Slashdot Mirror


Ask Slashdot: Which Google Project Didn't Deserve To Die?

Nerval's Lobster writes "When Google announced the shutdown of Google Reader, its popular RSS reader, it sparked significant outrage across the Web. While one could argue that RSS readers have declined in popularity over the past few years (in fact, that was Google's stated reason for killing it), they remain a useful tool for many people who want to collect their Web content—articles, blog postings, and the like—in one convenient place. (Fortunately for them, there exist any number of alternative RSS readers, some of which offer even more features than Google Reader.) This wasn't the first time that Google announced a project's imminent demise, and it certainly won't be the last: Google Buzz, Google Health, Google Wave, Google Labs, and other software platforms all ended up in the dustbin of tech history. So here's the question: of all those projects, which didn't deserve the axe? If you had a choice, which would you bring back?"

68 of 383 comments (clear)

  1. Google Weather API by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    How I miss thee...

  2. Google Groups by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Alas, poor DejaNews, we knew ye well.

    1. Re:Google Groups by heypete · · Score: 4, Informative

      Second. While you can still search usenet using Google Groups, it's a massive pain compared to how it used to be.

    2. Re:Google Groups by Jhon · · Score: 5, Funny

      Agreed. Although, I wish I could "delete" some of my (embarrassing) posts from the early to mid 90's. I was young and I needed the money!

    3. Re:Google Groups by Hardness · · Score: 2

      *sigh* Miss Delaware will never learn...

    4. Re:Google Groups by ewoods · · Score: 2

      What got me away from Yahoo was IG - Interactive Google. I have a few widgets on my google.com/ig page and I use it as my home page. They're ditching IG and I am going back to Yahoo.

    5. Re:Google Groups by Jason+Levine · · Score: 2

      You are modded funny, but I seriously cringe when I think of some of my early 90's Usenet posts.

      As for "I needed the money", I seriously considered an offer from a potential employer at one point until I decided I just couldn't do it. The job? Post photos of declothed women to a Usenet group. Had I accepted the job, my career might have gone along a completely different path!

      --
      My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
    6. Re:Google Groups by antdude · · Score: 2

      Yeah, I hate the new GUI on there. I stopped using it. Is there another free web-based newsgroup to use like the old DejaNews and old Google Groups?

      --
      Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
    7. Re:Google Groups by Jhon · · Score: 2

      I've seen my early 90's usenet posts. I more than cringe. I make light of it now because I'm older/wiser and less prone to actually putting my PHONE NUMBER in my sig (ug) among other things.

  3. Lots of choices by recoiledsnake · · Score: 5, Informative
    --
    This space for rent.
  4. "Do no evil." by concealment · · Score: 5, Insightful

    My favorite Google project was the idea that a company built brand loyalty by refusing to do evil, manipulative and underhanded things.

    Ten years later, Google is doing those things. They're getting more aggressive with ads and invading personal information; they're cutting out useful projects that don't immediately monetize; they're trying to manipulate us into being better cash cows by signing up with our cell phones and handing over more ad-friendly information through Google+.

    I don't begrudge them the right to make a profit. They were doing that, and continue to do so, without any of these manipulative activities. I just want the "do no evil" project to come back because that was a Google, Inc. I could believe in.

    1. Re:"Do no evil." by tokencode · · Score: 3, Funny

      The "Do No Evil" project was scrapped as soon as they started the "Publically Traded Company" project...

  5. Re:quit whining over loss of free services by tepples · · Score: 2

    most people doesn't use RSS, it's obscure geeky thing

    What do most people use for the use cases for which geeks use RSS?

  6. Re:quit whining over loss of free services by ZorinLynx · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Nearly everyone I know used Reader.

    It's not an "obscure geeky thing". It's a great way to follow multiple websites. You don't need to be a geek to figure it out or benefit from it.

  7. iGoogle by swinferno · · Score: 5, Insightful

    How I'm dreading November 1st when iGoogle will be retired...
    http://support.google.com/websearch/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=2664197

    --
    "In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act." - George Orwell
    1. Re:iGoogle by jeffy210 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yup, that's the one I was going to post. It's been my homepage for years. It's a nice simple web based RSS aggregator that I could get to from anywhere.

      --
      ------
      "And may your days be long upon the earth."
    2. Re:iGoogle by sosume · · Score: 5, Funny

      Yup, that is the one, iGoogle. My default page for the last 5 years or so. Why they would retire that is beyond understanding, it attracts a ton of users at a relatively low cost. I am trying to do without the page at the moment, and find that I consume *much* less of Google's services as a consequence. I even started appreciating Bing and Live Maps as viable alternatives, who knows, my next phone may even be a WP8 device! (shrudders).

    3. Re:iGoogle by ElectricTurtle · · Score: 2

      I've been using netvibes.com since the announcement of the 'retirement' of iGoogle. It does most of what iGoogle did as well or better. It's funny ever since the Reader 'retirement' was announced netvibes has frequently put up a message apologizing for slowness because of having to adjust to a huge influx of new users. I bet they're super happy that Reader is dead.

      --
      I support the Slashcott and will not be reading or commenting from 2/10/14 to 2/17/14. Beta is steaming pile of dog shit
    4. Re:iGoogle by jitterman · · Score: 2

      I too have used iGoogle for as long as I can really recall, and agree that its retirement puzzles me greatly. NetVibes doesn't really do it for me; I'm trying igHome for now as the purpose of the project is to closely (not exactly) replicate iGoogle.

      As for WP8, I have a Lumia 920 (got it on release day) and enjoy it thoroughly - it's not just not bad, it's actually good (my opinion of course).

      --
      For conscience is the wound, and there's naught to staunch it
    5. Re:iGoogle by Cro+Magnon · · Score: 2

      Exactly this! I'm still using iGoogle, and I haven't decided on an alternative homepage, but when I do, it won't be from Google.

      --
      Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
    6. Re:iGoogle by acw528 · · Score: 2

      I will miss iGoogle. What could replace it? I just want news, time, weather, and peak into my email. Maybe a pretty picture. None of the substitutes put all of this on one page. Any suggestions? Love iGoogle.

  8. Google Code Search by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    RIP

  9. And now Google Drive is down... by mystikkman · · Score: 5, Informative

    In other news Google Drive is down. Most Chromebooks are rendered useless because of paltry local storage and reliance on the Google Cloud for storing important stuff.

    http://www.slashgear.com/google-investigating-google-drive-downtime-18274444/

    1. Re:And now Google Drive is down... by fredprado · · Score: 5, Insightful

      That is one of the many problems with relying on clouds.

    2. Re:And now Google Drive is down... by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "That is one of the many problems with relying on clouds."

      Sadly, the main problem is the whole concept. While it might be a good idea, at some point in the future, that future is not yet here.

      What major online service, e.g. iCloud (based on MS Azure), Amazon AWS, etc. has not gone down for a significant period in each of the last few years? I am having trouble thinking of one.

      And before anybody says "Yes, but it's still more reliable than your own servers" I call bullshit. My own servers have not been down at all in the last few years.

    3. Re:And now Google Drive is down... by emag · · Score: 2

      It's not really down, it's just hungover from too much St Patrick's celebrating this weekend...

      --
      "The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule." --H.L. Mencken
    4. Re:And now Google Drive is down... by Sarten-X · · Score: 2

      Personally, I'm inclined to disagree. I think Apple should take their metric fuckton of cash and buy DropBox, then put the DropBox team in charge of iCloud.

      iCloud suffers from the same foibles as Internet Explorer and GNOME. It's not really smooth enough, but it's so tightly integrated into the core system so deeply that removing it is practically impossible. I'd rther see DropBox bring their reliability, ease, and compatibility into iOS, rather than rely on the community of app developers to voluntarily integrate tightly with a non-Apple service.

      --
      You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.
    5. Re:And now Google Drive is down... by mystikkman · · Score: 2

      Strangely, if you read the comments, and not only the Chris Burn's story, you'd see that the only thing that isn't working is http/https access. But never let the facts get in the way of an anti-google rant, right?

      I am glad to hear that Gopher service was not impacted.

    6. Re:And now Google Drive is down... by Opportunist · · Score: 4, Insightful

      From a company point of view, cloud services are about as horrible as it can get because we're talking the loss of real money. Yet that ghost hovers over oh so many board rooms it just is not funny anymore. It usually comes with its buddy, Software-as-a-service. Normally encountered shortly after one of the tie racks comes back from lunch with one of the sales drones from such a provider.

      Sure, it looks nice at first glance. We store our stuff "somewhere" and someone else takes care of it, and the best part of it is that it's really dirt cheap. Plus we can fire all those techies, or if we already did and outsourced our storage, we can cut that noose we hang on and gain a lot of flexibility. And it's great until (not if, until) something goes wrong.

      Anyone here really had NO downtime in their company in the last, say, three years due to computer or network troubles? And if you think getting your stuff back in order is a hassle with your ISP, try the same with a cloud provider. What you saved in months of cloud services is lost in the few days your employees will sit around and do no meaningful work.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    7. Re:And now Google Drive is down... by jellomizer · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It is more reliable then your own servers generally, Not more always more reliable then your server personally.
      A lot of companies have their servers running on Desktop System under their desk plugged into the wall, with a single hard-drive. Or have their systems in a server room but there are the low priority servers that are not part of the main architecture, because what they do, do not justify the cost. So if you have a cloud system you get a cheap server, to do a low/mid priority task. Say running your website, or email. Something depending on your organization can afford to be offline for a period of time.

      So you personally may be a good administrator, or you may have been lucky that they didn't go down. It isn't that could is better any individual system for uptime, it is just better on the average.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    8. Re:And now Google Drive is down... by plover · · Score: 4, Insightful

      And from a company point of view, I can also produce statistics on how many of our systems we ourselves screwed up with no help from the cloud. People screw up. Hardware fails.

      The difference with the cloud is that you've added two additional horribly complex systems (the network and the external servers) that can also be screwed up by people or fail for various reasons. You've also added the latency required to access the remote service. On top of that you've added multiple entry and exit points for data coming into and leaving your network, with extra key exchanges needed, and a different security environment to either be audited or blindly trusted.

      In exchange, you get to avoid the up front costs of installing a few servers, and the ongoing costs of managing them. Instead, you simply pay someone else on an ongoing basis to buy and maintain their own hardware with your money. And if they raise their rates, or go out of business, or buy cheap servers, or hire stupid people, or smart lawyers, guess what? You're only a lot worse off than you were before.

      It's a pretty cloud when it's way up in the blue sky. But it's nothing but fog when it's in your face.

      --
      John
  10. Re:support for odf in Google Docs by serviscope_minor · · Score: 5, Informative

    Support for the open document standard (.odf etc.) in Google Docs should never have been removed

    How so? I can still download documents as ODT. I might be missing something since I don't use google docs all that much.

    --
    SJW n. One who posts facts.
  11. Google Health by DarrenBaker · · Score: 2

    This needs to happen again, before it gets owned by some shady proprietor.

    Speaking of which, where's Google Vote?

  12. Nexus Q by mystikkman · · Score: 4, Informative

    I don't know why they killed the Nexus Q.
    http://pogue.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/07/05/the-google-nexus-q-is-baffling/

    If you’re having friends over, and they, too, have Android phones, and they, too, have bought songs from Google’s music store, then they can add their own songs to your Q’s queue.

    Sounds interesting in theory. In practice, there’s a lot of spontaneity-killing setup. You have to go into Settings to turn on the feature. Then you have to invite your friend to participate by — get this — sending an e-mail message. Then your friend has to download the Nexus Q app.

    If you or the friend then taps the name of a song in your online Google account, it starts playing immediately, rather than being added to the queue as you’d expect. A Google rep explained to me that you’re not supposed to tap a song to add it to the playlist; you have to use a tiny pop-up menu to add it. More bafflement.

    Sounds like a great party addon!

    1. Re:Nexus Q by sootman · · Score: 4, Informative

      > I don't know why they killed the Nexus Q.

      Because it cost 3x as much as other devices that did a WHOLE lot more? And, as described in the bit you quoted, it was badly-designed? Seriously -- it was a $250 one-trick pony. ALL it did was let friends play music, and IF and ONLY IF they were using the exact right combination of things: Android phones, music in your account, etc. The only product deserving of a swifter death was the Microsoft Kin.

      --
      Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.
    2. Re:Nexus Q by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Actually, it also plays video. But that's not the purpose, either. The intent is to say you don't need yet another computing device with apps, what you really want is the ability to use all of the devices you already own, you know, the ones with a screen that you already interact with, and stream them to your TV. Was it complete? Not by a long shot. But the idea was sound and a much more realistic experiment than Google or Apple TV where a single account needs to support an entire family and App UIs need to change between the 10' couch model and the handheld touch model.

      Why was it killed? My only hope is that Miracast support on both displays and devices is what killed it. Screw the integrated amplifier and stripped down Android OS - just give me a standards-based way to throw content from my phone/tablet to the TV and I'd be much happier. The reality is Google's explanation of how things work is pretty poor and people kept comparing it to Google TV against which it most assuredly did not compete.

  13. Re:quit whining over loss of free services by iggymanz · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You're like the person in old story who had a rich man come to the front door with $1,000 every month. the person was happy and said "thank you" each time. One day the rich man went to the person's neighbor instead of his house, and gave the neighbor $1,000. The person was angry, and yelled "Hey, where is my money!!??" Do you see the issue now? *You* are the one being an asshole and an ingrate. You were given something good free of charge for years, and now can only bitch.

  14. Re:quit whining over loss of free services by bimozx · · Score: 3, Informative

    I think there is some validity to what he said. From how I see it, people don't even know they are using RSS when they use Google Reader. All they know is there are feeds that you can subscribe to, so that you can get any new updates from a certain website. Take it with a grain of salt though, since I don't have any prove of the fact, it's just what I got from watching the reaction of people from this whole Google Reader thing.

  15. I liked iGoogle by Notlupus · · Score: 2

    as my homepage. It's still around but it will be gone in a few months. Better start looking for alternatives.

  16. Re:support for odf in Google Docs by heypete · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Support for the open document standard (.odf etc.) in Google Docs should never have been removed.

    Say what? I can import and export OpenDocument files in Google Docs just fine.

  17. Re:quit whining over loss of free services by Fallingcow · · Score: 2

    Nothing.

  18. There Seems to Be a Disconnect Here by eldavojohn · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The translate API was axed because it was too popular.

    I think there's a serious fiscal-minded disconnect between Google and Google fans/consumers. Google appeared to give several services for free to users. The first being search. And when they monetized big time on ads by selling users' eyeballs, only the businessmen and engineers seemed to realize that.

    Now, when they find they cannot monetize on an decent implementation of a news reader or an API of translation tools (surprise, surprise) they do a cost benefit analysis and decide that they are losing money and -- like any business -- pull the plug. People bitch and moan (myself at the front of the line) but you have to realize that what's good for the consumer isn't always good for the business. If Starbucks offers free 12 oz coffee day or 7 Eleven does a free 32 oz slurpee day, you can't go back the next day and scream in outrage that they have baited you in and now switched it on you and discontinued your favorite product (that was conveniently free) ... likewise you can say how great something was for the end user all you want. It doesn't mean it's going to survive. There is an old notion that good products survive because they sell and while that still applies to physical products, people are having a hard time transitioning that notion to software. Because it's not true when you think about it like Google's cash cows.

    I found the Google Reader petition particularly amusing ... where, in the petition, was the promise to pay a nominal yearly fee to use Reader? Or are we stupid enough to petition for publicly traded businesses to lose money? Where is the petition to have banks hand out $1 each time you visit them?

    Of course there's this weird notion on Slashdot that ad based revenue on the internet is a very bad thing and that the internet was better before it and there's some mythical better revenue model. And here we are on Slashdot, a site that (as far as I can tell) makes its money/breaks even on ads ...

    I think this question should be "What acceptable revenue model would have saved these services or turned them into cash cows?" Keep in mind that if tracking your users is part of maximizing your profit to offer these services then you're facing pitchforks and torches -- I mean look at the stupid "scroogled" Microsoft mud slinging ads.

    --
    My work here is dung.
  19. Hey We Get It But... by garcia · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Listen, I understand that Google's services are free and they are a business and need to do what they feel is necessary to make money; however, I am not sure why some of these went away.

    Let's take for instance the fact that Google has killed off their RSS discovery plugin. I was a die hard Google Reader person and made the move to Feedly when Google Reader was killed. Killing Google Reader may have made sense to them; after all, they were supporting traffic and crawling feeds, and doing all those things that take money, time, engineering resources, and bandwidth. No worries there. But killing off the RSS plugin? I just can't fathom how that matters.

    Leave the damn tool out there for people to use. It really doesn't harm anyone if it's something that works and can continue to work client side.

    But I digress. Yes, Feedly (or any of the tools that will ultimately replace Reader) could make their own but killing it off in some misguided attempt at pushing users to use G+ (what I assume is their reasoning for it all) is just going to drive people farther away from Google's tools.

    No, G+ (or any social network for that matter) does not operate in the same way Reader (or any RSS reader) did. I don't give a fuck what other people find interesting for the most part; I want to be able to pick and choose and provide that content back out to people on those networks, not the other way around.

    Make your money in the way you see fit but I hope they're not surprised when there is a backlash against those changes. Oh and open source the damn RSS app and even Reader so people can continue on w/o Google's backing. That would fit the "do no evil" mantra.

    1. Re:Hey We Get It But... by CanHasDIY · · Score: 2

      Except, giving out personal information doesn't actually *cost* me anything, so to me, it *is* free.

      Bullshit; It costs you your privacy. Try to keep in mind, the term "cost" does not necessarily equate to fiscal transactions.

      The fact that you're OK with losing your privacy in exchange for services does not make it any less of a cost to you.

      --
      An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
  20. The one they didn't kill by leptechie · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Surprisingly, Google Apps.

    It's not dead, but it's no longer free. I work with three volunteer organisations - they're not charities but social groups geared towards helping expats get settled in my city. Membership management, event planning and budgeting, publications and flyers. All were easy to collaborate on with Google Apps, but even the (seemingly) small subscription fees are a burden when we're explicitly non-profit and loosely organised. We could have two active users one month, ten the next, so no single pricing plan option is appropriate without serious overhead and/or possible overspend.
    Very unfortunate.

  21. Don't be, not don't do by SirGarlon · · Score: 4, Informative

    Correction: it was "don't *be* evil" (emphasis added). There is a subtle semantic distinction between doing some evil and actually being evil. Such hair-splitting is probably what lets Google managers sleep at night.

    More from the link:

    Our commitment to the highest standards helps us hire great people, build great products, and attract loyal users. Trust and mutual respect among employees and users are the foundation of our success, and they are something we need to earn every day.

    Nice words they've got there.

    --
    [Sir Garlon] is the marvellest knight that is now living, for he destroyeth many good knights, for he goeth invisible.
    1. Re:Don't be, not don't do by dunkelfalke · · Score: 3, Insightful

      No, there isn't. Evil is as evil does.

      --
      "It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
  22. Google Public Data by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    IMO, google public data is a prime candidate to get the axe. we rely on it for our visualizations here at work. i vehemently argued against using this service because google can axe it at any time. it provides no discernable income for google (no ads appear anywhere), it has virtually no support whatsoever so it seems to function basically as a loss leader for google.

    i argued for using a product such as tableau which may cost some upfront cash but is also less likely to dissapear than a free google product, since it has the backing of a large public company whose livelihood relies on producing and maintaining said product.

    well, only time will tell if my prediction is right or wrong.,,

  23. Re:quit whining over loss of free services by MBGMorden · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Actually a lot of people pay for Google these days. My work account and my ISP account are both by Google and are advertisement free.

    Also - plenty of people listen to podcasts, which are mostly compiled via RSS. As a matter of fact that was my primary use of Google Reader - I used it to listen to podcasts and whatever computer I happened to be sitting down to without having to worry about syncing anything. All the ones I listed to were in the list and ready to go.

    --
    "People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
  24. Re:quit whining over loss of free services by ElectricTurtle · · Score: 4, Informative

    Essentially. They just have bookmarks/favorites and visit sites every day/hour using precious time/bandwidth because they don't know what a 'feed' is.

    Granted I didn't really use RSS much either until iGoogle (another killed service, hooray) because I wanted an interface that was customizable and dense. I have since moved to netvibes because it's as good or better than iGoogle (and 100x better than Reader) at tons of dense feeds visible at once.

    Really I don't know why reader is being lamented so much. It had a stupid, wasteful interface and wasn't very customizable. I've tried a couple times to make something useful of it but it's always been inferior.

    --
    I support the Slashcott and will not be reading or commenting from 2/10/14 to 2/17/14. Beta is steaming pile of dog shit
  25. Gizmo5 by weave · · Score: 2

    They forgot all of the companies they've bought and closed down, like Gizmo5

  26. Google Answers by foreverdisillusioned · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Spawned a million clones, all of which suck.

    1. Re:Google Answers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Mod Parent UP. Google answers provided as simple forum for leveraging experts to research information on complex topics. Users would pay from $2 to $200 based on the complexity of the research. The researchers were independent contractors that would provide a thorugh analysis of the given topic. I was impressed with the quality of work and I'd often look at the threads and topics that were generated to learn about a particular topic that I was interested in. There is a site available that the google answers experts created on their own but the community fell a part with out google's backing.

    2. Re:Google Answers by foreverdisillusioned · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The lack of Google branding hurt UClue for sure, but it was also held back by their self-interest: only former Google Answers researchers were allowed to become paid UClue researchers. The rest of the answers sites are generally crappy free wiki-type things, with little oversight and relatively small communities of contributors. The demand for a high quality research-oriented community with bounties is there, still unsatisfied, when Google had the product in the palm of their hand over ten years ago. Apparently, it was discontinued for no reason other than it was niche. Well, why the hell didn't you expand it?! For starters, you could have embraced the wiki revolution and recruited lots more paid researchers, offered resources for amateurs wanting to go pro. And it's not like it was an expensive thing to maintain. The people running it were commission-based contractors, not employees... and google got some of that commission too, on top of whatever they were making with ads.

  27. SageTV by queequeg1 · · Score: 2

    I'm still pissed that they bought up SageTV and appear to have done absolutely nothing with the technology. One of the better comprehensive PC-based DVR/media streaming systems destroyed. Even with zero updates and little support for 2 years, I still use it. The HD300 is still an excellent media streaming box.

  28. Google Labs and Google Sets by gr8_phk · · Score: 2

    Withing the old Google labs was a search called Google Sets. It was rarely used, but when you needed that capability it was the only place on the net you could do it. Why it or "labs" had to go away I don't understand.

    For the uninitiated, Sets allowed to you enter 2 or 3 things of some type and it would return a list (15) of other things of that type. The example they used was to enter the titles of a few Tom Cruise movies and it would return a bunch more. In real world usage you could use it to identify alternative makers of various products, or alternatives to any number of things (programming languages for example) or even things where you don't know how the terminology that describes how they are related.

  29. Re:quit whining over loss of free services by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You're like the person in old story who had a rich man come to the front door with $1,000 every month. the person was happy and said "thank you" each time. One day the rich man went to the person's neighbor instead of his house, and gave the neighbor $1,000. The person was angry, and yelled "Hey, where is my money!!??" Do you see the issue now? *You* are the one being an asshole and an ingrate. You were given something good free of charge for years, and now can only bitch.

    Wrong; it was a covenant: They got my personal data so they could sell me to advertisers as a precisely targeted demographic, and in return I got a useful tool. In addition, they got a certain amount of exclusivity in the marketplace, because anyone else trying to build this type of useful tool would have a hard time beating "free". They broke their end of the bargain; now I'm on the lookout for better tools that beat "free" by a long margin, by selling me a service rather than selling me to advertisers. Gmail, for example, is right out as of the immediate now. I would prefer an email address I can be reasonable sure will stay the same for the next decade at least.

  30. Re:quit whining over loss of free services by Seumas · · Score: 5, Insightful

    He's right. Most people don't use RSS. The same way most people don't visit web pages other than Facebook and Twitter. It's hardly a justification for dismissing a protocol. RSS is a primary functionality of the web, now. It's offered on almost every website. It's the backbone of almost every podcast program.

    The tech media and self-promoting personalities would tell us that they've long since replaced RSS with Twitter and Facebook and that's where they get all their links and news. I call bullshit on that. They seriously log into a website 24x7 and sift through all the trivial garbage their friends post for the few pieces of signal among the noise? Most of the people I know who use facebook have nothing to do with the news or industries I'm in or care about and seeing my stream full of their posts about NASCAR, network television shows, and Kim Kardashian amidsts the occasional ignorant political rant would serve me in absolutely no way.

    RSS is my window to the world. I choose what sites I care about and I get their content delivered directly to me, quickly, stripped of any extraneous bullshit from their site. It's the kind of service that simply won't likely ever be replaced, because it is so simple and fulfills an important role.

    As for Google Reader. Whatever. I used it for years and it was the best way they had to keep me associated with their services. Perhaps even more than my gmail account. However, I don't care that they got rid of it. Google is worth like half a trillion dollars. Just because they don't see a future in it, financially, for themselves -- that doesn't mean it isn't worth it for everyone else. Look at all the little guys out there. They don't need half a billion users for their RSS clients and infrastructures to be a success. They only need a tiny fraction of that. Google's choice to ax this is fantastic. It would be like Blizzard axing World of Warcraft -- an act that would breath fresh life into a genre that it is sucking the air out of. It would encourage others to step in and take their place and compete and innovate.

    Already, we see plenty of these guys competing and offering new services and ways of interfacing with RSS. Syncing, different clients, magazine interfaces, clean stripped down interfaces. All sorts of stuff. And, hey, I bet some of them won't be utterly fucking broken the way Google was (where it would just not let you ever delete some entries in your feed, even after several years) -- and if they are, they'll probably have some form of god damn customer service so you can actually talk to a human about how their shit is broken.

    PS: This move isn't going to get me to use G+ any more, either, Google. The only thing I need social networking for is work and that's what LinkedIN is for. I use G+ in the same way I use Facebook -- as a placeholder for my name so someone else can't take it and nothing more.

  31. Re:quit whining over loss of free services by jader3rd · · Score: 3, Interesting

    What do most people use for the use cases for which geeks use RSS?

    Email notifications.
    I'm astounded at how people want to get emailed anytime anyone on their Facebook friends list does anything. Their email inbox is effectively their RSS reader.

  32. Google Knols by Hugh+Pickens+writes · · Score: 2

    Knol was a Google project that aimed to include user-written articles on a range of topics. The project was led by Udi Manber of Google, announced December 13, 2007, and was opened in beta to the public on July 23, 2008 with a few hundred articles mostly in the health and medical field. Some Knol pages were opinion papers of one or more authors, and others described products for sale. Some articles were how-to articles or explained product use. Other people could post comments below an article, such as to refute opinions or reject product claims.

    In November 2011 Google announced that Knol would be phased out. Content could be exported by owners to the WordPress-based Annotum. Knol was closed on April 30, 2012, and all content was deleted by October 1, 2012. Between these dates the content was not viewable, but was downloadable and exportable

  33. Re:None by Seumas · · Score: 2

    Don't forget Google Earth, Picasa, G+, Google Drive/Docs, Google Sites, Google Contacts, Google Calendar, GTalk, Google Mars, Google Moon, Google Sky, Google Books, Google Alerts, Blogger, Custom Search, Google Finance, Google Groups (their attempt to convince people that usenet is a Google service only), Google News, Google Shopping, Orkut, Patent Search, Scholar, Schemer, News Archive, Hotpot, Image Search, Web History, Google Video, Google Voice, Gmail, AdSense, AdWords, DoubleClick, Meebo, Google Web Optimizer, Google Plus, Goo.gl url shortner, Google Profile, Google Sites, Google Web Fonts, Youtube, App Engine, Dark, GO, OpenSocial, Google Code, Analytics, Public Data Explorer, Trends and Zeitgeist, Chrome, Google Toolbar, Latitude, Google Music, Google Play Store, Google Sync, Translate, turnkey enterprise search systems, Nexus cell phones, Google Glasses, Google Crisis Response, Google Fiber, Public DNS servers, Google Wallet, Google self-driving cars, Zagat/Places/etc.

    . . . . and whatever else I've forgotten.

    As we can see, Google is a very slim and trim company with limited but refined services. They just don't want to offer everything to everyone. Just three or four products that they do really well. :D

  34. Re:quit whining over loss of free services by eyrieowl · · Score: 2

    Thank you. i thought it was insulting to see columnists touting Twitter or Google+ as some answer/way forward for consuming information. They don't even begin to remotely serve the purpose that Google Reader did. And even if I could create a Twitter which managed to show me every article I was interested in from my current RSS collection, none of those other social sites do the tracking of what you've read, and what you haven't, so that you can make sure you don't miss things from sources you want to closely follow. How dumb to tech writers think we are that we'd see any sort of equivalence between those different platforms?

  35. What about my.yahoo.com? by cshay · · Score: 2

    I have been a long time my.yahoo user. When iGoogle came out, I tried it, but liked my.yahoo.com better.

    I haven't heard people mentioning them here as a replacement for iGoogle. Why is that?

  36. CalDAV by Njovich · · Score: 2

    And suddenly Google Calendar turned useless to me...

  37. Federated Protocols by snadrus · · Score: 3, Insightful

    RSS, Federated XMPP, and Google Wave are all federated protocols that Google's not working with anymore. We need better federated protocols to catch-on (by being well supported) now that email is looking ancient.

    Everyone has an email address because anyone can run an email server, not because a handful of mega-tech companies elected to work together. Email has no central point of censorship or ad-scanning. The same isn't true for any discussion page, twitter, social media, etc.

    HTTP is mostly decentralized (except DNS & SSL) and is the basis of today's Internet. Decentralized protocols make the world grow. Axing them kills progress.

    --
    Science & open-source build trust from peer review. Learn systems you can trust.
  38. Google Voice by Bo'Bob'O · · Score: 2

    It might not be officially dead, but it may as well be. I would have paid money for it, but it's been unreliable, flaky with getting texts to other carriers, and hasn't been updated in years now. I can't even make IP voice calls from voice.google.com, I have to go to gmail.com to make a call from my Google voice number. There is no way that I would use my google voice number as my main number with it's issues, and it doesn't look like that is ever going to change now. It's a shame, it was the product for me, and I would be recommending it to all my friends and coworkers who travel internationally.

  39. Re:quit whining over loss of free services by houghi · · Score: 2

    You forgot one detail. The rich guy told me he would be giving me money for the rest of my life, so I could give up my job. That I have done and now he says it wasn't a real deal, because he crossed his fingers behind his back.

    --
    Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
  40. Labs was more than that by Azure+Flash · · Score: 2

    The removal of Google Labs was more than just another product being retired. It was a sign of a massive shift of mentality from Google. This is when they started doing their own thing and not giving a damn what users think. Since then, it's becoming clearer and clearer that Google is not particularly worried about doing evil or not, and much less about what benefits the users. This is worrying for users, but investors and COs are probably thrilled.