Microsoft & RSS "Rebranding" - What a load of bollocks
Source Title:
RSS v Web Feeds: sticking up for Microsoft
RSS v Web Feeds: sticking up for Microsoft
Story Text:
I've avoided the row about MS calling RSS "web feeds" untill now. It just seems such a stupid, petty gripe. But Duncan's post sticking up for MS has prompted me to do the same.
So what if MS are calling RSS feeds "web feeds" in IE7? Seems like a perfectly sensible and forward thinking move to me. We have various versions of RSS, not to mention Atom, and who knows what we'll have 5yrs down the line?
I've avoided the row about MS calling RSS "web feeds" untill now. It just seems such a stupid, petty gripe. But Duncan's post sticking up for MS has prompted me to do the same.
So what if MS are calling RSS feeds "web feeds" in IE7? Seems like a perfectly sensible and forward thinking move to me. We have various versions of RSS, not to mention Atom, and who knows what we'll have 5yrs down the line?
- Y! MyWeb
Who loves "RSS"
"RSS" is a stupid name only the nerdiest of geeks (or complete and utter cocks) would love. I would much rather have a friendly name and if "web feed" or "news feed" or somesuch gets used then I am all for it. There is too much pointless jargon as it is.
I'm with Nick on this one.
I'm with Nick on this one. As a programmer, I'm for abstraction in all areas of the world, and "web feed" seems like a suitble abstraction for RSS. Let's not forget that RSS is, well, a bit shit really. We don't want to be lumbered with RSS forever just because MS said so (literally).
RSS, like many things, isn't the best, it was just the first.
a feed is technically more
a feed is technically more accurate anyway, for the reasons highlighted above (atom, different versions of rss, etc). If I have an extended XML feed(!) on my website, I'm going to refer to it as such, simply because RSS would be an incorrect - needlessly technical - term for it.
so to clarifiy...
Is it "web feed" or "web feeds" or both?
Dan
Makes perfect sense actually
Makes perfect sense actually - web feeds sounds way more accessible to common folk than RSS. We don't use a term HTML pages, do we?
at any rate, Atom has come
at any rate, Atom has come one step closer to being the better, standard option.
point is, RSS is not invented here
RSS is not invented in Redmond, that's why. Look out for extensions of established protocols, methods and standards. Nuff said.
Not first won't be the last
But people only complain loudest when it is microsoft.
Personally, as I have said before on TW, I prefer Atom and think it is better thought-through. Wouldn't call either by their technical names though, "feed" seems way more consumer-friendly which is really what matters to anyone other than a nerd.
in terms of wording
The word "feeds" is way better than "RSS", "XML", "Atom", and so on. No doubt about that.