The Fishbowl: "It's all just another one of those rows geeks get into without realising they're fighting over thin air. I've been fantastically guilty of this over the years, and probably will be again, so I know the signs."
I've been reading plenty of angry comments from developers and other stakeholders in the rss/(n)echo debate. If you think people are pissed about my commercial view of weblogs and syndication by paying for feed placement, just wait to see how pissed off everyone will be when microsoft and ibm start spending millions to 'own' these formats and make developers their bitch with lock-in tactics.
ofcourse I don't want to stifle 'progress', I just don't see the need for a competing format that does everything rss already does for me. perhaps someone will take the time to explain to the users what the differences are and benefits of a new format. To me it only appears to errode the infrastructure I have helped build over the past 3 years.
I've promoted RSS and invested in the format, used it and evangelized it. I see rss and xml icons everywhere. It works just fine.
I beg for explanation, in simple terms, why do I need (n)echo?