Fred Wilson nails it. The reason? Because RSS still isn’t “brain dead simple.” For non-geeks it’s still too confusing to set up an RSS newsreader, to find – or aggregate – all the feeds you’re interested in, to subscribe, etc.
The RSS vs. email debate has erupted once again in response to the announcement several days ago that Yahoo and AOL will start charging senders 1/4 of a cent to a penny per message delivered. The idea is that the email or e-newsletter marketers who pay this premium will be guaranteed that their messages will reach intended recipients.
Read Tris Hussey and Steve Rubel on the topic of the end of cost-effective email marketing. Read Dave Winer on why RSS is hard to use and Stowe Boyd on Reads, Not Feeds.
Oh, and don’t misunderstand. RSS is in many ways a better solution for dispensing and receiving information online. But despite the proposed postage for email marketers, email isn’t dead yet.
Uh, it also won’t ever supplant email because it’s not a one-to-one medium. You won’t use RSS to write your mom. And as long as people use email, and a web browser, there are going to be a lot of them that don’t want to learn yet another Internet application. Plus, as Fred said, it’s kludgy.
My dirty secret is I don’t us RSS. Just can’t care that much. What’s it’s great for is digesting loads of info. Most people don’t need that. If I only have 5 web sites I visit with any frequency, it’s not such a big deal to just go to the site. It’s a better experience than RSS, with the pictures and customized layout, etc. RSS is ugly and geeky. Who wants to use another app just to read newsletters from companies?
Comment by Rick Bruner — February 7, 2006 @ 4:40 pm