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

Google Reader shut down announced ten years ago today

googleblog.blogspot.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 354 posts

Re: Google Reader shut down announced ten years ago today

#111

Post by modo_mario »

jemmyw wrote: post #67
thr717272 wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ironically, for me it was probably when they shut down Google+ that I finally changed my views on Google. For me Google+ was a lot like HN: Peaceful, quiet and beautiful and lots Open Source content and smart people. I still look once or twice a year but it seems everyone who are into building social media wants to copy not only the very limited functionality of Twitter, down to its dumb limitations, but also its UX…

I also liked Google+ it was where I could manage my tech social stuff without participating in the madness that Facebook was becoming.

The trickle in invitation system with which they made it public was such a glaringly obvious mistake it still makes me mad. So many people I knew had accounts there but stopped using it because their friends weren't there or by the time they could join their friends had already left because in turn their friends weren't there.

Re: Google Reader shut down announced ten years ago today

#112

Post by izacus »

wmf wrote: post #6

I still don't understand why people couldn't switch to a different RSS reader. The Google Reader narrative seems like it was just as helpful as the bank run we just had.

That's because the goal of the whining is the whining - people feel emotionally slighted because someone didn't keep maintaining a free product just for them. This explains why paid alternatives didn't take off - people wanted FREE and they wanted GOOGLE to GIVE them FREE. It's modern developer entitlement at its best - it comes from the same place as all of the abusive attacks on opensource developers when they don't cater to the audience.

Re: Google Reader shut down announced ten years ago today

#114

Post by benoliver999 »

zedadex wrote: post #92
yjftsjthsd-h wrote: post #10

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…

For me it was Google Talk. It hit the sweet spot of a lightweight chat app that didn't take any configuration or convincing for my non-techie friends. I still miss it.

And you could use XMPP.

Re: Google Reader shut down announced ten years ago today

#115

Post by mft_ »

scarface74 wrote: post #99
raizer88 wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I never understood why Google doesn't hire B teams to do the maintenance work, or outsource it. It's normal that if you hire only top players that no one wants to be stuck doing tickets.

It’s not about hiring top players. It’s about the incentive structure of getting ahead. From all of the leveling guidelines I’ve seen at major tech companies, “coding quality” only comes into play to differentiate an entry level dev to a mid level dev. I can’t think of any good measurable incentives that Google could use,

Rational beings typically act according to the incentives they are provided, so if coders don't want to work on Reader for this reason, and management don't want to keep it around, it does point to the incentive structure being part of the problem. But it therefore follows that many of Google's bad decisions could be partly traced back to how the company is organised - probably the interlinked combination of the incentive structure, and success metrics.

What's interesting is that even the most biased insider must see that Google really sucks in some domains - and recognising (and/or generating) user value seems to be one of them. Several times, they've either spent big on products which just missed the mark from day one (Plus/Currents, Stadia, multiple text/chat apps), or killed products which already had major engagement (Reader, Inbox, Orkut).

What's interesting is that if they made user engagement the only major metric that mattered and incentivised accordingly, it would likely drive interesting behaviour - a real focus on user needs, iteration to optimise engagement in the longer term, improvements in customer service, etc.

Re: Google Reader shut down announced ten years ago today

#116

Post by kennyadam »

pirsquare wrote: post #91
js4ever wrote: post #16

This is probably the inflection point in history where I lost all trust I had in Google. I don't know how much they saved by shutting it down (probably nearly nothing) but I know that for me and people around me it was a such terrible signal that I never trusted again Google for anything serious/business. Well done guys

Yes in my case I was a 4 yrs customer with Google Cloud and they abruptly shutdown all my servers last friday. Any decent human being would at least try to rectify things ASAP, except for Google. 3 days now and they still haven't gave me a resolution. They're the most dysfunctional organization I've seen in my life. It's like communications between teams goes with a "none of my business" attitude. Context: https://ww…

Google's support is a joke. I honestly don't think anyone should do business with them.

Re: Google Reader shut down announced ten years ago today

#117

Post by pirsquare »

kennyadam wrote: post #116
pirsquare wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes in my case I was a 4 yrs customer with Google Cloud and they abruptly shutdown all my servers last friday. Any decent human being would at least try to rectify things ASAP, except for Google. 3 days now and they still haven't gave me a resolution. They're the most dysfunctional organization I've seen in my life. It's like communications between teams goes with a "none of my business" attitude. Context: https://ww…

Google's support is a joke. I honestly don't think anyone should do business with them.

Their support is so horrible that we should rename Google Cloud Platform as "Google Clown Platform"

Re: Google Reader shut down announced ten years ago today

#118

Post by zamnos »

whatshisface wrote: post #88
erik_seaberg wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Despite the prior “more wood behind fewer arrows” announcement, it might be the first time Google killed something that was popular with Googlers. I think it was an “Elves leave Middle-Earth” moment for my friends on campus. Memegen was full of “we can launch (ultradoomed project) but can’t keep Reader alive?” snark, less good-natured than usual. I’ve heard it blamed on Vic and G+, actual security issues from scrapin…

I haven't heard the phrase "more wood behind fewer arrows" before, but I am pretty sure that never in the history of the evolution of projectiles was that tradeoff ever taken in that direction.

F = M * A

Raise the mass of the arrow and it'll hit with more force. There's a sweet spot for piercing heavy cloth armor. If the arrows are too light, they'll bounce right off.

Re: Google Reader shut down announced ten years ago today

#119

Post by thinkingemote »

It was the social graph that made Google Reader great not the basic RSS functionality. That was really the game changer. It tapped into your friends feeds, what they liked and read.

You could follow other peoples recommendations, and the user belonged to a network of other users. It also made finding widely shared news items stand out and interesting blogs to follow easier and strengthened the network by doing so.

All the replacements afterwards didn't have this social aspect (or if they did they lacked the network needed for it) so they were like a graveyard socially.

Re: Google Reader shut down announced ten years ago today

#120

Post by synu »

saurik wrote: post #103
whatshisface wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I haven't heard the phrase "more wood behind fewer arrows" before, but I am pretty sure that never in the history of the evolution of projectiles was that tradeoff ever taken in that direction.

That's what makes it so amazing !!! It was a delicious self-parody. I remember reading it and thinking it made absolutely no sense as a metaphor: just imagine the poor archer being told "instead of having 15 arrows to take with you today, we've decided to give you three really heavy arrows"... that was the announcement that really made Google product management feel like a laughing stock to me, and is what I return t…

I always thought it was something like a comparison between ballistae with fewer shots and larger arrows (javelin size, really) doing more damage, and a storm of smaller regular arrows. Maybe I was being too generous with my interpretation.
Post reply on HN