
Google Kills Its RSS Subscription Browser Extension Too - florent_k
http://techcrunch.com/2013/03/15/google-kills-rss/
======
onemorepassword
I'm one tinfoil hat away from believing this isn't just about discontinuing
unprofitable products, but a concerted effort to kill off support for open
standards (RSS, CalDAV, what's next?) and turning the Google universe into a
Facebook/Apple style walled garden called Google+.

Evil plan or not, the days of Google as the champion of the open web are over.

~~~
Andrenid
This is actually the final step for me.

I've been an avid Google fan since the early days. I use all the Google
services, I use Chrome religiously, I convince family/friends to switch to
Chrome from IE, and I've always been convinced Google is the one we're
supposed to look up to for how things should be done.

Yeah they've made mistakes, and G+ is a clusterfuck of brilliant talent thrown
down a horrible path of closed socialness and realname ridiculousness... but
overall I always thought they were still on the right side of "Don't Be Evil".

I'm totally convinced this quiet attack on RSS is a not-so-subtle attempt to
push people into G+, and even though I casually use G+ (about the same as I
casually use FB or Twitter), G+ is NOT a replacement for RSS, and it's not how
I want to keep track of all the sites I read. I don't want to "like" them or
add them to my social networks. I just want to read their shit. Simple.

RSS doesn't care if you're logged in. RSS doesn't care if you use your real
name. RSS doesn't care if you're accessing it from work, home, or anonymously
via an internet cafe. And that's exactly how it should be.

Throw in the Picasaweb crap they're doing now too, FORCING you to use G+
Photos (which is a horrible horrible experience), and I'm done.

I've just installed Firefox on all my home computers and my phone, for the
first time since Chrome came out, and will be looking for a new RSS
aggregator.

~~~
ok_craig
I don't understand why these changes make you switch from Chrome to Firefox.

There appears to be a really prevalent attitude here on HN that you can either
really love or really hate a company. If you like it, you use all their stuff.
When the switch in your mind flips and you know you must instantly start
hating them, it means you must stop using every instance of their software,
whether it's related or not to whatever your issues were.

It seems kind of silly.

~~~
mike-cardwell
Chrome is created by an Ad company so that they can make more money selling
Ads. People are willing to overlook this fact because they trust that Google
wont put it's own desire to make profit over keeping the web open. People are
losing the trust that this is the case.

If somebody comes up with some new technology that makes the web better in
some way, but also means it's more difficult or impossible to target
advertising, do you think Google will implement it? Do you think the makers of
Bing will?

Am i the only one that thinks that a handful of Ad companies shouldn't be
controlling how the web evolves?

~~~
BHSPitMonkey
Does using Chrome or Chromium somehow _serve_ Google and its nefarious goals?

~~~
pretzel
Yes - default settings of 3rd party cookies is an obvious start.

------
Udo
I think they're going to shut down Blogger next.

It's a neglected platform at best, and it too encroaches on some partial
functionality that could be offered by G+.

Picasa is in the process of being absorbed completely into G+. We're in the
middle of a massive consolidation. They're closing down and walling off
everything they can. When the smoke clears Google will have transformed from
an open standards company into exactly the same walled garden everybody else
is offering.

~~~
mark_l_watson
+1 This is what I have been concerned about also. I rely a lot on Blogger,
Gmail, and (now) G+ photo albums. I like the way Blogger is easily mapped to a
sub domain (blog.markwatson.com) and I don't have to run blogging software
myself. GMail has been central in my workflow and I like the convenience of
taking pictures on my droid phone and have all pictures auto uploaded to G+.

However, I have been thinking of starting an open source project that would be
a one JAR deploy that would support personal photo album with easy sharing,
blogging, live messaging (ironically I would like to use Apache Wave), and
perhaps email (but probably not). I believe that since most technical people
have their own servers and many of us are tired of walled gardens that this
might garner a few users besides myself.

~~~
mark_l_watson
Also: for many years I have forwarded email from my own domain to GMail. I am
going to stop doing that even though I really like their anti spam service. It
probably makes more sense to just use my gmail account for access to
customer's shared google docs, etc. in other words, still use useful Google
services but stop relying too much on them.

I also now prefer paid services. Evernote and Dropbox, for examples, are
clearly motivated to support me because I am a customer not a product.

~~~
alexqgb
I set up my own domain (hosted by InMotion, who have fantastically good
customer service) and run my email through that. My initial reservation was
that I'd be relying on spam filters that were inferior to Google's. In
practice, it hasn't been a problem at all. Obviously, this is anecdotal, but
the light-years ahead advantage in spam filtering that Google one had seems to
have eroded to the point where it's no longer enough to keep me on gmail.

I still have my gmail account, but it's no longer primary.

------
cs702
Embrace, give away, extinguish:

    
    
      1. Embrace [open web standard].
      2. Give away [standards-based product].
      3. Extinguish: if/after competition evaporates, discontinue product.
    

Result: walled gardens.

~~~
MatthewPhillips
Extend works fine here. Google product's are chock-full of extensions to open
standards, which is why we have so many Gmail-only email clients floating
around out there, etc.

------
choko
I don't understand what people use to see new information from multiple
websites at once if they aren't using RSS. Are they actually visiting 10 or 20
websites a day manually? Do "normal" users stick to just a few websites?

~~~
Kiro
You don't need updates from 10 to 20 websites. Find one or two good
aggregators. HN and Facebook are enough for me.

~~~
icebraining
HN and such aggregators are nice for fluff content, which appeals to a broad
range of people. More specific content either isn't aggregated, or the
aggregators themselves are so niche that they only update once in a while
(e.g. Lambda-the-Ultimate). And frankly, while obviously none is indispensable
for my life or well-being, I'd rather miss out on HN than on the smaller blogs
and feeds.

~~~
Kiro
What about Facebook?

~~~
icebraining
I wouldn't know, I don't have an account.

------
anon1385
>The extension, which previously placed a small, orange RSS icon next to the
website’s URL in the Chrome address bar, no longer functions even on Chrome
browsers where the extension is installed and enabled.

So how have they disabled it in browsers where it was already installed? Does
it use some backend service that they have taken down? Or was it disabled by a
silent Chrome update?

~~~
fjarlq
It, _RSS Subscription Extension (by Google) v2.2.0_ , is still installed and
working in my Chrome. It does not seem to use any backend service. It just
reads RSS information on a webpage and creates subscription links for you that
go to the RSS webreader of your choice (I've been using Google Reader with
it).

But, the extension's website has been removed:
[https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/nlbjncdgjeocebhnmk...](https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/nlbjncdgjeocebhnmkbbbdekmmmcbfjd)

I believe that version (the original) was written by a Google employee, Finnur
Thorarinsson (finnur at chromium.org):
<https://plus.google.com/104317586100499660731/posts>

Another extension claims to be a fork, but I don't know any specifics:
[https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/rss-
subscription-e...](https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/rss-subscription-
extensio/dobjkkjbcmhohalobdalmmenogajjlaj)

------
lignuist
Twitter has disabled RSS this month too. Is RSS too open for the big players?

~~~
baby
I disabled it on my blog a long time ago because I want people to actually
come to my website to read my posts. See the "related" posts and the
"comments" section etc...

I guess it's even more obvious if you have ads on the website.

~~~
craftman
Dont know your site, but be sure I would never come back to it if you dont
have a RSS feed (and leave it within 2 secs if there is any ad on it).

~~~
baby
I know this is some people's problems. But I believe it is the minority. So
I've made my decision. I also don't support old IE browsers.

~~~
krzyk
But why disable something that you don't have to even support, most (if not
all) blog time sites provide an easy way to provide RSS.

You are alienating maybe a minority, but I think maybe a more valuable part of
you readers - large part of HN readers use RSS (at least it seams so based on
latest Google Reader deprecation).

There is no value in removing RSS, you are just crippling your site.

------
nsns
It seems that every decision that betters Google+ hurts the Google brand. If
Google+ is the new Google, then Google is now Google-, obviously.

The fact that they are (allegedly) surprised at the amount of people using
Reader is a tastement to how insignificant it is to their business.

~~~
mcintyre1994
They're not at all surprised, can I ask where they said that? I'd love to see
how a company that makes billions by knowing as much as possible about their
user base words the idea they're surprised by a quantity of users on a product
of theirs.

------
perlpimp
I'll go out on the limb and suggest that google is trying to kill the
ecosystem that nurtured it and focus on more mainstream nanny and media for to
be cosumable for ages 10-14 or some such number. News papers target groups
with lower intelligencer ratio and TV goes even further.

With that I don't think google wants to support independent internet anymore -
it does not go well with investors and profitability. And can roust some smart
minds that just might bring the whole google empire to its knees(or more aptly
make it irrelevant). At this point google can be called the internet in some
sense. And if such status can be argued for then it is not interest for google
to support resources out side of its "google is the internet" domain.

Most companies go through such cycles and it seems that google is sort of
outgrowing itself. It is sort of popular with G+ but largely it has failed in
the social arena. I has captured some market share with lowcost android
phones. But there is no certain future in Silicon Valley. One can say google
is tired and is withdrawing from being rapacious inventor and instigator of
new technologies.

...

my 2c. Just an opinion :)

------
Too
Less people reading rss => More people reading on actual web sites => More
people exposed to, and maybe click, embedded adsense ads from google + More
user behavior data from google statistics.

Simple as that.

------
tytso
As I noted recently, Google Currents is an Android application which uses RSS.
And it is a product which has been getting updates, and is available at the
Play Store here:

[https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.google.and...](https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.google.android.apps.currents&hl=en)

So if people think Google is getting out of the RSS business, here's a
counter-example. Personally, this is how I browse my favorite news/blog sites
each morning, looking for interesting content (which can be easily shared via
G+ or other any other link sharing service; unlike iOS, it's easy for any
Android application, including Google Currents, to share content with other
Android applications, whether it be G+, or Evernote, or Digg, etc.)

------
jmharvey
When Google announced they were killing off Reader, the big problem was that
there was no obvious alternative. That's not the case when they remove
features I like from Chrome. I hear Firefox is pretty good these days, I'll
probably try switching over and see how I like it.

------
pavs
Its working just fine here...

~~~
prathibhanu
I take this as an opporunity to develope something like multiplx.com. Check it
out

~~~
feronull
promo code ? :)

~~~
prathibhanu
HACKERNEWS

------
neves
It is a concerted effort to kill ways to access data without seeing ads. They
are killing RSS and forbiding Ad Block em Google Play.

Go Firefox, Go!

------
justinkelly
hey guys

i've forked the google rss extension, updated it and loaded it to the chrome
store - so that it works with feedly, newsblur and theoldread * have removed
google reader, igoogle etc.. from the list

[https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/rss-
subscription-e...](https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/rss-subscription-
extensio/bmjffnfcokiodbeiamclanljnaheeoke)

cheers

justin

------
marban
Hate the GR shutdown but that seems just like a logical house cleaning
consequence.

~~~
sergiosgc
Only if you assume the extension existed to support the Google Reader service,
which is false. RSS is a standard with many uses outside Google Reader.

~~~
marban
Sure, but what was the default service?

~~~
ijk
Not the browser extension, but when I check a Feedburner feed in Chrome I see,
in order: MyYahoo, NewsGator, MyAOL, Bloglines, Netvibes, Google Reader,
Pageflakes, and then a dropdown for other options.

~~~
marban
the majority of those service is defunct.

~~~
ijk
Sure, but part of the reason why they're defunct is that Google Reader killed
them. Which doesn't address this point but does the larger conversation.

------
nwzpaperman
I know from some of the parties that have shown interest in my company that
the highest levels of media are very concerned about being not just
marginalized, but trivialized.

We have made ZERO deals for, always, one or both of two reasons:

1) The investors want to control the content and under the CDA/DMCA
definitions be publishers.

2) The belief that people are unwilling to pay for news.

Up until 2012, there were doubters that online subscription is the only bet
the industry can make to persist. What the interested parties will absolutely
never agree to is a system that they don't retain absolute control of the
message with.

It is just my speculation now, but I believe they thought I wouldn't get an
actual information exchange built without their resources and assistance. I
did and now there is some panic because we are one break-out event away from
changing the news industry forever. I say forever because people will see a
different future and want that once they understand it.

After six months in open beta I know what needs to be done and it isn't
pivoting. Mostly UI and colors with some feature polishing. This next
iteration will polish the foundation of the nwzPaper system and then we will
integrate the facilities to complete the incentive structure and adapt the
article ranking as volume builds.

We will be doing some new licensing arrangements to balance the need for
producers to earn something with the need for news information to be public,
accessible, available and free.

As a developer, you should look at nwzPaper as a central locking agent in a
distributed system.

~~~
camus
dude you must be on good kush ...

~~~
nwzpaperman
That is legal in Colorado, but I abstain just to be safe!

