tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3522311.post7677016973610674441..comments2024-03-12T03:23:42.976-04:00Comments on NeuroDojo: The terrifying death of Google ReaderZen Faulkeshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07811309183398223358noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3522311.post-90803678794180523902013-03-15T16:36:08.560-04:002013-03-15T16:36:08.560-04:00Craig -- no argument from me on any of the above. ...Craig -- no argument from me on any of the above. I think this has hurt Google, and I can't see how the RSS reader was NOT part of their core business. <br /><br />I simply can't understand their decision on any basis but, as you put it, pure greed.Billnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3522311.post-29758545904380162062013-03-15T04:40:47.962-04:002013-03-15T04:40:47.962-04:00Bill- Well that's great and all...
Why did Go...Bill- Well that's great and all...<br /><br />Why did Google offer this service for so long for free if that is their business model?<br /><br />There are reasons to offer free useful services that help people without direct profitability. <br /><br />It improves the value and image of the brand name when people are happy with a service. Sure that won't make you money immediately, but it can't hurt later when you bring out the products that do.<br /><br />That and Google's business is information. I can't possible see how there was no side benefit to being the key provider/vendor of people's sources of information. I'm sure they could (and or did) keep records on the amount of use some venues were getting, and from which demographics... That is extremely profitable information to have in the business OF information.<br /><br />There is also this thing called the betterment of mankind... Which incidentally I think should trump profit. There is putting food on the table and then there is just greed.<br /><br />Unless Google released solid numbers showing they were bleeding huge amounts of money, I can't see how they are rationalizing this other than pure greed. It couldn't have been that hard to maintain. Sure it might have gotten out dated coasting on just on pure maintenance (as opposed to being continually developed) , but I'm sure that would have taken years.traumadorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00387315561167115253noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3522311.post-82065011170577783322013-03-14T18:00:35.384-04:002013-03-14T18:00:35.384-04:00If those services shut? What then? I’d be screwed....<i>If those services shut? What then? I’d be screwed.</i><br /><br />Then you're screwed. There will never be a way to make money from those services, and they cannot be used to give Google AOL-like gateway control over how people access the web, so they *are* going away in the forseeable future. <br /><br />My policy is to look for replacements where the business model makes sense, i.e. you pay us money, we provide you a service. Fastmail is good email, lots of people like Evernote, etc etc (and these services usually have free tryouts). Billnoreply@blogger.com