Publishing 2.0: RSS Is a Glorified “Favorites” Feature
Barry Bloye
· 3 years ago
Personally, I find Live Bookmarks in Firefox really useful. I like Live Bookmarks, as they give me a quick overview of new stories without having to actually visit the site and scan through. They're there when I want them, and not bothering me when I don't.
But I also agree that RSS isn't always used in the best ways. On one hand, I don't like the way aggregators accumulate posts like emails - then I feel obliged to read (or at least 'mark as read') every one.
On the other hand, the implementation in IE7 is rubbish. All they have done (as far as I could see) is create a 'special' favourites folder for RSS feeds, and then apply a stylesheet to them. You might as well just bookmark the site. In fact, I think calling it an RSS 'aggregator' or 'implementation' is really stretching the imagination.
BriaN
· 3 years ago
(Let's put aside the fact that I found this news article using an aggregator, and that this site itself has an RSS feed.)
For me, RSS is all about speed and simplicity.
RSS lets me organize headlines the way I want; I don't have to use anybody's navigation structure or dig for content. Sites such as CNN.com have 2 tech stories listed on the front page, and a handful more on their tech page. I have to dig further to find other tech content that I want. Subscribing to a list of their recently-published tech stories is a far faster way to browse through the site's new tech content. Along the same line, RSS reduces the amount of clutter I have to cut through. I don't have to go to a news site and wade through their 20 stories and 80 links to find what I want.
RSS brings my headlines into one place. I can scan 50 tech stories from 5 sites using my RSS reader in, say, 5 minutes. Browsing those same 50 stories by visiting the web sites (i.e., your "favorites" idea) would take at least twice as long--probably more.
Do you ever use a portal site with your local weather on it? According to your comments, that would seem to be ludicrous; why not just visit your weather.com favorite? Do you aggregate your financial transactions in Microsoft Money? Why not just visit all 5 of your bank accounts? Speed and simplicity are the answers. That's why people use RSS instead of just favorites. To equate the two is to miss the point of RSS.
Scott Karp
· 3 years ago
BriaN, I didn't say RSS wasn't an improvement over favorites -- you make a good point that RSS cuts through clutter for each source -- it's just not all that exciting an improvement. It still doesn't solve the problem of 1,000 (or 1,000,000) sources.
And I don't think your weather and financial analogies hold up.
The reason weather works so well on a portal is you don't have to click to a new screen to see it. In IE7, each RSS feed is a new screen.
And RSS in IE7 is still like having to click on 5 separate tabs to see transactions by bank, rather than see them all on one spreadsheet. And I know that all of my bank transactions are relevant, while I don't know that every item in each of my 100 feeds is relevant.
Until I can get a single feed that has only exactly what I want, RSS will be nothing more than a slight incremental improvement in an overwhelming world of media.
(I have an RSS feed on this site because it's the best I can do at the moment -- if I'm critical of RSS, it doesn't mean all or nothing -- it's about striving for improvement, not refusing to work with what you have.)
BriaN
· 3 years ago
Ah, now we agree on something, Scott. Your elaboration is good; while RSS is significantly more efficient than browsing multiple web sites (a point which I don't think you adequately conceded in your article, but seemed to agree with in your comment), I still do have to wade through a number of headlines in which I have no interest.
RSS allows us to browse much more focused, targeted content than a simple list of favorites does. (It's such a different process of data-gathering that I was surprised to see it compared to favorites.) But we need a step beyond RSS to cut even more of the clutter. I share your interest in seeing the technology move forward.
J.D.
· 3 years ago
Keeping feeds bookmarked is not a great idea, hosted is the only way to go. That's why I use bloglines - I like to be able to have my feeds available on more than one computer. IE's handling of RSS also makes the mistake of stripping styles from feeds, making things like FeedBurner less useful. IMHO if MS wants in on this space it should be integrated into MSN's live favorites so that it's portable.
Scott Karp
· 3 years ago
J.D., great point about hosting. That's what I dislike about FeedDemon -- it's a powerful application, but I hate having to turn it on.
And then it dings at me, like Outlook -- that space at the bottom right of my screen is hyperactive enough from email. "What I want, when I want it" does not mean notifying me every time there's "something NEW." It's as if I should say "WOW! A new blog post -- let me drop everything and go see!"
Biff
· 3 years ago
Do I really need to be notified whenever one of the 1,000 blogs I subscribe to posts new content? Is it really that urgent that I need one more distraction in my life?
Umm, maybe you shouldn't be subscribed to 1,000 blogs. 99.9% of blogs are shit. Only subscribe to blogs that actually say something. At least IE will get the average idiots on board with RSS to some degree.
Tish Grier
· 3 years ago
Scott,
Like you, I question the use of RSS by the "average" person.
Now that I'm more involved in blogging (and as part of a job), RSS is better for me than my old "Favorites" bookmark system. "Favorites" kept me chained to my personal computer (sadly, not a laptop). With an RSS reader (I use Bloglines) if I happen to be travelling, I can keep up with what I need to do--although I'm still hunting out cybercafes because, well, no laptop.
Yet, my involvement in blogging is different from the involvement of most average people. There is indeed a kind of conceit that insists everyone out there will want to read blogs. That's not necessarily true. Even if they start blogging themselves, they might not read a great number of blogs--maybe only a few favorites. Letting people know RSS readers are there is great--insisting that *everyone* must use them, however, is a tad dogmatic...
Living where I do, I'm around "average" people all the time--there's no Silicon out here in the Pioneer Valley, that's for sure--I see, and understand, how technology is NOT touching their lives. It's great that the high-speed, techy tools are out there, but insisting that they are the only way to go kind of denies the fact that not everyone's going at the same speed, or that everyone is ready to go at that speed. Heck, out here, they're still debating the importance of Forums and Newsgroups--blogs and RSS readers are almost a foreign concept.
T.
l.m.orchard
· 3 years ago
'For the record, “RSS sucks†is code for “RSS applications suckâ€Â'
Yeah, I think this is the issue you're seeing. Syndication tech rocks, but aggregation tech has a ways to go. News tickers and instant notifications are not very dense or helpful for managing attention if you've got over a handful or two feeds. FeedDemon / NetNewsWire email inbox style aggregators are better for scanning lots of feeds, and NewsRiver style aggregators are even better for just letting the feeds stream by. The next stage should involve filtering and intelligence so that you don't have to use *your* intelligence to sift out the crap.
All Comments
But I also agree that RSS isn't always used in the best ways. On one hand, I don't like the way aggregators accumulate posts like emails - then I feel obliged to read (or at least 'mark as read') every one.
On the other hand, the implementation in IE7 is rubbish. All they have done (as far as I could see) is create a 'special' favourites folder for RSS feeds, and then apply a stylesheet to them. You might as well just bookmark the site. In fact, I think calling it an RSS 'aggregator' or 'implementation' is really stretching the imagination.
For me, RSS is all about speed and simplicity.
RSS lets me organize headlines the way I want; I don't have to use anybody's navigation structure or dig for content. Sites such as CNN.com have 2 tech stories listed on the front page, and a handful more on their tech page. I have to dig further to find other tech content that I want. Subscribing to a list of their recently-published tech stories is a far faster way to browse through the site's new tech content. Along the same line, RSS reduces the amount of clutter I have to cut through. I don't have to go to a news site and wade through their 20 stories and 80 links to find what I want.
RSS brings my headlines into one place. I can scan 50 tech stories from 5 sites using my RSS reader in, say, 5 minutes. Browsing those same 50 stories by visiting the web sites (i.e., your "favorites" idea) would take at least twice as long--probably more.
Do you ever use a portal site with your local weather on it? According to your comments, that would seem to be ludicrous; why not just visit your weather.com favorite? Do you aggregate your financial transactions in Microsoft Money? Why not just visit all 5 of your bank accounts? Speed and simplicity are the answers. That's why people use RSS instead of just favorites. To equate the two is to miss the point of RSS.
And I don't think your weather and financial analogies hold up.
The reason weather works so well on a portal is you don't have to click to a new screen to see it. In IE7, each RSS feed is a new screen.
And RSS in IE7 is still like having to click on 5 separate tabs to see transactions by bank, rather than see them all on one spreadsheet. And I know that all of my bank transactions are relevant, while I don't know that every item in each of my 100 feeds is relevant.
Until I can get a single feed that has only exactly what I want, RSS will be nothing more than a slight incremental improvement in an overwhelming world of media.
(I have an RSS feed on this site because it's the best I can do at the moment -- if I'm critical of RSS, it doesn't mean all or nothing -- it's about striving for improvement, not refusing to work with what you have.)
RSS allows us to browse much more focused, targeted content than a simple list of favorites does. (It's such a different process of data-gathering that I was surprised to see it compared to favorites.) But we need a step beyond RSS to cut even more of the clutter. I share your interest in seeing the technology move forward.
And then it dings at me, like Outlook -- that space at the bottom right of my screen is hyperactive enough from email. "What I want, when I want it" does not mean notifying me every time there's "something NEW." It's as if I should say "WOW! A new blog post -- let me drop everything and go see!"
Umm, maybe you shouldn't be subscribed to 1,000 blogs. 99.9% of blogs are shit. Only subscribe to blogs that actually say something. At least IE will get the average idiots on board with RSS to some degree.
Like you, I question the use of RSS by the "average" person.
Now that I'm more involved in blogging (and as part of a job), RSS is better for me than my old "Favorites" bookmark system. "Favorites" kept me chained to my personal computer (sadly, not a laptop). With an RSS reader (I use Bloglines) if I happen to be travelling, I can keep up with what I need to do--although I'm still hunting out cybercafes because, well, no laptop.
Yet, my involvement in blogging is different from the involvement of most average people. There is indeed a kind of conceit that insists everyone out there will want to read blogs. That's not necessarily true. Even if they start blogging themselves, they might not read a great number of blogs--maybe only a few favorites. Letting people know RSS readers are there is great--insisting that *everyone* must use them, however, is a tad dogmatic...
Living where I do, I'm around "average" people all the time--there's no Silicon out here in the Pioneer Valley, that's for sure--I see, and understand, how technology is NOT touching their lives. It's great that the high-speed, techy tools are out there, but insisting that they are the only way to go kind of denies the fact that not everyone's going at the same speed, or that everyone is ready to go at that speed. Heck, out here, they're still debating the importance of Forums and Newsgroups--blogs and RSS readers are almost a foreign concept.
T.
Yeah, I think this is the issue you're seeing. Syndication tech rocks, but aggregation tech has a ways to go. News tickers and instant notifications are not very dense or helpful for managing attention if you've got over a handful or two feeds. FeedDemon / NetNewsWire email inbox style aggregators are better for scanning lots of feeds, and NewsRiver style aggregators are even better for just letting the feeds stream by. The next stage should involve filtering and intelligence so that you don't have to use *your* intelligence to sift out the crap.