed that people with strong ego typically hate that kind of writing that said.
Re: Chief Architect of Google+ requests clarification on Google Reader
#4Do the benefits of an RSS reader really need explanation? Or is he simply hoping to hear some unexpected input from this?
Re: Chief Architect of Google+ requests clarification on Google Reader
#5Interesting, but doesn't speak too well of Google. Shouldn't Google know how people were using Google Reader before deciding to axe it? And even if that information's in a different part of the company, shouldn't the chief architect of Google+ have access to it?
Re: Chief Architect of Google+ requests clarification on Google Reader
#6Yeah, I really don't understand what he's looking for here. He wants constructive criticism about what parts of Google Reader were useful, but if you complain at all, your comment will be deleted.
Google Reader itself was the useful piece. It aggregates RSS feeds. I don't really know how else you can explain that "yes, it aggregated RSS feeds, and I like to read all of my RSS feeds in one place".
Re: Chief Architect of Google+ requests clarification on Google Reader
#7Do the benefits of an RSS reader really need explanation? Or is he simply hoping to hear some unexpected input from this?
He's asking for specific elements of the reader that people found useful, enjoyable, easy to use. I'd say that's valuable. How is it not?
Re: Chief Architect of Google+ requests clarification on Google Reader
#8Do the benefits of an RSS reader really need explanation? Or is he simply hoping to hear some unexpected input from this?
Different people appreciate different things. Some of the use cases that people are glowing about leave me cold.
It never hurts to ask, you can always be surprised.
Re: Chief Architect of Google+ requests clarification on Google Reader
#9Do the benefits of an RSS reader really need explanation? Or is he simply hoping to hear some unexpected input from this?
He's asking for specific elements of the reader that people found useful, enjoyable, easy to use. I'd say that's valuable. How is it not?
So like, the "Subscribe" button, and the list view?
That's what was useful. I really don't get what he's aiming for here... obscure features that may have existed that only some people thought were useful?
Re: Chief Architect of Google+ requests clarification on Google Reader
#10Do the benefits of an RSS reader really need explanation? Or is he simply hoping to hear some unexpected input from this?
I interpreted the post as "Why does everyone care about Google Reader? Why Google's instead of the myriad of other available RSS services?"