Desktop RSS Readers Are (Nearly) Dead
I resisted the headline 'Desktop RSS Readers Are Dead', but our latest poll of which methods people use to read RSS feeds is showing a clear trend - more people are using browser-based RSS Readers and less are using desktop Readers. This week's poll is almost identical to a poll we did 6 months ago, which gives us an opportunity to compare results. We're currently asking: How do you primarily read your feeds? It currently has 1,335 votes (after a couple of days), compared to 1,197 just over 6 months ago in January.
Here is the comparison:
| July 2007 | January 2007 | Change | |
| Web-based (e.g. Bloglines, Google Reader, Rojo) | 59% | 52% | + 7% |
| Desktop (e.g. FeedDemon, NetNewsWire) | 13% | 19% | - 6% |
| Start Page (Pageflakes, Netvibes, etc) | 16% | 14% (+ 2%)* | no change |
| Browser (e.g. Firefox Live Bookmarks) | 6% | 8% | - 2% |
| Email or email-based client (e.g. Outlook, Thunderbird) | 3% | 3% | no change |
| Social Network (Facebook, MySpace, etc) | 0% | - | n/a |
| Other (please comment) | 2% | 2% | no change |
* in January we had the following category, which scored 2%: Portal-based (e.g. MyYahoo, ThePortNetwork). In the current poll, we're categorizing this type of product as 'Start Pages'.
Results
While this isn't overly scientific, each poll had over 1,000 separate voters and we are polling a tech-savvy audience. So I believe the results show definite trends that are worth analyzing.
Firstly, the above stats show that people are migrating from desktop to browser-based RSS Readers. The percentage change in one is virtually a mirror of the other, while none of the other categories has changed much (if any). Web-based Readers are up 7% and desktop Readers are down 6%. In the space of 6 months. I attribute this mostly to the strong growth of Google Reader, which in most peoples' Feedburner stats is in the top 3 Readers. Google Reader has been the most innovative major RSS Reader over the past year, and a lot of people I know use it as their main Reader now (as do I). Bloglines and Rojo also continue to be popular.
And consider this: the top desktop RSS Reader in R/WW's Feedburner stats is NetNewsWire. It's ranked 12th overall, well behind Google Reader, Bloglines, Rojo and other browser-based Readers.
The other trend of note is that start pages have now overtaken desktop Readers. According to our current poll, 16% of respondants use a start page (iGoogle, MyYahoo, Pageflakes, Netvibes, et al) as their main way to read feeds. 13% say they use a desktop Reader. In January, desktop RSS Readers still held the edge. This change is significant, given that a few years ago start pages didn't exist (maybe apart from MyYahoo) and desktop RSS Readers were the bee's knees among geeks.
What do you make of these stats? Do you agree desktop RSS Readers are a dying breed?
Update: Greg Reinacker (Newsgator) and Nick Bradbury (FeedDemon, owned by Newsgator) have both posted responses. Greg says that "I think much of the the "drop" Richard is seeing in desktop client popularity is most likely due in large part to the way the new desktop clients retrieve data", while Nick says that I "neglected to consider behind-the-firewall Enterprise customers who can't use web-based RSS readers, and was based on a survey whose audience is far more likely to use a web-based reader to start with." Both fair criticisms, although I would say that I don't necessarily agree that R/WW's audience is pre-disposed to use web-based aggregators.
3 TrackBacks
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.readwriteweb.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/1481
FOLLOW RWW ON TWITTER
RECENT JOBS
Comments
Subscribe to comments for this post OR Subscribe to comments for all ReadWriteWeb posts
Couldn't agree more - desktop RSS readers are a dying breed, as are many other desktop applications that make so much more sense being Web-based. I think that platforms (such as AIR and XulRunner-based WebRunner) that allow these apps to live on the Desktop and have some desktop-like functionality will become increasingly important.
I recently switched from a desktop RSS aggregator to Google Reader and never looked back. I'm using WebRunner that allows to have an almost desktop-app experience with Google Reader - I wrote about it on my blog.
Posted by: Alex Sirota | July 25, 2007 2:01 AM
I'm using NetNewsWire (application). Bought it and now I can read them on my desktop, online and they even released a special iPhone interface yesterday! So I don't think it's fair to put them in the category "Desktop Reader"...
O, did I mention your feeds get synced all over the 3 different interfaces? Worth the cash me thinks :-)
Posted by: Tim Van Damme | July 25, 2007 2:08 AM
Web-based make much more sense, specially with a browser like Firefox, where you can click a link and open it in another tab.
In a dedicated reader, you'd have to open the browser anyway (or worse, some use the IE code to show IE-like pages in the reader).
Google reader with Gears for offline browsing is my absolute favorite. Specially once Gears gets to include pictures and more than 2000 articles .... cannot wait .... :)
Posted by: hombrelobo | July 25, 2007 2:26 AM
You have to remember that Web-based aggregators can't be uninstalled. So the subscriber numbers tend to only move upward. When you uninstall FeedDemon, it stop polling and the numbers go down. When you stop using Google Reader, Google doesn't stop counting u in their stats.
Posted by: Randy Charles Morin | July 25, 2007 2:46 AM
I'm using IM based RSS reader and notifier(Anothr.com). Actually few people cares about reading, but notification.
Posted by: nancy | July 25, 2007 2:59 AM
I doubt desktop aggregators are dying, but I suspect their user count will level out at a smallish proportion. (Randy has a good point).
As to why, at least part of the reason I'd say is collateral from the old "syndication wars" and the subsequent relative success of RSS 2.0. This format is really just about content delivered by the polling mechanism. While RSS 1.0 supported this, there was a lot more capability in terms of metadata and data delivery in general. (It's hardly surprising that extensions are now being discussed for RSS 2.0 that would effectively have come free with RSS 1.0/RDF).
For straight content-oriented material, all you need is a viewer (and pretty much all you can have is a viewer). Pretty much out of the box, a browser is adequate. Without richer material being delivered there's little more that can be done.
Ok, there's plenty of potential with text-based search and natural language understanding to augment the content with material that makes interesting machine-processable data, but to be effective with this kind of thing you need a lot of source content to play with - requiring heavy-duty storage, also heavy-duty processing. This are the kind of things that are more in reach of big server-side setups like Google (funnily enough).
Were richer material being delivered, then there'd be more potential for interesting yes simple-to-develop desktop apps. Although it lacks features of RSS 1.0, Atom does offer more potential for including decent quality arbitrary data. Also the Atom Publishing Protocol blows the crude blog-only style of earlier APIs out of the water, so it'll be interesting to see what happens there.
Having said all this, the browser can always be used as a presentation layer for richer material (e.g. as in the SIMILE tools), so I guess it's win-win for the browser...
Posted by: Danny | July 25, 2007 3:19 AM
I still use Vienna on the mac and I love it. I also use a few feeds on my iGoogle but much prefer to use the desktop app. I like being able to archive interesting articles and read when offline.
Posted by: James | July 25, 2007 4:38 AM
These statistics are somewhat deceptive. New versions of NetNewsWire for example, require a NewsGator online account to activate the product. On top of that, it then uses NewsGator to sync up your feeds. In other words, my aggregator never hits web sites directly, it just asks NewsGator for the latest stuff.
I don't think NetNewsWire will show up in the stats directly, then, but instead will get rolled up into NewsGator. (a quick and dirty netstat while refreshing all feeds confirmed an open connection to NG and none to other web sites) I suspect something similar is happening with FeedDemon, which happens to be one of the most popular desktop aggregators.
I don't doubt that more growth is happening on the web-based aggregators. After all, they're free and the barrier to trying RSS is as low as it can get there. I just don't want folks like me, who are power RSS users, to get miscounted. :)
Sujal
Posted by: Sujal Shah | July 25, 2007 4:44 AM
Agh, never mind... I misread the first paragraph and thought this was a followup to the poll based on collected stats. If people are voting, then the vote stands on it's own. Ignore what I said... ;-)
Sujal
Posted by: Sujal Shah | July 25, 2007 4:46 AM
I'm still searching for the best Web-based RSS reader. I feel like there's still something missing, there needs to be something revolutionary, something with AI. If only I had the ability to develop one.
Posted by: Gorhaur | July 25, 2007 4:59 AM
Ideally, there would a way to use web-based readers and desktop's ones and to sync the state of feeds.
BTW, I'm reading RSS over XMPP thanks to the great Jabber RSS Service transport.
Posted by: kael | July 25, 2007 5:06 AM
Because a small percent of people are using desktop readers we can not conclude that they are dead.Moreover, 13 percent is a significant percent. If you are managing hundreds of feeds, desktop readers are the way to go because they are much faster. I used FeedDemon sinchronized with NewsGator and its the best of both worlds: http://www.newsgator.com/Individuals/FeedDemon/.
Posted by: Mario A. Núñez | July 25, 2007 6:16 AM
When I started using an aggregator, I used a Firefox plugin. However, since I read feeds from 3 different computers (two part-time jobs and at home) I quickly saw that it wasn't going to work. There was no way to keep track of what posts I read on one computer and have them be marked "read" on another. So I tried out both Bloglines and Google Reader, found that I preferred the latter, and have been with it for a few months now.
Posted by: Jaclyn McKewan | July 25, 2007 6:27 AM
I think desktop readers still have the edge in terms of features and usability for people who read a lot of feeds -- can your online reader give you prioritized reading, feed filtering, instant search, and dead-feed management, all in one package?
http://www.feedghost.com/
We're just days away from our latest release, but if you don't mind a beta, you can grab it from:
http://www.feedghost.com/Support/FeedGhost-Beta-Setup.exe
Having said that, one of the most common requests we get is for a web-based reader. We're due to begin development of that shortly, and it will synchronize with the desktop reader, giving (hopefully) the best of both worlds.
(disclaimer: in case you didn't guess, I co-produce the above reader)
Posted by: Stu Smith | July 25, 2007 7:06 AM
Well I hope the desktop readers aren't dead as I develop one www.feedghost.com :-) Seriously though, whether it’s a desktop or web reader it doesn’t really matter, what counts is marketing and of course how good the product is and in the end Google scores high on both.
Posted by: Lee Alexander | July 25, 2007 7:16 AM
I started using desktop RSS readers: first NewzCrawler and later changed to FeedDemon. Now I'm using Google Reader. My main reason for switching to an online reader is that I get rid of the CPU-hogging when processing hundreds of feeds through a desktop reader.
Posted by: Anders P. | July 25, 2007 7:18 AM
BlogBridge: works for me, but I have a laptop. As for 13% = dead, I guess that's why Apple died some time ago, eh?
Posted by: Eric | July 25, 2007 7:40 AM
To me, it seems logical that my RSS reader and e-mail client are the same application, that's why I'm using Thunderbird. I haven't tried out any of the web based readers and I don't think I will anytime soon, as I like to have everything on my computer, available even if I'm offline.
And I don't think that desktop based readers are dead, those 13% will probably drop to about 10% in a few months, but I don't expect it to drop any lower.
Posted by: Aesqe | July 25, 2007 8:07 AM
Desktop clients may not work across the board, particularly if you need your feeds synced across multiple computers/devices. However, I find Thunderbird's RSS reader to be extremely convenient for managing both my email and feeds at the same time. It doesn't require a separate feed reader (it is already open for email) and I find it pretty useful in handling/archiving feeds just as I do with email.
Posted by: Ken | July 25, 2007 9:46 AM
maybe the title should be "RSS is dead"
Posted by: john | July 25, 2007 10:03 AM
i use newsfire daily and its one of my favourite apps. it's better than google reader: you can search through old posts, there are smart groups, it's sexy to look at it, it's simpler but more powerful with different sorts functions. and most of all, you go through each post with the spacebar. yes you can do it in google reader with the shortcut J but it's better implemented in newsfire.
Posted by: heri | July 25, 2007 11:20 AM
I use both. I like my news ticker fixed to the top of my desktop while I work. If I have 15 minutes to blow, I use the web reader to scan all of my news.
Try www.emarketsoftware.com/newsbliss.aspx
It's the best news ticker I found.
Thanks,
Lou
Posted by: Lou Gallio | July 25, 2007 11:27 AM
Is it just me or is Rojo dead - again - right now?
Rojo is in theory my favorite reader, but seems to be slowly dying...
Posted by: Noah | July 25, 2007 1:41 PM
I've tried to switch to web-readers and I just can't seem to. I LOVE Safari for RSS. Folders containing categorized RSS Feeds can provide an aggregate view of multiple feeds. Then, numbers next to the name of the bookmarks in the bookmrk bar act as flags for new content.
I closely follow approximately 150 feeds. Piece of cake!
Try using Safari RSS to watch for specific items on craigslist (craigslist makes a feed for any search result).
What I'd love is a web-reader that follows Safari, so in the rare event that I'm not on my own machine, my online reader could be right where I left off, then send the info on what I've read back to my local Safari.
Posted by: Andrew A. Peterson | July 25, 2007 2:14 PM
Interesting poll. In my personal experience with feed reading I also see the trend to move to webbased readers (I use an Outlook Reader and am more and more using Google Reader). But is this true for all kinds of workers? E.g. consultants that are one the road? Do they also use webbased readers? Or are they using them more and more now you can read webbased readers offline (such as Google Reader)?
Another interesting question is: when do people read their feeds?
Posted by: Samuel | July 26, 2007 1:36 AM
Richard,
13% is a good number by any means :) so I am not sure on what basis you think that desktop readers are nearly dead.
The percentage/numbers will continue to vary and these are entirely dependent on the user behavior/user preferences. The fact is there's gigs of data available on the internet and the readers have so much to consume.
Web-readers work well if you're connected to internet most of the time. Web-readers have a bit of problem if the feeds are huge in number as some one rightly mentioned above.
Desktop readers like i-Fetch, Great News would continue to do well as for specific set of users they act like a typical desktop application e.g. a messenger which loads during start-up.
Moreover its not the hassle of visiting a website again and again.Now the alternate theory says online readers are more dynamic, faster news alerts and specifically handle your feeds on the go.
I'm trying to tell you that all forms of feedreaders would exist whether they come in the form of plugins, desktop apps, email clients as long as the users want them and there's a need created by the technology driven applications like i-fetch,google reader, news gator. The technology is RSS and as long as it exists all forms of feed readers would continue to evolve... entirely depending on user preferences :)
Dear richard, it is my kind request to you don't misguide readers by making such ambiguous statements predicting the death of RSS readers.
Posted by: daksh | July 26, 2007 3:22 AM
I suspect that those people using desktop feed readers would be less inclined to partake in online polls such as this.
Posted by: Damon | July 26, 2007 5:55 AM
There is one major flaw in web-based readers, which is your information is stored outside of the corporate firewall on someones else's hardware. Large companies are very concerned about information leaking about what things they (their employees) are watching. Storing your favorite feeds on someone's web server is just unacceptable since it has the potential to expose too much about what you do. Corporations will always elect to go with either a fat-client version reader or installed their own in-house web server environment for managing feeds. The former will keep fat-client web readers around for a long long time to come.
Posted by: Thomas | July 26, 2007 6:04 AM
My trackbacks aren't working, but I wrote about this here:
http://www.rassoc.com/gregr/weblog/archive.aspx?post=835
Greg Reinacker
Founder / CTO
NewsGator Technologies, Inc
Posted by: Greg Reinacker | July 26, 2007 9:36 AM
I've been a huge proponent of Rojo but they've been down for the past 2 days. I'll probably be switching to Google's reader but the danger is there for any on-line reader.
I think as long as web-based readers experience inconvenient downtime or extended glitches, there will be a trickle of people switching (back) to desktop readers.
Posted by: Jason - GorillaSushi | July 26, 2007 10:33 AM
If you are obsessive about RSS and
check your feeds every hour
check your feeds on your phone
check your feeds on my multiple computers
Then, yes, you should be online. I don't however, since I do not do the above. I use Vienna at work--which is also the ONLY place that I check my RSS feeds.
Posted by: Stephen James | July 26, 2007 12:33 PM
Two Words: Offline Reading
I use Feeddemon on the desktop, the Go Reader on my WinMo phone. They all sync to the same centralized source, so I can read feeds on the Go (heh), that are marked as read when I get back to my desktop.
I also travel alot, and I find it a great time when stuck in the air for quite a few hours to catch up on my feeds. When I get back to net connectivity, a quick sync, and all my feeds are marked read for what I actually read.
the achilles heel of the web browsers is not having the ability to have an offline sync mode.
Posted by: Jef | July 26, 2007 6:38 PM
When Google Reader figures out how much I need the tab key, I might switch. Until then you can only have NetNewsWire if you pry it from my cold, dead hand.
Posted by: Joe | July 26, 2007 10:36 PM
I think desktop readers will make a comeback when people start using more secure feeds that contain sensitive information like financials and such. Not to mention "enterprise rss" feeds that are always kept behind the firewall for obvious reasons.
I have been using bloglines and feeddemon both off an on over the years, but I've now made the permanent switch to feeddemon so I can stay on top of my private and custom feeds that I generated with RSSBus.
Posted by: Lance Robinson | July 27, 2007 8:54 AM
Richard, thanks for updating your post to include our responses. BTW, I just noticed that your poll shows desktop readers at 17% (4% higher than when you initially posted this), so the drop is down to 2% now.
Posted by: Nick Bradbury | July 27, 2007 10:26 AM
Anybody using IE7 can simply click on the newsfeed link and it works as a pretty nice reader.
You can save the feeds in your favorites.
So now the most popular browser (according to repeated webtrends analysis of my high traffic website) is fully capable of replacing conventional readers.
It won't be long before Mozilla is capable without plugins as well.
Yep... I see the demise of the desktop reader coming quickly.
Posted by: Christopher Vourtis | July 30, 2007 8:42 AM
One more vote for desktop readers! Online readers are annoyingly slow and clumsy, to me. I use GreatNews and love it.
I think it's been easier to point newbies to Google or Bloglines instead of asking them to download a new desktop application. The sad thing is, they don't know what they're missing.
Posted by: Shannon Whitley | July 30, 2007 12:59 PM
I would tend to agree... but it makes me wonder becuase google is trying to reach people offline???
http://omadsense.com
Posted by: Omadsense | July 31, 2007 10:25 AM
Mr. Reinacker and Mr. Bradbury obviously have explicit technology and market knowledge, but also a severe conflict of interest. While these guys quickly produced blog posts that adequately refuted Mr. MacManus's post (as well as questioning the fact checking of bloggers)), anyone notice there was no reference to actual "customer" numbers, or revenue? True, that wasn't the noted topic of the post, but when assessing NewsGator's (NG)user-numbers it is instructive to look at economic viability. If they cannot sustain their revenue, they will have to reduce the staff or go out of business. They have their interests closely aligned with MS at this point, and to be up against Google (w/ salesforce partnership...hint.hint.hint), Apple, and others is not a great situation in which to find oneself.
Posted by: captain obvious | July 31, 2007 12:41 PM