No More Google Reader

This announcement was surprising. Google is shutting down Google Reader. You have until the end of June to export your settings.

I need to find a new RSS reader now. Any suggestions?

That was surprising. I guess they’re trying to force people to use Google+ or other things? That decision makes no sense to me.

After trying out RSS Owl (Google Reader synchronization bug), feed demon (lame UI), rss reader (wouldn’t install), I settled on JetBrains Omea Reader.

5 Responses to No More Google Reader

  1. Anonymous Coward March 15, 2013 at 5:07 pm

    I don’t like Google. I was stung by what I believed to be obvious click fraud. Over the years I have paid a considerable amount of money to Google via adwords. I noticed that all my daily budget was being exhausted within seconds of the start of each new day and on a screensaver website on their display network. The goods I was selling had nothing to do with screensavers. When I turned off the display network, my daily budget was never exhausted over a whole day when just on Google’s search page. I did ask Google a couple of times for a refund, but I just got form answers back from them.

    Given the length of my time with them as a customer and the amount of money I paid them over the years, it would have been simple good manners to grant my request for a tiny fraction of the money I gave them back.

    Maybe Google is just too big to give proper service to one customer.

    Google’s virtual monopoly of web searches is a cause for concern. The have the power, if they choose to, to downgrade a website and then up their Adwords costs per click. I really don’t see why CPC is so high. In my niche there is an absence of competition at the moment, yet the minimum click price is so high as to make advertising with them uneconomical.

    If Google charged fair prices for clicks, then they would actually make more money from what I see – which may be unrepresentative.

    Google paid money to buy in the Android operating system. They did not develop it themselves.

    As we all know, Google dumps Android on the market for free. This is cost-shifting.

    This makes it hard to Microsoft, Research In Motion (Blackberry) and Apple to compete. How can you compete with free?

    From my point of view, I feel that I am paying high prices for advertising to subsidize Google’s spending spree only to give stuff away for free.

    When will things fray at the seems?

    Suppose you want to distribute high quality, cheap software and keep you running costs low. The Internet should allow cheap software as you don’t have to pay for real estate.

    We had some nice years. But high advertising costs at Google will kill off quality content on the Internet. Google hoovers up the money.

    Beware of Google.

  2. Anonymous Coward March 15, 2013 at 5:11 pm

    The irony is not lost on me.

    I develop high quality software that sells at low rates given it is business software.

    To make money, someone has to like myself enough to convince their company to buy it.

    I then give 10% of my net income to Google for advertising. They use it to buy in software and give it away free.

    In a sense paid-for software is providing the money to buy software and then give it away free.

    But I am only one customer amongst many.

  3. Anonymous Coward March 17, 2013 at 9:33 am

    The Google clowns crow in big billboard advertisements and television commercials about their Google Chrome web browser.

    Has anyone looked up the dates of the development of Apple’s WebKit and JavaScript compiler on Wikipedia. WebKit is a trademark of Apple and supported CSS, HTML5, multimedia and lots more before Google came along and used Apple’s WebKit and ultimately Konqueror source code to produce Chrome.

    Yes, they would have had to do some work.

    There are some differences between Apple’s original JavaScript to bytecode compiler and Google’s JavaScript to machine code compiler.

    But the mapping between bytecode and machine code is one-to-one or one-to-three or four.

    What they didn’t was hardly a great technical leap from what Apple had already done.

    Yet these Google clowns crows about how wonder and smart they are.

    They even were too weak and floppy to do the work with just their army of recent high academically performing graduates.

    How can you be smart if you cannot do something new and do you own research?

    Their JS to machine code compiler(a step up from Apple’s JS to bytecode compiler) wasn’t even led from the GooglePlex in California.

    They had to hire an ex-employee of Sun from Sun’s compiler team to head the work from Denmark.


  4. Anonymous Coward March 17, 2013 at 6:35 pm

    Oops! Made a mistake. It seems Apple did produce a JavaScript to Machine code compiler before the Google clowns.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>