Baby steps toward replacing Google Reader
1–10 of 65 posts
Re: Baby steps toward replacing Google Reader
#2I'm working on an opensource implementation of the API here if anyone is interested in helping out :) https://github.com/devongovett/reader
Re: Baby steps toward replacing Google Reader
#3I'm working on an opensource implementation of the API here if anyone is interested in helping out :) https://github.com/devongovett/reader
The most important thing right now is probably making sure that there is a documentation of the old API we all agree on. The one you are using [1] seems like a good start.
[1] http://undoc.in
Re: Baby steps toward replacing Google Reader
#4I'm working on an opensource implementation of the API here if anyone is interested in helping out :) https://github.com/devongovett/reader
Did I miss something in their API, or was there absolutely no way to tell whether you had renamed a feed or not?
Re: Baby steps toward replacing Google Reader
#5That's a good idea but I nevertheless think big clients (client reader + integrated access to server api) will win anyway because if you have to pay a client and then pay a subscription to a server to have access to an implementation of this API I don't think it will be very appealing. All the current model of 'small' clients was based on the fact that the access to Google's (non official) api was free. That part won't be replaced.
Re: Baby steps toward replacing Google Reader
#6I'm working on an opensource implementation of the API here if anyone is interested in helping out :) https://github.com/devongovett/reader
I might pitch in and help on this, I know I'll be looking for a replacement to Reader, might as well help build an api implementation
Re: Baby steps toward replacing Google Reader
#7That's a good idea but I nevertheless think big clients (client reader + integrated access to server api) will win anyway because if you have to pay a client and then pay a subscription to a server to have access to an implementation of this API I don't think it will be very appealing. All the current model of 'small' clients was based on the fact that the access to Google's (non official) api was free. That part won…
It would be nice if one of the self-hosted server-side apps (Fever, Tiny Tiny RSS) replicated the Reader API. It's not really worth it for me to bother with a self-hosted solution if I have to use a web client.
Re: Baby steps toward replacing Google Reader
#8Also, an implementation independent test suite would be nice...
I'm sure there are plenty of corner cases where all the new implementations might fall down, or make different decisions than are expected.
Re: Baby steps toward replacing Google Reader
#9All I know is that I will be on whatever reeder supports. So basically whoever makes that thing is going to be deciding my fate. I hope they choose wisely.
Re: Baby steps toward replacing Google Reader
#10Please, as an advice to general HN posters, please avoid posting marco.org links here on HN, because his sole intention is to sell his readers out more than focusing on writing. That's a fairly grande accusation, but it's justified.
Do you know why is he writing about Google Reader now? Go to your HN homepage right now, as of writing this comment, the Google reader announcement has about 1700 upvotes. Ouch, that's a lot of views for someone to let go of. Hence, if someone writes something that compliments this announcement, common sense tells me that they would get more page views.
There's nothing wrong in having ads on your blog/website, people do it all the time. What's wrong is trying to create an impression to your readers that your sole intention is to write quality content, while you care just about pageviews. Please, realize that marco.org is no different from Techcrunch!
Marco isn't innocent, if you've been following him closely. Also, I think it would help if you take a look at this page where he just blatantly sells us, his readers like some piece of junk commodity. http://www.marco.org/sponsorship