Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Chief Architect of Google+ requests clarification on Google Reader

plus.google.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 131 posts

Re: Chief Architect of Google+ requests clarification on Google Reader

#101

Post by saraid216 »

roc wrote: post #59
scott_s wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I thought it was straight-forward: he wants to understand what it was about Reader that users liked, so he can work on incorporating them into Google+. Since he does not have the power to save Reader, he's telling people this is not the venue to complain about its shutdown.

That's funny, I assumed it was a PR move to make Google appear responsive when they inevitably add an RSS-ish feature to syndicate news subscriptions into google+ feeds, as opposed to appearing like a malevolent plan to kill a beloved service to push more people into google+. Hence it's counter-productive to mention the shutdown in negative terms, as that associates the two efforts in a way that underscores the latte…

The odd thing to me is that he phrased it as "many Google products", which sounds as if he's thinking about leaving the Google+ product.

Re: Chief Architect of Google+ requests clarification on Google Reader

#102

Post by saraid216 »

pazimzadeh wrote: post #91
saraid216 wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You realize this person almost certainly doesn't exist, right?

No, seriously can you elucidate? He could at least meet with someone who had worked on the project.

It's fairly common knowledge that Reader had zero support inside Google, and hasn't had any support in several years.

Re: Chief Architect of Google+ requests clarification on Google Reader

#103

Post by guizzy »

dannyr wrote: post #74
ceejayoz wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They don't even beta test when they build products. Uh... Gmail pretty much started the "launch your web app as a beta" craze.

Dude, do I need to put a sarcasm tag?

On the internet? Yes, always.

Re: Chief Architect of Google+ requests clarification on Google Reader

#104

Post by lancewiggs »

dechols wrote: post #69
jcampbell1 wrote: post #34

Google can be damn stupid sometimes. They shutdown Google Reader which is used daily by every journalist on the planet. This resulted in a ton of bad press which was completely foreseeable. Now they have some chieftain try to change the conversation into "Tell me what you loved about Reader", under the guise that they will use your comment to help make better products. As if Google has no data on how people use Googl…

I wanted to reply, but then it asked me to sign up for Google+. Then it hit me: That's exactly it. Google+ is Google's way of controlling an entire ecosystem of replies to topics. That's exactly the problem with Google+. Google Reader was great because it gave you a window into the internet. A window that you could shape however you wanted.

Yes. I scanned the first hundred or comments on the post and none said that the experience on Reader (and Twitter) is owned by the reader, while the experience Google + (and Facebook) are owned by Google (and Facebook).

I do not want to share my reading activity with everyone. I just want to sit here on the corner and read. So why make it "social"?

Re: Chief Architect of Google+ requests clarification on Google Reader

#105

Post by bumbledraven »

Great comment from AJ Kohn on that thread (I don't know how to link directly to his post, unfortunately):

The Reader interface was pragmatic and efficient so it appealed to those, like me, who are information consumers.

At the heart of it all are two main points:

Time-Shifted Consumption and Deliverability

It's never been about having real-time access to information. It's about time-shifting the consumption and knowing that I will see that content at some point in time if I desire.

Feeds are to Reader as Season Passes are to TiVo. (As an aside, the latter is the model that should have been marketed to users.)

Using other methods such as G+ or Twitter or Facebook or any other mechanism that tries to find, shape and filter the information based on interest etc. are usually not comprehensive and rarely allow me the comfort of knowing I can rely on reviewing whether or not I value that content.

In short, I might not see it fly by in my stream and curation services might remove content that I may enjoy.

=====

In the same thread, Rob Ferguson writes:

Not specific to Reader, but regarding RSS (even Twitter to some extent), the multi-feed publish/subscribe model allows people to create separate feeds that each represent a facet of their personality, something they want to say. While the single-output model of G+ or Facebook has some advantages, e.g. seeing the 'whole person', the trade off is that you can't really specialise or segment content.

=====

Nelson Minar writes:

So I'd say the main value of Google Reader in the last year has been the very fast centralized feed crawler, along with its API that made it easy to put more modern UIs on top of Google's RSS reader infrastructure

Re: Chief Architect of Google+ requests clarification on Google Reader

#106

Post by OGinparadise »

VikingCoder wrote: post #93
jcampbell1 wrote: post #34

Google can be damn stupid sometimes. They shutdown Google Reader which is used daily by every journalist on the planet. This resulted in a ton of bad press which was completely foreseeable. Now they have some chieftain try to change the conversation into "Tell me what you loved about Reader", under the guise that they will use your comment to help make better products. As if Google has no data on how people use Googl…

"under the guise"? Pretend for one yoctosecond that you work at Google, disagree with the decision to shut down Reader, and are in a position to try to make the product you're working on help fill the void. That people like you assume it's malice, or some conspiracy or evil plot, just saddens me. Full disclosure: I have empathy, and own GOOG stock.

Pretend for one yoctosecond that you work at Google, disagree with the decision to shut down Reader, and are in a position to try to make the product you're working on help fill the void.

So, Google would allow another team to create a clone of what they shut down after all these years? Their excuse was that they need to focus on fewer products

Re: Chief Architect of Google+ requests clarification on Google Reader

#107

Post by roc »

scott_s wrote: post #85
roc wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"an engineer", Chief Architect, same difference, right?

Where I work, Chief Architects do not make decisions about killing products. That happens higher than them. Their responsibility is engineering the architecture of their product. So, yes, I think it's accurate to refer to a Chief Architect as "an engineer."

> "Chief Architects do not make decisions about killing products."

No, but if you were trying to convince people you weren't forcing them into Google+, but Google+ was presenting alternatives out of their sincere love for the people, you wouldn't use the person who made the decision now would you?

And who better to stand up and ask "how can we help" than one of the people who will later take to the Google Blog to say "look what we added to Google+ because you asked for it?"

Re: Chief Architect of Google+ requests clarification on Google Reader

#109

Post by Karunamon »

joshma wrote: post #63
Karunamon wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The traffic to the web app was negligible. This is completely and demonstrably false. It drives more traffic at this point than G+ itself. http://www.quora.com/How-many-users-does-Google-Reader-have

This is not demonstrably false, as the Quora post you linked to is 3 almost 2 years old. (For comparison, the latest answer is right around when G+ launched.) The large majority of the population doesn't even know what RSS is, let alone use it for their day-to-day reading.

You have reason to believe that Reader's usage went down in two years?

Re: Chief Architect of Google+ requests clarification on Google Reader

#110

Post by DannoHung »

shrikant wrote: post #29
reader5000 wrote: post #12

G+ can't be google reader for two reasons: 1. Information density. Magazine style / tiles / graphics etc aren't the same as single line expandable headline with maybe 40 headlines visible per screen height. 2. Just the content. Reader didn't try to guess what you wanted to read or notify you what your friends were up to.

..and you know what? I like text. I 'circled' a bunch of people from the numerous Hacker News communities on G+, and I see far too many pictures and videos in the feed. And mostly personal life stuff, like their pets, or lunch, or some trees or whatever. (This is also my current complaint with App.net, but that's a different story). I really wish there were a way to filter by post type (text and links only) in Google…

Hmm... maybe what they oughta let you do is filter out posts from people that go out to "Public". I don't want his public or her public or that circle's public, but if they post to a specific circle that I'm a part of, send it on.
Post reply on HN