The problem with them is that their OPML import times are ridiculous.
I've literally been waiting over 2 weeks for 1 OPML file with about 30-40 feeds in it to be imported now.
They really need to step up during this advantageous time for them and spin up more servers to handle imports.
I've been checking in every few days and their import rate seems to be less than a thousand OPML files a day (when I signed up weeks ago, it was around 25000 users ahead of me with OPML files to be imported and I'm still waiting). Not giving me much confidence in their company at this early stage.
I ran into the same issue. I'm not sure why it's so slow but I contacted them directly and they bumped my import to the head of the queue. I would recommend doing that. The site may be slow but at least their support is responsive.
They also had some serious UI slowdowns for the first couple of days but it is better now. I've also noticed that the feeds don't update as rapidly, but that will probably improve over time and it's mostly only noticeable when compared directly to Google Reader.
I wonder how they count it? Because I definitely signed up, imported my feeds, and gave it a try. But I've stopped using it because it requires a browser extension/plugin which I find irritating. Am I counted in the 3 million?
Similar here, but I haven't used Google Reader for more then 2 years. After all the buzz I thought I'd give rss readers another try. (It didn't last long.)
If you take out the whining people out of the three million, you still have a pretty good user base. A user base which just might be willing to pay if there's a good service. Heck, I'd pay if there was something significantly better than the free Feedly.
Which paid solutions exist ? And there is a distinction here. Feedly exists because of feeds and hence are in the same camp as Dropbox, Evernote, LogMeIn and other companies that exist solely for one purpose.
But the lesson from the Reader saga was clear. Google is an advertising company and if there isn't a clear way for them to advertise then the product has a high risk of being cancelled.
I trialed several things. I went into Feedly with the expectation it wasn't free. I was actually surprised when it never charged me, and I find myself hoping they will, as I'm not really interested in following another service like this into the inevitable sludgy morass of ads that all free services like this degenerate into. So far it's the winner for me, since I've ended up moving a lot of my RSS consumption to my phone, which has made the final contenders a rather short list.
Is there any actual evidence that paid services are more reliable than free ones? Seems like a non-viable paid service is just as bad as a non-viable free one. I guess paid services feel worse about shutting down... unless they get acquired.
You imply paid product somehow would be immune to being shut down. Which sounds about right - there's no precedent that product which charges subscription fees was ever discontinued. Or is there?
Free is a red herring, plenty of paid services lasted less than Google Reader.
The key is making sure all the layers in your stack are either commodities or can be self-hosted.
For example, proprietary SaaS/PaaS services - bad. Generic and interchangeable Linux systems - good. You can build on top of the latter knowing that you can switch if the service is killed.
Then, for non-standard components (e.g., the application), you must either host it yourself or make sure you have everything you need (code and data). If you don't have the skills, you can pay someone else to set it up, as long as you don't become hostage to them.
It's not unlike cars - if you want something reliable and durable, you're better off choosing the less comfortable model for which parts are easily sourced.
I don't understand why Feedly needs browser extensions. As far as I can tell the only reason they need them is to spy on your behavior. Otherwise, as all the other online RSS readers show there's no need for browser extensions.
That leads me to believe they are spying. Because, to repeat myself, why else would they need the extension?
Yeah, I won't use feedly because 1) wtf browser extention and 2) needs a google login? Come on! I'm supposed to believe this service is going to replace google reader and they can't demonstrate it running without google reader's backend yet? Nor without a browser extension? #1 gives the appearance of incompetence and #2 smells like vaporware.
29 comments
[ 4.5 ms ] story [ 75.6 ms ] threadFeedly seems to be doing a good job of balancing the new UI features and focusing on the backend replacement.
Any idea how they will make money in the future?
I have hundreds of Starred articles that I will have to write a script to move to whatever service I end up using.
http://theoldreader.com
I've literally been waiting over 2 weeks for 1 OPML file with about 30-40 feeds in it to be imported now.
They really need to step up during this advantageous time for them and spin up more servers to handle imports.
I've been checking in every few days and their import rate seems to be less than a thousand OPML files a day (when I signed up weeks ago, it was around 25000 users ahead of me with OPML files to be imported and I'm still waiting). Not giving me much confidence in their company at this early stage.
They also had some serious UI slowdowns for the first couple of days but it is better now. I've also noticed that the feeds don't update as rapidly, but that will probably improve over time and it's mostly only noticeable when compared directly to Google Reader.
It's all web based. No apps/plugins to install.
Doesn't support importing OPML files yet but it does have it's own feed indexing service so it's not at risk when Google Reader API shuts down.
A bunch of UI improvements are being tested now and will be released soon.
Bunch of whining free riders. Now I understand why Google dumped you.
If you take out the whining people out of the three million, you still have a pretty good user base. A user base which just might be willing to pay if there's a good service. Heck, I'd pay if there was something significantly better than the free Feedly.
But the lesson from the Reader saga was clear. Google is an advertising company and if there isn't a clear way for them to advertise then the product has a high risk of being cancelled.
You... you don't understand even the very basics of Google's business model, do you?
Spoiler: 99% of their revenue is not derived from direct user transactions to them.
The key is making sure all the layers in your stack are either commodities or can be self-hosted.
For example, proprietary SaaS/PaaS services - bad. Generic and interchangeable Linux systems - good. You can build on top of the latter knowing that you can switch if the service is killed.
Then, for non-standard components (e.g., the application), you must either host it yourself or make sure you have everything you need (code and data). If you don't have the skills, you can pay someone else to set it up, as long as you don't become hostage to them.
It's not unlike cars - if you want something reliable and durable, you're better off choosing the less comfortable model for which parts are easily sourced.
That leads me to believe they are spying. Because, to repeat myself, why else would they need the extension?
Please pile on additional votes to keep the pressure up.
For what it's worth, they claim they are not monitoring your browsing: http://blog.feedly.com/2008/06/18/feedly-and-privacy/
But you're right, still a good idea to push for the web version regardless.