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

RSS is undead

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 276 posts

Re: RSS is undead

#261

Post by pinkano »

organsnyder wrote: post #180
stryk wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I see Google Reader mentioned a lot when virtually anything RSS-related comes up. I missed out on the whole RSS craze (prison will do that to you). But I have always wondered -- so many people lament the fact that Google killed it -- why hasn't anyone forked/cloned it's UI and feature-set? You don't want to just straight up copy it and wake the Google lawyers from their nests obviously, but why not make something tha…

When Reader was killed, I switched to Feedly and haven't looked back. It took Reader's feature-set (at least, the features I care about) and has continued to provide a robust application for consuming news. I never used the social bits of Reader, though.

thank you so much, happy to hear this. Petr from Feedly

Re: RSS is undead

#262

Post by pinkano »

ryangittins wrote: post #230
Vinnl wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hmm, you might want to know (or already do) that Feedly just added keyword filtering - brings in some competition :)

I did see that a while back—I'm actually a Feedly user myself! I haven't looked at their implementation much, but I imagine it only works on Feedly itself whereas siftrss is meant to be totally agnostic to what reader you use. The tool also supports regex, so you can do some slightly richer matching with siftrss.

It actually works everywhere, you just have to create the Mute Filters in Feedly. Petr from Feedly

Re: RSS is undead

#263

Post by pinkano »

DarkIye wrote: post #221

Thanks to Wordpress publishing an RSS feed endpoint by default (/feed) and Feedly's aptitude at finding feeds, RSS is not dead, or undead, or anything of the sort and I have been using it on a daily basis for over a decade now.

Happy to hear this, thank you for using Feedly! Petr from Feedly

Re: RSS is undead

#264

Post by sametmax »

sh87 wrote: post #256
Vinnl wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Another weird idea is that RSS should be for everybody. No. It speaks to a certain kind of people, and that's fine. Well, that's fine as long as that group of people is big enough for the sites I care about to consider it worthwhile enough to actually add an RSS feed :)

Adding an RSS feed is easy. Individual writers and hosts have no good reason for not including them. For groups / publishing houses that are not techinically bent generally use publishing platforms that generally support them. For the minority thats excluded from the above, hey, just a shout out and someone will be ready to help (me included). But thats not the real problem, the lack of ads on rss feeds (which is its…

As the OP, I love RSS.

But let's not pretend it's always easy.

You gotta take in consideration the filters, the configuration, the cache, if you support rss and atom, the routing, and how you integrate it in your design.

There is no such thing as a free lunch.

Re: RSS is undead

#265

Post by bastage »

lunchables wrote: post #144
jeremyjh wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Surely Google Reader had numbers that influenced the decision to shut it down?

Or just as likely the inability to monetize those users. Was there any indication that RSS viewership was dropping? I've been using RSS uninterrupted, every day, since the early 2000s. First on Google Reader and then, and now, using Tiny Tiny RSS. I always find these articles about RSS being dead to be pretty funny, considering I'm usually reading them via RSS.

Thanks for saving me hassle of typing 100% of those same exact words.

When Google Reader went away I looked at a few of the hosted alternatives but found tt-rss early on and never looked back.

Re: RSS is undead

#267

Post by gregknicholson »

gkya wrote: post #59
gregknicholson wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> solving RSS as business model. There needs to be some sort of a commerce layer around feeds RSS is not a business model. Selling things people actually want is a business model. If you can't persuade someone to pay for your content (perhaps via willingly watching adverts), then it's not economically viable content. If you care enough to continue publishing it, great, but it's out of your own pocket.

> If you can't persuade someone to pay for your content (perhaps via willingly watching adverts), then it's not economically viable content. "useless content". FTFY.

No, there's a difference between “economically viable” and “useful”. A labour of love may be very valuable to its author and its audience; it's just not a way to make money.

Re: RSS is undead

#268

Post by Vinnl »

sh87 wrote: post #256
Vinnl wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Another weird idea is that RSS should be for everybody. No. It speaks to a certain kind of people, and that's fine. Well, that's fine as long as that group of people is big enough for the sites I care about to consider it worthwhile enough to actually add an RSS feed :)

Adding an RSS feed is easy. Individual writers and hosts have no good reason for not including them. For groups / publishing houses that are not techinically bent generally use publishing platforms that generally support them. For the minority thats excluded from the above, hey, just a shout out and someone will be ready to help (me included). But thats not the real problem, the lack of ads on rss feeds (which is its…

Easy is something else than no effort at all. Wordpress by default comes with RSS feeds enabled, but e.g. Jekyll doesn't - and I've seen many static sites even by tech-savvy people or for software libraries that hadn't enabled them. That means I have to contact site owners to enable their RSS feeds before I'm able to subscribe to them. And that's just when they're using a package like Jekyll that already has RSS support baked in.

Re: RSS is undead

#269

Post by gkya »

gregknicholson wrote: post #267
gkya wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you can't persuade someone to pay for your content (perhaps via willingly watching adverts), then it's not economically viable content. "useless content". FTFY.

No, there's a difference between “economically viable” and “useful”. A labour of love may be very valuable to its author and its audience; it's just not a way to make money.

Certainly. What I meant was the content that was meant to make money but not inherently economically viable, i.e. all that clickbait ad-ridden stuff out there.

Re: RSS is undead

#270

Post by itakedrugs »

severine wrote: post #253
itakedrugs wrote: post #249

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If a website offered RSS, it used to be in plain view in the address bar, like this: http://screenshots.oldapps.com/3/large_87_Firefox%201.5.0.12...

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/awesome-rss/

Tha's good, but an extension is just not the same... it hides the feature from most people.
Post reply on HN