I was even blissfully ignorant to the existence of these social features in Google Reader until this moment.
While it's satisfying to blame Google, the killing of Reader always seemed like a natural effect of RSS not being popular than its cause. It's not like there aren't other RSS alternatives. And, of course, social media does a pretty good job--for all its faults--of surfacing those various tidbits with or without RSS.
It seems hard to argue that it would have become more successful, given that its successors are pretty good but they’re small businesses.
1. They're a distraction and
2. It's probably very career limiting to work on them.
Someone at IBM told me years ago that if something wasn't going to be a billion dollar business they weren't interested. And Google walked away years ago from organizing the world's knowledge if advertising wasn't attached.
> In retrospect, it was the least toxic social network. You added your friends, their recommendations bubbled up in the interface, so you saw cool new stuff.
This is just "subscribe to people's blogs". That's still the ideal social media for me.
My friends and I loved Buzz and lamented its loss. We tried Google+, but it couldn't even really do what Buzz could do, and it certainly didn't have any other killer features, so it didn't take.