Comparing Digg Reader and Feedly is pretty much like comparing apples to apples. Feedly offers a few more layout tweaks, but basically they are both pretty much the same thing – at least I thought so until I ended up with a pair of irritated corneas – and found a reason to switch to Digg.
Long story short – I live in Japan, where every spring I find myself bombarded with extremely allergenic pollen. The two species that do the most damage are Japanese cedar and Japanese cypress. The latter is responsible for my current predicament. It started with itchy eyes, and within a couple of days progressed to one of the worst allergy-related eye infections that my ophthalmologist (yes, I spelled it right the first time) had ever seen. I was in danger of losing my sight. Flash forward to ten days, after a battery of medications, my eyes are on the mend, but looking at a computer screen is still a special kind of torture – and Feedly is practically unreadable.
The problem is contrast. The light gray on white might look pretty, but it does not work for damaged eyeballs. Digg, however, does. For the longest time, I was of the opinion that Digg did not offer anything that Feedly didn’t do better – it turns out that it does. Now, my eye issue is only temporary (I hope) but I’m guessing that there is probably a not insignificant number of Internet users for whom this is a day-to-day reality. The inbetweeners, whose vision is not quite so impaired that they need to use a screen reading device, but bad enough that they struggle with poorly defined text. Other than that, there is not really all that much difference between Digg Reader and Feedly.
I do not know if accessibility was important to the designers at Digg, but it definitely has an enormous advantage in that department. Kudos to Digg for getting that part of the equation right. [Image]