So the chief architect of Google+ wants to know why people used Google Reader? Can't he ask Google employees who should know this because they built the damn thing and documented their challenges and findings?
Or read the most upvoted complaints on open forums like HN or Reddit? Especially since he's architecting an ahem social product, shouldn't he already be comfortable doing that? And shouldn't he value the diversity of those responses more than those from Google+ buddies? I guess "dogfooding" has become more valuable than understanding.
Finally, my favorite "Zune" moment: "NB: The comments have filled up!"
I am sure there are technical reasons why more than 500 comments is not allowed, but none of them are user-centric.
Or read the most upvoted complaints on open forums like HN or Reddit? Especially since he's architecting an ahem social product, shouldn't he already be comfortable doing that? And shouldn't he value the diversity of those responses more than those from Google+ buddies? I guess "dogfooding" has become more valuable than understanding.
Finally, my favorite "Zune" moment: "NB: The comments have filled up!"
I am sure there are technical reasons why more than 500 comments is not allowed, but none of them are user-centric.