Re: The constraint to widespread adoption of syndication

Doug Ransom wrote:

>I think the current constraint in the adoption of syndication is the 
>lack of usable aggregators.  They are for the most part shareware, look 
>like shareware, and behave like shareware.  These are great programs for 
>those who are keen to get stuff working (like most of us), and don't 
>mind either setting up command line arguments and batch files (i.e. 
>nntprss, hoping v4 will be the ticket!),  dowloading dotnet frameworks 
>or whatever else is required, and running  yet another client that looks 
>like their mail reader but isn't (i.e. syndirella, sharpreader {which I 
>personally use}, probably radio {i have never tried radio}).
>  
>
I completely agree about client aggregators leaving a lot to be desired. 
That's why I created http://www.bloglines.com (just had to get the plug 
in there). ;-)


>Many content producers are not going syndicate their content with RSS, 
>necho, etc. until the clients are in more widespread use.  There just 
>isn't the business case with current volumes.  I feel aggregators must 
>be integrated into corporate email clients (like MS Outlook) for 
>widespread adoption at work, and into common mail readers like outlook 
>express, mozilla, etc. at home.  Sharpreader, syndirella, newsmonster , 
>etc. are not headed for the mainstream, because they have 
>yet-another-interface that behaves almost as good as a mail/nntp reader. 
>  
>
Here's where I disagree with you. I don't want an aggregator in my mail 
reader. The spam/information overload problem with email is so great 
right now, the last thing I want is more things arriving in my inbox. 
I'd probably accidently delete half the feed items mistaking them for 
spam. I'm not claiming 'death of email, footage at 11'. Yet. Also, and 
people may disagree with me, I think if aggregators become widely 
adopted, that the vast majority of users will not be active bloggers, 
mirroring the behavior of the Internet population at large. The 
aggregator will be a 'one-way/read-only' portal of information. That's 
different than email, with its iterative, read/write nature.

Personally, I think there are a couple of other issues hampering 
aggregator adoption (if anything is hampering it, and I'm not sure). One 
is terminology. You say news feed, and I might think USENET. You say 
news aggregator, and as a normal user I might have no idea what you're 
talking about. And RSS is probably a meaningless acronym for most 
people. So terminology is confusing. Second is education. I bet the vast 
majority of people who could benefit from using an aggregator have no 
idea that they exist and don't fathom how they operate.

The education part, at least, I think is pretty normal for a new 
technology and will just take some time to work out. The terminology 
part, however, I think will take a little work (and it's not a skill I'm 
blessed with).


Cheers,

Mark
--
Mark Fletcher
Bloglines
http://www.bloglines.com




 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/