Comments on: Google Alerts to add RSS http://www.plagiarismtoday.com/2008/10/10/google-alerts-to-add-rss/ Content Theft, Plagiarism, Copyright Infringement Thu, 18 Mar 2010 00:03:14 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=abc hourly 1 By: at1mp (Arthur Wilbur)http://www.plagiarismtoday.com/2008/10/10/google-alerts-to-add-rss/comment-page-1/#comment-124329 at1mp (Arthur Wilbur) Fri, 17 Oct 2008 18:59:00 +0000 http://www.plagiarismtoday.com/?p=1935#comment-124329 Google Alerts to add RSS functionality soon, third party apps will not be needed. http://is.gd/4fxT Google Alerts to add RSS functionality soon, third party apps will not be needed. http://is.gd/4fxT

]]> By: Jonathan Baileyhttp://www.plagiarismtoday.com/2008/10/10/google-alerts-to-add-rss/comment-page-1/#comment-129059 Jonathan Bailey Wed, 15 Oct 2008 23:23:58 +0000 http://www.plagiarismtoday.com/?p=1935#comment-129059 I actually have to disagree with that. Though it would depend on the nature of your mail queue, I think that for most email would actually be faster. <br><br>The reason is this. Google Reader updates feeds once an hour, less if there is only one subscriber (something that would be true for nearly all Google Alert feeds). As such, there will be an average delay of about 30 minutes before any new item appears. Email, in those cases, would likely be much faster, probably taking less than 10 minutes.<br><br>Granted, there are ways to mitigate this but what the speed issue comes down to is how you have your email setup vs. how you have your RSS set up. For some feeds will be faster, others will get more quickness out of email.<br><br>Still, I don't think that a delay of even an hour is going to be much to most Google Alert users. Most, I doubt, check their alerts often enough to notice.<br><br>Just my theory though, I could be wrong.<br><br>Thank you for your thoughts! I actually have to disagree with that. Though it would depend on the nature of your mail queue, I think that for most email would actually be faster.

The reason is this. Google Reader updates feeds once an hour, less if there is only one subscriber (something that would be true for nearly all Google Alert feeds). As such, there will be an average delay of about 30 minutes before any new item appears. Email, in those cases, would likely be much faster, probably taking less than 10 minutes.

Granted, there are ways to mitigate this but what the speed issue comes down to is how you have your email setup vs. how you have your RSS set up. For some feeds will be faster, others will get more quickness out of email.

Still, I don't think that a delay of even an hour is going to be much to most Google Alert users. Most, I doubt, check their alerts often enough to notice.

Just my theory though, I could be wrong.

Thank you for your thoughts!

]]> By: Jonathan Baileyhttp://www.plagiarismtoday.com/2008/10/10/google-alerts-to-add-rss/comment-page-1/#comment-128026 Jonathan Bailey Wed, 15 Oct 2008 19:23:58 +0000 http://www.plagiarismtoday.com/?p=1935#comment-128026 I actually have to disagree with that. Though it would depend on the nature of your mail queue, I think that for most email would actually be faster. <br><br>The reason is this. Google Reader updates feeds once an hour, less if there is only one subscriber (something that would be true for nearly all Google Alert feeds). As such, there will be an average delay of about 30 minutes before any new item appears. Email, in those cases, would likely be much faster, probably taking less than 10 minutes.<br><br>Granted, there are ways to mitigate this but what the speed issue comes down to is how you have your email setup vs. how you have your RSS set up. For some feeds will be faster, others will get more quickness out of email.<br><br>Still, I don't think that a delay of even an hour is going to be much to most Google Alert users. Most, I doubt, check their alerts often enough to notice.<br><br>Just my theory though, I could be wrong.<br><br>Thank you for your thoughts! I actually have to disagree with that. Though it would depend on the nature of your mail queue, I think that for most email would actually be faster.

The reason is this. Google Reader updates feeds once an hour, less if there is only one subscriber (something that would be true for nearly all Google Alert feeds). As such, there will be an average delay of about 30 minutes before any new item appears. Email, in those cases, would likely be much faster, probably taking less than 10 minutes.

Granted, there are ways to mitigate this but what the speed issue comes down to is how you have your email setup vs. how you have your RSS set up. For some feeds will be faster, others will get more quickness out of email.

Still, I don't think that a delay of even an hour is going to be much to most Google Alert users. Most, I doubt, check their alerts often enough to notice.

Just my theory though, I could be wrong.

Thank you for your thoughts!

]]> By: Jonathan Baileyhttp://www.plagiarismtoday.com/2008/10/10/google-alerts-to-add-rss/comment-page-1/#comment-123400 Jonathan Bailey Wed, 15 Oct 2008 18:23:58 +0000 http://www.plagiarismtoday.com/?p=1935#comment-123400 I actually have to disagree with that. Though it would depend on the nature of your mail queue, I think that for most email would actually be faster. <br><br>The reason is this. Google Reader updates feeds once an hour, less if there is only one subscriber (something that would be true for nearly all Google Alert feeds). As such, there will be an average delay of about 30 minutes before any new item appears. Email, in those cases, would likely be much faster, probably taking less than 10 minutes.<br><br>Granted, there are ways to mitigate this but what the speed issue comes down to is how you have your email setup vs. how you have your RSS set up. For some feeds will be faster, others will get more quickness out of email.<br><br>Still, I don't think that a delay of even an hour is going to be much to most Google Alert users. Most, I doubt, check their alerts often enough to notice.<br><br>Just my theory though, I could be wrong.<br><br>Thank you for your thoughts! I actually have to disagree with that. Though it would depend on the nature of your mail queue, I think that for most email would actually be faster.

The reason is this. Google Reader updates feeds once an hour, less if there is only one subscriber (something that would be true for nearly all Google Alert feeds). As such, there will be an average delay of about 30 minutes before any new item appears. Email, in those cases, would likely be much faster, probably taking less than 10 minutes.

Granted, there are ways to mitigate this but what the speed issue comes down to is how you have your email setup vs. how you have your RSS set up. For some feeds will be faster, others will get more quickness out of email.

Still, I don't think that a delay of even an hour is going to be much to most Google Alert users. Most, I doubt, check their alerts often enough to notice.

Just my theory though, I could be wrong.

Thank you for your thoughts!

]]> By: Ricardo Lopeshttp://www.plagiarismtoday.com/2008/10/10/google-alerts-to-add-rss/comment-page-1/#comment-123399 Ricardo Lopes Wed, 15 Oct 2008 01:33:07 +0000 http://www.plagiarismtoday.com/?p=1935#comment-123399 Ok, ill give you one strong reason: RSS is FASTER<br>The reason why this is somerhing good is because RSS is suposedly faster than e-mail delivery, and no matter how fast and local, google emails are being sent, they still will have to go through a process of mail queu, on the other hand, by rss, you should maybe at a certain point, define the refresh of your feeds, optimizing time, freeing servers and the most important, receiving the news in the shortest amount of time.<br>Of course, this will also depend on whether email alerts and rss will be sent out at the same time.<br>It's not only a question of format, but rather, the speed it can provide in data transmission.<br>As well as the reduction of many times anuecessary content traffic. Ok, ill give you one strong reason: RSS is FASTER
The reason why this is somerhing good is because RSS is suposedly faster than e-mail delivery, and no matter how fast and local, google emails are being sent, they still will have to go through a process of mail queu, on the other hand, by rss, you should maybe at a certain point, define the refresh of your feeds, optimizing time, freeing servers and the most important, receiving the news in the shortest amount of time.
Of course, this will also depend on whether email alerts and rss will be sent out at the same time.
It's not only a question of format, but rather, the speed it can provide in data transmission.
As well as the reduction of many times anuecessary content traffic.

]]> By: postsgoogle (Posts Google)http://www.plagiarismtoday.com/2008/10/10/google-alerts-to-add-rss/comment-page-1/#comment-124330 postsgoogle (Posts Google) Fri, 10 Oct 2008 20:38:50 +0000 http://www.plagiarismtoday.com/?p=1935#comment-124330 Google Alerts to add RSS: A recent article in the Wall Street Journal by Walter Mossberg about how to.. http://tinyurl.com/4dt8d2 Google Alerts to add RSS: A recent article in the Wall Street Journal by Walter Mossberg about how to.. http://tinyurl.com/4dt8d2

]]>