[ancarda]

My initial reaction is "cool, but I won't use it as it'll be shutdown soon enough". I wonder if enough people avoid new Google products due to shutdown fears so it leads to a product ultimately being shutdown due to neglect.

A bit of a vicious cycle.

[k-mcgrady]

>> "My initial reaction is "cool, but I won't use it as it'll be shutdown soon enough"."

Why? It's not like you have to invest anything into the service (building a network, creating a profile etc.etc.) and it doesn't seem like a tool that is meant to become part of your workflow (e.g. reader). Also, if Helpouts goes away these 'experts' will still be available somewhere - you could schedule appointments directly.

[detst]

> I wonder if enough people avoid new Google products due to shutdown fears [...]

I doubt it. That attitude is mostly a HN/geek thing. I like that they're willing to try things and test for viability in the real world. I'd rather have something and for it go away than to never have it at all. (And yes, I do understand the frustrations with Reader but I wouldn't go back in time and never use it from the start)

[ancarda]

This wasn't about Reader specifically. Google has shutdown a lot of products. The latest being Google Checkout, which makes people nervous of building their business on Google's software. Since this service is paid, I could be netting a lot of money through it, only for it to fizzle out.

[detst]

> Since this service is paid, I could be netting a lot of money through it, only for it to fizzle out.

But that's true of any service from any company. If I'm a stay-at-home mom making some extra cash on Helpouts, I have a very different risk profile than a doctor who closes down his practice to see patients exclusively through Helpouts. The stay-at-home mom might not be happy about a shutdown but she still "[netted] a lot of money" whereas the doctor might have destroyed his/her career. Every individual/company needs to assess their own risk and take the appropriate risk-mitigating actions.

The point I'm making is that the damages from a Google service shutdown are typically very low or easily mitigated (Google Checkout being no exception) and every service should be evaluated on an individual basis with your risk profile. If the value you are getting from any service is lower than the damages that would result from a shutdown, don't put all of your eggs in that basket; if you do anyway, get some contractual guarantees and be confident that they will be fulfilled.

[Samuel_Michon]

> get some contractual guarantees and be confident that they fill be fulfilled.

In that case, no services that Google offers should be used. They don’t give any guarantees, not even to their paying customers.

[detst]

They have deprecation policies in at least some cases. They may not be unconditional guarantees but they're still just risk factors to be evaluated individually. I have no problem with the risk averse avoiding any services for their own reasons but it's gone beyond that in many cases here on HN to pure FUD. In any case, you've taken that clause out of context.

[icebraining]

Yeah, Google Checkout only lasted seven years. I could barely make an account, and it was closed!

[middus]

Think about it: most Google users did not even use Google Reader. So: no, this does not happen in "real life", just in geek circles.