Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

You'd think they could at least have slowly integrated Reader with their G+ vision rather than alienating a good portion of the users who have championed them for years.


They did slowly integrate some parts of Reader into Google+ and it was met with resistance.

Google+ Sparks was a kind of RSS/StumbleUpon thing. Flopped.

Reader sharing became sharing into Google+. Many in the Reader crew defiantly cried out against it and said they wouldn't share things if they had to use Google+ to do it.

It wouldn't have been all roses no matter how you cut it.

I think people are in the bargaining phase of dealing with their post-Reader era grief.


Sparks didn't have RSS... did it?


I think you miss the point.

Google, Facebook, and Twitter don't want publishers to use RSS/Atom. They want them to publish using their respective, proprietary APIs.


I suppose that's why -- since about the time Buzz was introduced -- Google's been pushing an open push publishing specification (PubSubHubbub).


... Which is not used or supported by Google+. PubSubHubbub was very much part of a different era.


How would G+ possibly use PuSH? It does not make sense. There is no use case. The main (search) Google crawler does support PUSH.


PubSubHubbub is still alive and kicking though, and Google still seem to be encouraging people to use it.

The blogpost at http://googledevelopers.blogspot.co.uk/2013/07/pubsubhubbub-... also mentions a Feed API.

I'm confused, I guess this means that only the sync + ui for reader is dead.


> Which is not used or supported by Google+

So, what?

> PubSubHubbub was very much part of a different era.

PubSubHubbub is very much part of now, which is why they just released a new version of the spec.




Consider applying for YC's Summer 2026 batch! Applications are open till May 4

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: