Google Reader Apocalypse Extremely Fucking Nigh

Post by guruz » Tue, Jun 25, 2013, 2:03 PM UTC

unimpressive wrote: post #112

veidr wrote: post #111

> I have no interest in reading my feeds through > a web site (no more than I would tolerate reading > my email that way, like an *animal*). I haven't laughed that hard at something I read in a blog post so far this year. And I agree wholeheartedly. Who gives a shit about Google Reader the website? (Apparently, a whole lot of people... but not me.) I only care about the syncing. Like Zawinski, I want a fast, awesome,…

>So I don't know what the solution is. Personal cloud. You have a domain name and you host the sync on cheap hardware in your home. For a single application this seems wildly expensive, but if you had a decent ecosystem of apps it'd suddenly be a bargain. This also has secondary benefits like not sending your data to shady 3rd parties.

Post by Kerrick » Tue, Jun 25, 2013, 2:21 PM UTC

melling wrote: post #194

xradionut wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your analogy sucks and you could have easily fixed it: "If Microsoft gave Office away, destroyed the competition, then killed Office..." Google killed Reader and trust.

My comparison is simply that someone built a solid product and gave it away. Yes, people still pay hundreds of dollars for the same software when Open/Libre Office will work for most people.

Post by aaronharnly » Tue, Jun 25, 2013, 2:37 PM UTC

nmcfarl wrote: post #192

jimhart3000 wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's the source of that $5/month claim? It's not on Reeder's site or twitter - is there another place that's come out? Not calling your statement into question or anything, just very disappointed to find that out...

Yeah - particularly since reeder syncing is now via feedbin which is 2$ a month. Which makes this service 84$ a year. A bit steep in my opinion - particularly the reeder part. I'm willing to pay up front for software that runs on my phone, but I'm not sure I'd pay 60$ for reeder, and making it a subscription, for a non-hosted service, would be a deal breaker for me. Hopefully this report is inaccurate/mistaken in som…

Post by jamiebikies » Tue, Jun 25, 2013, 2:44 PM UTC

zainny wrote: post #74

1123581321 wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yoleo has been wonderful for me. I've been recommending it to everybody.

I gave Yoleo a shot as well. Biggest issue is no mobile app :-(

Post by unimpressive » Tue, Jun 25, 2013, 2:52 PM UTC

amirmc wrote: post #137

unimpressive wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>So I'd want the same thing mirrored (but encrypted) up in the public cloud. I don't want to end up in a situation where all my stuff dies because a disk fails. The implied parenthetical there is "(Without your permission)", encrypted backups would be miles ahead of where we're at now in terms of security.

I don't understand what you mean by "without your permission". I'd expect to have all the keys so it would be 'secure' in that sense. The problem I want to solve is having proper ownership of my stuff without having to do that much more admin. I'd use the cloud as just storage. We're not necessarily that far ahead from having this now as services like tarsnap [1] offer part of what I'm after. I think the missing piec…