In a backhanded way, neither do I.

When Google Reader died, it reminded me not to become dependent on other peoples' computers. I had gotten lazy and was attracted to a well done tool, and it dying was a helpful reminder that I'd been suckered, and was lucky it wasn't something more important.

I've been better at not making that mistake since.

It suggests a lack of focus, and gives users a reason to not trust their products. Why should I adopt service n when it's probably going to be shut down in 12-18 months, after the launch of service n+1?

You shouldn't, because you're a member of the early majority, late majority, or laggards, in Crossing the Chasm terms. Innovators and early adopters are more comfortable trying out a startup's offering that might be imperfect or might fail.

Most people are conservative like you. Your sheer numbers are why crossing the chasm is so important for the long-term survival of a new offering.

Quite a pointed you there. Thanks for that.

I love discovering and trying out innovative new products, and have made it a large part of what I do professionally.

However, some offerings I take more seriously than others.

With Google, if it's not search, data or ad related (i.e. the stuff that makes them money), it's generally the case it's not going to be around long-term.

Not really, adopting these apps is usually a modest investment on the users' part.

After a while it starts looking like a bloodbath