If it is going to be influential then there is a likelihood that we are going to have to trust Google with it for the near future. Since they have the cash despite this economy and they are openly investing in opportunities through a venture arm.
I just wrote about the amount of Google hate that exists. It's an interesting phenomenon and something we all will need to deal with.
Frank
Danny
· 8 months ago
Hi Frank,
I don't think it's as much "Google hate" as it is "Google frustration". At times, they get things right (as Tim mentions below with Gmail), and at others they get it incredibly wrong (Feedburner is a prime example).
Add to that their incredibly poor customer service (have you ever had to get in touch with them re. an issue?) and for such a huge company, they're a paradox.
It's clear that when Google do something right they can be phenomenal, but for me they'd be a bad move on Twitter's part. Of course, I'm not the expert so watch me look silly in about 6 months time... ;-)
Tim Jahn
· 8 months ago
Feedburner sucks now that it's part of Google. But Gmail is hands down the best email platform I've ever used and the only one I recommend. I don't care if it's alpha, beta, or delta, it's amazing!
It seems to be a gamble with Google. You either get full attention or you get thrown in the closet to rot. Twitter's pretty damn cool. I don't think it's worth throwing the dice.
Danny
· 8 months ago
I agree that Gmail is pretty good, but even that has its problems, the main one being labels over folders. To me, that just seems like a whole load of work that's unnecessary?
But, as a free email system, it is one of the best.
Jamie Kim
· 8 months ago
I wouldn't be surprised if Google tried to take over the earth :)
Chris
· 8 months ago
I don't really care, as I think Twitter is a fad. Google or no, Twitter won't be around in a few years.
Jamie Favreau
· 8 months ago
I don't use Feedburner for my Blog. I am a newbie and I am not ready to sell my soul to Google. I know they will eventually track me down and they have my information via everyone else's Feedburner I use. I am just not ready to take that leap. I don't have GMail but I am thinking I might because a Startup Detroit Statsbragger.com is using it to communicate but I can wait until they need me for better marketing strategies. So NO. I don't think Twitter is a fad. It is more useful then Myspace and has a broader audience.
Danny
· 8 months ago
It's really a shame what's happened with Feedburner - before Google got involved, sure, it had its issues but it also had a great support team to help with them. Now, you're lucky to get a reply even via the support forums and the amount of times they lose reader feeds is bad.
I'm curious as to whether PageRank can implement the feed feature they were looking at - could be a definite alternative.
The Lovable Rogue
· 8 months ago
Chris, I agree to an extent that Twitter is more than likely a fad, but then again, so are many of the tools of the social media. I honestly can't see Facebook being around in a few years time, but then that's the neature of this media type; things evolve, people move on and the cycle repeats itself. What the developers can do is ensure that they are at least able to keep on top of developments by having access to the capital required to continue growing; not necessarily in one direction, but growing none the less. Arguably this is a pattern that Google itself has followed in recent years to remain one of the world's most successful organisations.
Would Twitter be detrimentally affected by Google's ownership? I'm not sure. I agree with Tim; Gmail is a very useful email tool, whereas FeedBurner has lost credibility in recent times. Is this a result of Google's ownership, or simply one service being replaced by others that outperform it? If Google were to assume ownership of Twitter, the only concerns that I would have would gravitate around developments to the service. The beauty of the platform lies within its own simplicity. I fear that the capital available to Google may encourage them to 'enhance' the service, causing the simplicity thereof to become diluted.
TLR
Tim Jahn
· 8 months ago
I think you bring up a good possibility here and a topic worth further discussing (oh I sense a blog post coming on!). Does a company with larger resources feel obligated to stuff a product/service with more features than necessary?
Danny
· 8 months ago
Chris - I think the Feedburner issue is more to do with Google acquiring it. Perhaps their idea is to integrate their Reader platform more so they're tinkering with how Feedburner gets its information?
Either way, as I mentioned to Jamie, the service is more problematic than useful at the minute. And for an analytical service from the same company that gives us Google Analytics, it's not good enough when trying to collate stats.
Jason Tryfon
· 8 months ago
This deal isn't happening. I'll leave my big mouth open at that. : )
John Haydon
· 8 months ago
No.
Edward Mendoza
· 8 months ago
Interesting news, I mainly use Twitter now to find out what music videos people are talking about; since Facebook has done such a good job at stealing the 'what are you doing now' concept and making it more relevant(I actually care what my friends and family are doing compared to random strangers), so I don't really care if Google acquires at this point.
Either way Twitter might become the next Myspace, so it would be a big loss of money for the Big G.
Ari Herzog
· 8 months ago
It's amazing nobody mentioned FeedBlitz as a rising alternative to the ubiquitous (Google) FeedBurner. I'm considering it, but not a fan of the 1) cost; and 2) 30-day redirection. For a detailed review, see what Louis Gray wrote a few days ago.
Second, everything on the web is beta. Heck, you could make the argument Web 2.0 is beta. A version.
Danny Brown
· 8 months ago
I was considering mentioning Feedblitz (along with a couple lesser-known ones) but as you mention, paying for feeds seems at odds when you consider there are alternatives.
I just wish either Google would sort itself out with Feedburner, or give it to coders who care. There are plenty around.
Phil Hollows
· 8 months ago
We (FeedBlitz) are better
1) *because* there's a cost. Commitment matters; we care because we're paid. You care because you're paying. Or, more harshly, how's the free, unsupported, unresponsive monopoly working out for you these days?
PS Where's FeedBurner in this conversation? Telling, isnt it?...
Danny
· 8 months ago
Hi Phil,
Thanks for stopping by, and good to see that Feedblitz monitors its brand.
"Cost" doesn't always mean better - I'd suggest there's no better CMS tool for bloggers, for example, than Wordpress and that's free. "Cost" simply means that there's no excuse for no support.
The main problem with "cost" is that there are millions of bloggers that are curious about their community and traffic yet it's not a professional medium for them. Therefore, why should they pay? I think that's where Feedblitz might struggle to attract more bloggers.
Feedburner (before Google) were actually active at taking part in the conversation - perhaps the question should have been "Where's Google?".
Kim Woodbridge
· 8 months ago
I don't want google to have anything to do with twitter. I don't hate google but they own too many of the tools we use on a daily basis. And Danny raises a very valid point - they don't have adequate customer service for the size of the company - maybe this is because most of us use their tools for free.
Some days when I'm feeling paranoid-ish I think that in the near future every aspect of our lives will be brought to us by google - think of all the data they own on us already - might even be more than what the govt. has.
Phil Hollows
· 8 months ago
I think the question is not really about "cost" but "value" and "commitment" $1.49 is less than a cup of coffee so isn't an arduous burden.
Why should they pay? - Because they want real, stable metrics. - Because they want support when they need it. - Because we've innovated more in the last 10 days than FeedBurner has in the last two years.
Because, basically, the value we add is worth it.
Sure, It is a business decision, even at the $1.49 minimum. But adoption is accelerating, I'll tell you that. Banner day for us yesterday, today heading is already the same direction. FeedBurner has had it soul destroyed by Google. Time to move on.
I can see your points, Phil, but I would still say that for many bloggers, Feedblitz may not be the best option.
While your pricing starts at $1.49 per month, it then goes up depending on email subscribers (since you don't charge for RSS readers).
Many people are now using email subscription as a preferred option, so this could take away readers from a blogger (if the blogger has a solid email subscriber count and is already paying hosted server fees, for example).
I'm not saying Feedblitz isn't a valid and better alternative to Feedburner - just that not all bloggers are business-oriented.
Global Patriot
· 8 months ago
That's hard to tell...Google "could" bring a new sense of innovation to Twitter (TweetDeck continues to out pace Twitter in the features department) or could lobotomize the platform with a bad integration. Wish I had a crystal ball on this one.
Danny
· 8 months ago
That's the problem with Google, as Tim Jahn mentions above. It seems to be all or nothing with them and lately a lot of it has been nothing.
Dana Todd
· 8 months ago
Hi Danny, You said you were going to mention Feedblitz "and a few others"...who are the few others?
Also, I have mixed feeling about the Google domination. On the one hand, I do agree that it does seem to eat its children. On the other hand, Google has fostered an ecosystem that even you are part of - many companies and individuals depend heavily on the Google love to keep everything going. I mean that in a literal sense (blogs running AdSense) and in a figurative sense (excitement in investment community to fund new ideas). So maybe their interest in Twitter could help give them a necessary boost to the next level.
One thing's for sure...Google is really taking a beating right now by everyone. Why is it we internet folks just looooove to kick the ankles of anyone who rises too high? I count myself in that mix, but feel somewhat ashamed.
Best, Dana Todd, CMO Newsforce Network
Danny
· 8 months ago
Hi Dana,
Some of the alternatives to Feedburner and Feedblitz are:
Or you could try and create your own (it's how Feedburner started).
With regards the AdSense, I'm not sure if too many bloggers make any significant money from that. At least, not unless they have their blogs looking like neon placards with adverts all over the place! ;-)
I'm all for companies rising as high as possible - we need success and innovation for any of us to move on. The problem (at least as far as my own view goes) is that Google has risen and forgotten the very users who put them there. Something I'm about to write about in my very next post, funnily enough... ;-)
All Comments
If it is going to be influential then there is a likelihood that we are going to have to trust Google with it for the near future. Since they have the cash despite this economy and they are openly investing in opportunities through a venture arm.
I just wrote about the amount of Google hate that exists. It's an interesting phenomenon and something we all will need to deal with.
Frank
I don't think it's as much "Google hate" as it is "Google frustration". At times, they get things right (as Tim mentions below with Gmail), and at others they get it incredibly wrong (Feedburner is a prime example).
Add to that their incredibly poor customer service (have you ever had to get in touch with them re. an issue?) and for such a huge company, they're a paradox.
It's clear that when Google do something right they can be phenomenal, but for me they'd be a bad move on Twitter's part. Of course, I'm not the expert so watch me look silly in about 6 months time... ;-)
It seems to be a gamble with Google. You either get full attention or you get thrown in the closet to rot. Twitter's pretty damn cool. I don't think it's worth throwing the dice.
But, as a free email system, it is one of the best.
I don't have GMail but I am thinking I might because a Startup Detroit Statsbragger.com is using it to communicate but I can wait until they need me for better marketing strategies.
So NO. I don't think Twitter is a fad. It is more useful then Myspace and has a broader audience.
I'm curious as to whether PageRank can implement the feed feature they were looking at - could be a definite alternative.
Would Twitter be detrimentally affected by Google's ownership? I'm not sure. I agree with Tim; Gmail is a very useful email tool, whereas FeedBurner has lost credibility in recent times. Is this a result of Google's ownership, or simply one service being replaced by others that outperform it? If Google were to assume ownership of Twitter, the only concerns that I would have would gravitate around developments to the service. The beauty of the platform lies within its own simplicity. I fear that the capital available to Google may encourage them to 'enhance' the service, causing the simplicity thereof to become diluted.
TLR
Either way, as I mentioned to Jamie, the service is more problematic than useful at the minute. And for an analytical service from the same company that gives us Google Analytics, it's not good enough when trying to collate stats.
: )
Either way Twitter might become the next Myspace, so it would be a big loss of money for the Big G.
Second, everything on the web is beta. Heck, you could make the argument Web 2.0 is beta. A version.
I just wish either Google would sort itself out with Feedburner, or give it to coders who care. There are plenty around.
1) *because* there's a cost. Commitment matters; we care because we're paid. You care because you're paying. Or, more harshly, how's the free, unsupported, unresponsive monopoly working out for you these days?
2) The 30-day redirection is a FeedBurner transition process that makes it easier to move without losing subscribers. It's a Good Thing. The "how-to" is here http://blog.feedblitz.com/2009/04/how-to-migrate-your-feedburner-feeds.html and the recently updated (4/7/09)FeedBlitz RSS FAQs are here http://www.feedblitz.com/rssfaq.asp.
Thanks,
Phil Hollows
Founder
FeedBlitz, LLC
PS Where's FeedBurner in this conversation? Telling, isnt it?...
Thanks for stopping by, and good to see that Feedblitz monitors its brand.
"Cost" doesn't always mean better - I'd suggest there's no better CMS tool for bloggers, for example, than Wordpress and that's free. "Cost" simply means that there's no excuse for no support.
The main problem with "cost" is that there are millions of bloggers that are curious about their community and traffic yet it's not a professional medium for them. Therefore, why should they pay? I think that's where Feedblitz might struggle to attract more bloggers.
Feedburner (before Google) were actually active at taking part in the conversation - perhaps the question should have been "Where's Google?".
Some days when I'm feeling paranoid-ish I think that in the near future every aspect of our lives will be brought to us by google - think of all the data they own on us already - might even be more than what the govt. has.
Why should they pay?
- Because they want real, stable metrics.
- Because they want support when they need it.
- Because we've innovated more in the last 10 days than FeedBurner has in the last two years.
Because, basically, the value we add is worth it.
Sure, It is a business decision, even at the $1.49 minimum. But adoption is accelerating, I'll tell you that. Banner day for us yesterday, today heading is already the same direction. FeedBurner has had it soul destroyed by Google. Time to move on.
FYI: Post on metrics and the "$1.49 question" here: http://blog.feedblitz.com/2009/04/on-rss-subscr...
While your pricing starts at $1.49 per month, it then goes up depending on email subscribers (since you don't charge for RSS readers).
Many people are now using email subscription as a preferred option, so this could take away readers from a blogger (if the blogger has a solid email subscriber count and is already paying hosted server fees, for example).
I'm not saying Feedblitz isn't a valid and better alternative to Feedburner - just that not all bloggers are business-oriented.
You said you were going to mention Feedblitz "and a few others"...who are the few others?
Also, I have mixed feeling about the Google domination. On the one hand, I do agree that it does seem to eat its children. On the other hand, Google has fostered an ecosystem that even you are part of - many companies and individuals depend heavily on the Google love to keep everything going. I mean that in a literal sense (blogs running AdSense) and in a figurative sense (excitement in investment community to fund new ideas). So maybe their interest in Twitter could help give them a necessary boost to the next level.
One thing's for sure...Google is really taking a beating right now by everyone. Why is it we internet folks just looooove to kick the ankles of anyone who rises too high? I count myself in that mix, but feel somewhat ashamed.
Best,
Dana Todd, CMO
Newsforce Network
Some of the alternatives to Feedburner and Feedblitz are:
1. Feedity.
2. Rapid Feeds.
3. Subscribe2 (Wordpress plugin).
Or you could try and create your own (it's how Feedburner started).
With regards the AdSense, I'm not sure if too many bloggers make any significant money from that. At least, not unless they have their blogs looking like neon placards with adverts all over the place! ;-)
I'm all for companies rising as high as possible - we need success and innovation for any of us to move on. The problem (at least as far as my own view goes) is that Google has risen and forgotten the very users who put them there. Something I'm about to write about in my very next post, funnily enough... ;-)