There are some comments from Publishing 2.0 about RSS and how to fix it.
Personally, I don’t think anything is broken and I’m not a huge tech geek (though I admit I’m more techie than some that I know). When the web really started gainging speed and popularity, we learned new terms and definitions. Who knew what a browser was before they came along? Or HTML? Or links? Or a 404 Error? Or later, blogs and wiki? What about email receipts or forwarding or CC or even BCC?
My point is, people learn when something is useful enough to learn about it. RSS is useful enough, but hasn’t quite tipped over into mainstream yet. I think it’s close and Windows Vista will go a ways to helping. But changing the terminology won’t get us any closer.
I mean, what is a “reader” anyway? What is it reading? Isn’t that someone who likes to read, maybe? We don’t have a word to describe email clients (outside of email clients, which is hardly used by most folks), we just call it email. Why not just call it RSS or Feeds since that’s what they are. The “reader” is more likely to be called what it reads than a reader if it gets adopted just like most people call Outlook “their email” in regular conversation even though Outlook isn’t email, but reads the email.