Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 21st Mar 2013 12:49 UTC
Google "Google's Chrome and Android operating systems will remain separate products but could have more overlap, Executive Chairman Eric Schmidt said, a week after the two came under a single boss." That's that, then.
Thread beginning with comment 556087
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: At least
by Delgarde on Thu 21st Mar 2013 22:55 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: At least"
Delgarde
Member since:
2008-08-19

With the recent announcement of the demise of Google Reader, I think people have a vested interest in wanting to run local/offline apps. Who wants to run apps that can be yanked by the developer at any given time? I don't. This is a conversation we're not having about web apps being the future, but really should be.


Actually, the biggest problem with the demise of Google Reader is that it can't easily be replaced by offline apps. It's chief advantages are that it's always online - meaning that nothing ever gets missed - and that storing state on a central server allows feeds to be accessed from multiple devices without syncing.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[4]: At least
by WorknMan on Fri 22nd Mar 2013 00:48 in reply to "RE[3]: At least"
WorknMan Member since:
2005-11-13

Actually, the biggest problem with the demise of Google Reader is that it can't easily be replaced by offline apps. It's chief advantages are that it's always online - meaning that nothing ever gets missed - and that storing state on a central server allows feeds to be accessed from multiple devices without syncing.


Well, it's like email in that way... you need somewhere for the data (email) to be stored, but you don't need to have the APP in the cloud. I think what we really need is for the RSS standard to be updated that defines a standard way of storing FEEDS in the cloud, so you can use whatever app you want and then have a server that stores the feeds, and if the server goes down, you just move the feeds to a different server, and continue using the same app.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[5]: At least
by Delgarde on Fri 22nd Mar 2013 01:02 in reply to "RE[4]: At least"
Delgarde Member since:
2008-08-19

Well, it's like email in that way... you need somewhere for the data (email) to be stored, but you don't need to have the APP in the cloud. I think what we really need is for the RSS standard to be updated that defines a standard way of storing FEEDS in the cloud, so you can use whatever app you want and then have a server that stores the feeds, and if the server goes down, you just move the feeds to a different server, and continue using the same app.


The problem isn't where the feeds are stored - that's already on the net, whether by a cloud provider or someone's personal web server. The problem is where the subscriptions are stored, and where you keep the information of which feeds you've read.

If you're using a desktop reader, then each client (laptop, work desktop, mobile, etc) has to track that stuff itself, so that a) if you subscribe to something new, it needs to be separately added to all clients, and b) any given client doesn't know which items you've already read on a different client. Google Reader solved that problem by centralising that info...

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[4]: At least
by zima on Tue 26th Mar 2013 19:10 in reply to "RE[3]: At least"
zima Member since:
2005-07-06

nothing ever gets missed

OTOH, we have enough information overload already...

Reply Parent Score: 2