Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Ray Ozzie Calls Google Wave "Anti-Web"

kdawson posted more than 5 years ago | from the man-with-the-credentials dept.

Google 256

TropicalCoder writes "Ray Ozzie says that Google Wave is 'anti-Web,' by which he seems to mean that it is too complex for its own good. In the video he complains about its complexity in relation to Microsoft's Live Mesh: 'If you have something, that by its very nature is very complex, with many goals... then you need open source to have many instances of it because nobody will be able to do an independent implementation of it.' That's its weakness to Ozzie, apparently — that this complexity that can only be overcome by open source. While he heaps high praise on the Google team that came up with this, he feels that the advantage of Microsoft's approach is that '...by decomposing things to be simpler, you don't need open source.' The Register's author summarizes it like this: 'In a way, this is classic Microsoft meets what is emerging as classic Google. Microsoft gives you an integrated stack but all the moving parts are anchored on a single company's vision. Google frees you to work out the bits yourself, but you must rely on your own smarts or those of your chosen tools.'"

cancel ×

256 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Watch out for the Jews (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28271317)

The Jews will use this to steal land from every type of nigger they can find.

Just look at how much land and water the Jews have stolen from the sand niggers in Palestine.

You can't trust Jews.

What's this!? (5, Funny)

Cheney (1547621) | more than 5 years ago | (#28271327)

Microsoft praised on the altar of Slashdot!? Blasphemy!

Re:What's this!? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28271365)

Microsoft praised on the altar of Slashdot!? Blasphemy!

I must have missed it... which bit sounded praisey?

Re:What's this!? (2, Informative)

dwiget001 (1073738) | more than 5 years ago | (#28271701)

"...which bit sounded praisey?"

None of it, I distinctly heard him say "paisley".

Snooore (5, Funny)

harryandthehenderson (1559721) | more than 5 years ago | (#28271347)

This just in: Microsoft employee claims that Microsoft tool is the best and their closed-source approach is the only way to go.

Re:Snooore (3, Insightful)

El Lobo (994537) | more than 5 years ago | (#28271491)

Calm down. The editor is our friend kdawson. When he choses to not troll directly he just choses some indirect form of trolling. Like putting out an obvious article of a MS employee praising their own products above the competition. Just to get this same reaction. Kdawson is just at work, doing what he does best: trolling.

Re:Snooore (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28271533)

Yeah, but he also said this:

But "if you have something that by its very nature...is very complex with many roles and the way you configure it...then you need open source to have many instances of it because no one will be able to do an independent implementation of it," Ozzie said.

Re:Snooore (5, Insightful)

stephanruby (542433) | more than 5 years ago | (#28271607)

Talk about being anti-web. The wave google tool is something you can use on the web. The Microsoft tool is something you have to download and then install before you can even start using. The wave google tool can be used with anyone with an email address. And the Microsoft tool can be used only with other people if those other people registered, downloaded, and installed their software. Yeah, I really wonder who's anti-web now.

Re:Snooore (1, Insightful)

DAldredge (2353) | more than 5 years ago | (#28271783)

"Talk about being anti-web. The wave google tool is something you can use on the web. The Microsoft tool is something you have to download and then install before you can even start using." Doesn't that make firefox anti-web?

Re:Snooore (4, Funny)

merreborn (853723) | more than 5 years ago | (#28271855)

Talk about being anti-web. The wave google tool is something you can use on the web. The Microsoft tool is something you have to download and then install before you can even start using.

Doesn't that make firefox anti-web?

Absolutely. Firefox should have been implemented as an activeX plugin.

No, wait. DHTML and javascript. And written to only run in IE6.

Re:Snooore (1)

rudlavibizon (948703) | more than 5 years ago | (#28271883)

Well it came with my Ubuntu install, and so do IE with Windows and Safari with OS X.

Re:Snooore (2, Interesting)

diabolus_in_america (159981) | more than 5 years ago | (#28272205)

I've found Microsoft's Live Mesh to be an idea in search of an application... whereas Google's product seems more the reverse, an application in search of an idea. I prefer the later. But also, I have no idea what Live Mesh is for. I don't know what the thing is supposed to do.

Re:Snooore (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28272277)

Live mesh is supposed to provide an easy cloud-based way to synchronize files between machines, no?

glug (2, Insightful)

Juln (41313) | more than 5 years ago | (#28271353)

Things that people from Microsoft say about both open source and google are often very stupid, and this bit from Mr. Ozzie is no exception.

I have an aversion to video, so unfortunately I cannot comment on the rest.

Ray Ozzie (5, Informative)

Niris (1443675) | more than 5 years ago | (#28271359)

So I was wondering who Ray Ozzie is, and how about that, he's a software architect for Microsoft. Of course he's going to praise Microsoft's software, no? Summery seems a little bias, imo.

Re:Ray Ozzie (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28271609)

Well, at one point Ray was the ceo of Microsoft's nemesis, Iris Associates, but then he sold out and drank the kool-aid.

Re:Ray Ozzie (1)

pembo13 (770295) | more than 5 years ago | (#28271639)

I wouldn't say biased, I'd just say it doesn't make sense.

Re:Ray Ozzie (4, Informative)

nvrrobx (71970) | more than 5 years ago | (#28271791)

You're missing some other details about who Ray Ozzie is - he was the creator of Lotus Notes. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ray_Ozzie [wikipedia.org] He definitely has some bias towards Microsoft though.

Re:Ray Ozzie (4, Informative)

Chyeld (713439) | more than 5 years ago | (#28272079)

He definitely has some bias towards Microsoft though.

and from your link:

On June 15, 2006, Ozzie took over the role of Chief Software Architect from Bill Gates.

A tad more than "some" I would imagine.

Re:Ray Ozzie (5, Funny)

idontgno (624372) | more than 5 years ago | (#28272345)

who Ray Ozzie is - he was the creator of Lotus Notes.

For this crime alone, he should be punished extravagantly. Or at least, regarded with skepticism.

I'm not sayin' Outlook's much better, but still...

signed,
idontgno, current Lotus Notes sufferer^w user

Re:Ray Ozzie (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28271965)

So I was wondering who Ray Ozzie is

I suggest you go read up on Ray Ozzie's contributions to computing. He's more than "a software architect for Microsoft." Here's a starting place: http://tinyurl.com/mgee5r

Re:Ray Ozzie (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28272163)

If you do not know who Ray Ozzie is then please do not comment

*Chief* Software Architect (3, Insightful)

Photo_Nut (676334) | more than 5 years ago | (#28272243)

So I was wondering who Ray Ozzie is, and how about that, he's a software architect for Microsoft.

Ray Ozzie [wikipedia.org] is the Chief Software Architect of Microsoft. He replaced Bill Gates as the person who drives Microsoft's technological decisions.

Live Mesh is Ray's brainchild. Why is it important to listen to what Ray says? Because he directs the future of Microsoft's development in the space. He controls billions of Microsoft dollars. The point is that he's not some random Microsoft shill - he's the guy in charge.

Just posting this article is (1)

ViennaSt (1138481) | more than 5 years ago | (#28271381)

... beyond flamebait. Is it even worth expelling energy towards a rebuttal to this? It would just be preaching to the choir.

How about criticizing it for unoriginality? (2, Funny)

BadAnalogyGuy (945258) | more than 5 years ago | (#28271385)

Wave is a total ripoff of Sharepoint, which is a ripoff of Notes and other collaboration software.

If Ozzie really wanted to criticize Google, he should have gone after their unoriginality. Then again, such a criticism may bite him back.

Re:How about criticizing it for unoriginality? (1)

ka9dgx (72702) | more than 5 years ago | (#28271529)

Really? Wave allows multiple people to edit the same document at the same time, across company lines... AFIK, this is not anywhere on the radar at Microsoft.

Re:How about criticizing it for unoriginality? (1)

dwiget001 (1073738) | more than 5 years ago | (#28271755)

You are correct.

But the sub-system needed to get it on the Microsoft radar is now in the planning stages.

We should see it "Real Soon Now!" (TM)

Re:How about criticizing it for unoriginality? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28271535)

If Ozzie really wanted to criticize Google, he should have gone after their unoriginality. Then again, such a criticism may bite him back.

I doubt Ozzie, or Microsoft, fear being called unoriginal - Ozzie as the originator of both Notes and Sharepoint is unlikely to be afraid of the comparison and while Microsoft obviously are unoriginal, it's hard to see why anyone would care.

However, I'm sure he isn't being paid to encourage people to think of Wave as an alternative to Sharepoint.

No surprises here (1, Informative)

93 Escort Wagon (326346) | more than 5 years ago | (#28271391)

I'm not sure what people would expect Microsoft's Chief Software Architect to say - "Gosh, Google sure has cleaned our clock with this one!"? For that matter, If it were an interview with the lead of Google's Wave team, would you expect them to talk about how Microsoft's approach was superior?

But I do feel compelled to point out that, until very recently, Microsoft's entire "web" approach was very anti-web. So much of what they did amounted to basically reducing the web/internet to a delivery vehicle for Windows-bound software. We ran into this a few years back - our university bought into a Windows-based "e-learning system". Problem was, this "e-learning" amounted to downloading some ActiveX-driven applications onto your desktop. I (and probably others) complained to the powers-that-be about this, and their response amounted to "we realized this after-the fact, and yes we basically got snookered".

Re:No surprises here (2, Funny)

geekoid (135745) | more than 5 years ago | (#28271721)

How about:

"Well I am fully vested and have just cashed out. I must say we suck, I mean we are STILL playing catchup on the web and can't put together a clean OS architecture. In fact, The only was we could improve is if you all went to goggle and we had to really think about what we do to compete.
Well, good night, and Steve? I bolted the chairs down."

Re:No surprises here (1)

CodeBuster (516420) | more than 5 years ago | (#28271933)

their response amounted to "we realized this after-the fact, and yes we basically got snookered"

That is generally what happens when the high-ups in an organization make a software purchase decision based upon some snazzy conference sales presentation made in some tropical resort locale without consulting the IT people (who never get to attend the executive conference at the tropical resort) even after they have returned and (hopefully) before they have signed on the dotted line? Also, has anyone else noticed that these conferences are invariably held in places where the attendees are likely to be in the best possible mood and three sheets to the wind with booze? This is one of the main reasons why I hold a special contempt for sales people who, now more than ever, contribute very little useful or meaningful knowledge to a purchase decision and exist mostly to assist the vendors with the separation of fools and their money.

Google's quantum leap (5, Informative)

ka9dgx (72702) | more than 5 years ago | (#28271393)

The basic problem these days is that you have many people who want to have access to a shared document. The solution that Microsoft was pursuing was good, and attempted to fit the RSS model blogs use to push content. But in the end you still have many copies of documents, and you're always trying to keep changes synced across them. This approach breaks down when you have multiple sources of change... conflict resolution will always jump up to bite you.

Google Wave is a brilliant leapfrog over this problem, at the cost of some complexity. They made engineering choices that so far seem to be very pragmatic and practical... and if you don't like them you could always build your own. They actually distribute the changes to all observers, using OT (Operational Transforms) to keep everything synchronized. As a benefit, you can work on only the changes to a document, instead of having to re-scan the whole thing every time something changes, to attempt to work backwards to figure out the changes.

The ambition of Google's approach is backed up with a brilliant exploration of the solution space, and a very good choice of models, both in terms of the open source approach, in their openness with documentation, etc... and their choice of federation as a first class part of the model.

The latest analogy that I came up with is one of a Jet Engine.... instead of working on one charge of fuel/air at a time (one document)... it operates on a stream of fuel and air.... which allows for higher performance (at the cost of some fuel efficiency).

We don't care as much about the computational cycles as we do all the human time this saves by tracking all the changes, and who made them.

Bravo, Google... you've done it again!

Re:Google's quantum leap (4, Insightful)

AnyoneEB (574727) | more than 5 years ago | (#28271967)

That's not the issue at hand here. The site linked from the summary, Live Mesh (Beta), supports sharing and discussing documents [mesh.com] . It does not do it in real-time, but, realistically, the real-time part of Google Wave's colloborative document editing is not that important.

The real issues are design and openness. I am a bit confused about where Ray Ozzie is coming from: I think he means that the problem with Google Wave is that it is too simple and web-like, not that it is too complex. That is, Google Wave has a lot of potiential, but much of that potiential depends on people writing gadgets/add-ons for it, as opposed to its features being limited to those Google/Microsoft can think up but already layed out in a structured way. The same issue is often referenced as one of the web's greatest strengths -- and weaknesses.

There is another large issue related to openness: privacy. With Google Wave, you can get all of the features running it on your own server, fully controling the software and hardware. Live Mesh is just yet another web service like Dropbox, etc. which depends on Microsoft's Live Mesh servers. Then again, Microsoft may plan on making it part of Windows Server, which gets rid of the privacy issue.

I think the web has shown quite clearly that leaving a protocol open allows for wide-ranged, unexpected innovations to be based on it. Google has shown off some of its ideas on what Wave is useful for. The Wave groups and various blogs have plenty more. Most likely, if Wave actually catches on, at least some of the common/mainstream uses 5 years from now will bare only passing resemblance to the ideas being thrown around today.

Re:Google's quantum leap (1)

CodeBuster (516420) | more than 5 years ago | (#28272007)

But in the end you still have many copies of documents, and you're always trying to keep changes synced across them. This approach breaks down when you have multiple sources of change... conflict resolution will always jump up to bite you.

There are already good solutions to this problem: it is called revision control [wikipedia.org] and the Subversion [tigris.org] system is a high-quality open source solution to most common version control / sharing scenarios. Visual Source Safe wishes that it could be as good as Subversion, but the open source crowd beat them to it.

Re:Google's quantum leap (1)

Enuratique (993250) | more than 5 years ago | (#28272185)

But in the end you still have many copies of documents, and you're always trying to keep changes synced across them. This approach breaks down when you have multiple sources of change... conflict resolution will always jump up to bite you.

There are already good solutions to this problem: it is called revision control [wikipedia.org] and the Subversion [tigris.org] system is a high-quality open source solution to most common version control / sharing scenarios. Visual Source Safe wishes that it could be as good as Subversion, but the open source crowd beat them to it.

And Subversion wishes that it could be as good as Team Foundation System.

Re:Google's quantum leap (1)

shog9 (154858) | more than 5 years ago | (#28272357)

And both wish they were distributed...

Come on, I expected someone to at least mention mercurial or git, which at least have some vague similarities to what Google is proposing.

Re: Revision control (1)

ka9dgx (72702) | more than 5 years ago | (#28272403)

I like SVN... but it's primary objects are specific versions of files, it does not deal with the changes between them as a primary object, but a means to get the primary object. When you have multiple authors, it's important to know who made what changes, and exactly what the changes were... the "Google Wave" approach is different in that each and every change is tracked, and those changes can be merged into bigger change sets if required... but the granularity is much finer and the authorship is always known.

Re:Google's quantum leap (5, Funny)

Tetsujin (103070) | more than 5 years ago | (#28272097)

The latest analogy that I came up with is one of a Jet Engine....

Your upstart "Jet Engine analogies" are putting trustworthy, hard-working American "Car Analogies" out of work!

Re:Google's quantum leap (1)

Chyeld (713439) | more than 5 years ago | (#28272193)

Besides, everyone knows "Jet Engine" [wikipedia.org] is a Microsoft product! This is more like... a steam engine!

Re:Google's quantum leap (3, Insightful)

diegocgteleline.es (653730) | more than 5 years ago | (#28272201)

The solution that Microsoft was pursuing was good, and attempted to fit the RSS model blogs use to push content

I think that FeedSync is great...if you think of it as a "improved RSS/Atom", but nothing more. I mean, using it as synchronization protocol for any kind of data flowing to/from the cloud looks stupid.

And this whole synchronization thing seems to be oriented, in the Microsoft side, to sync data between storage devices and computers. Google however seems want put most of the data in their servers. Just "upload" them one time, and the rest of the time access and share that data with the browser. No need to sync - most of the time. Microsoft is all focused in building a "synchronization protocol" that is not really going to be neccesary if we move all/most of our data to the cloud...

Re:Google's quantum leap (1)

Seraphim_72 (622457) | more than 5 years ago | (#28272241)

The basic problem these days is that you have many people who want to have access to a shared document. The solution that Microsoft was pursuing was good, and attempted to fit the RSS model blogs use to push content. But in the end you still have many copies of documents, and you're always trying to keep changes synced across them. This approach breaks down when you have multiple sources of change... conflict resolution will always jump up to bite you.

Not to be pro Microsoft or anything, but really their current approach is SharePoint, and lots of people are buying into it.

Google Wave is a brilliant leapfrog over this problem, at the cost of some complexity.

And to decouple your top paragraph and instead apply it to my statement about what they are currently pushing; you may well be right, this could be a giant kick to the crotch to SharePoint.

Sera

Talk about complexity! (1)

shog9 (154858) | more than 5 years ago | (#28272369)

Not to be pro Microsoft or anything, but really their current approach is SharePoint, and lots of people are buying into it.

Unfortunately, by Ray Ozzie's new standards Sharepoint is Anti-Web...

Re:Google's quantum leap (1)

Seriousity (1441391) | more than 5 years ago | (#28272455)

Sure, this article is a total astroturf, but your post still sounds like an advertisement ;)

Wait! (1)

whisper_jeff (680366) | more than 5 years ago | (#28271395)

Wait! What?! Microsoft is the simpler choice? Microsoft? Simple? What? Come on! Even people who like Microsoft will never claim that Microsoft is the simpler choice, ever. They may like it, but everyone knows Microsoft is complex... Well, everyone except this guy, it seems...

Re:Wait! (1)

Narnie (1349029) | more than 5 years ago | (#28271571)

Choosing a Microsoft product is the simpler choice when you work for Microsoft.

Re:Wait! (1)

smartr (1035324) | more than 5 years ago | (#28271771)

You don't even need to make a choice! Microsoft has already made all the choices for you. Why bother wasting your time looking at options when you can be a Microsoft Einsteinium partner and have all of your needs met at a competitive rate. Don't know how to compare things? Microsoft has the answers to show you just how competitive you can be using their products.

Re:Wait! (1)

kylben (1008989) | more than 5 years ago | (#28271689)

Sure Microsoft is the simple choice. In the same sense as the simplicity of Winston Smith's television viewing choices.

In other news: (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28271425)

Ford employee says the new BMW M3 is an okay car if all you care about are speed, style, and reliability, but if are cheap and want something to compliment your "awsome mullett" (sic) then a Ford Mustang is really your only choice.

Even a stopped clock can tell the right time (4, Interesting)

pieterh (196118) | more than 5 years ago | (#28271435)

This will become a truism in future times: software is the expression of a social intelligence and the more people are involved, the better that works. FOSS is simply better at solving complex problems (like "how to build an operating system") than closed source development.

Ironically, while Google depends on FOSS for its most innovative attacks on Microsoft (Android, for example, which has leapt over WinCE and Symbian with what appears little effort), Google keeps its most valuable technology (searching) completely closed.

Thus, one can conclude that this is also Google's long term weakness. Microsoft: if you want to beat Google, find a way to develop a completely open search ranking system.

Re:Even a stopped clock can tell the right time (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28271475)

You are a giant douchebag

Re:Even a stopped clock can tell the right time (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28271637)

Sadly, since your analysis was reached by only a single "analysis-developer" and in a "closed-thinking" environment no less - we can never be especially certain of the validity of your judgement.

Now, if you and a whole bunch of friends had sat out in the park and had a loud discussion about whether pieterh was a giant douchebag, allowing anyone passing to stop in and contribute to the debate, then we might be able to have more confidence in your analysis.

Re:Even a stopped clock can tell the right time (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28271725)

Now, if you and a whole bunch of friends had sat out in the park and had a loud discussion

Sat in the park talking??? We have web 3.01 technologies now to mesh on whether someone is a douchebag. YOU are the anti-web.

Re:Even a stopped clock can tell the right time (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28271483)

[whispering into watch microphone] pieterh has identified our weakness, send agents immediately.

Re:Even a stopped clock can tell the right time (2, Insightful)

SomeJoel (1061138) | more than 5 years ago | (#28271507)

Microsoft: if you want to beat Google, find a way to develop a completely open search ranking system.

That would be the craziest day ever. I wonder if it would come on the heels of Rush Limbaugh touting the virtues of President Obama and the RIAA unilaterally dropping all of its pending litigation and issuing a formal apology to those it has sued.

Re:Even a stopped clock can tell the right time (1)

geekoid (135745) | more than 5 years ago | (#28271753)

"FOSS is simply better at solving complex problems "

I think it would be better to state that FOSS is cheaper and solving complex problem.

OS or CS it doesn't matter. All that matters is the quality of effort and time. What OS brings t the table is personal accountability.

Re:Even a stopped clock can tell the right time (0, Flamebait)

malevolentjelly (1057140) | more than 5 years ago | (#28272027)

FOSS is simply better at solving complex problems (like "how to build an operating system") than closed source development.

But it hasn't built an operating system... it created a messy clone of unix.

Can someone name an operating system "Built by Open Source"? Something relevant, please.

Re:Even a stopped clock can tell the right time (1)

tjonnyc999 (1423763) | more than 5 years ago | (#28272147)

Microsoft: if you want to beat Google, find a way to develop a completely open search ranking system.

Most insightful sentence in the discussion so far.

Re:Even a stopped clock can tell the right time (2, Funny)

Chris Burke (6130) | more than 5 years ago | (#28272317)

Microsoft: if you want to beat Google, find a way to develop a completely open search ranking system.

Ballmer: What's that? You need a chair flung at your head? I could have sworn you just said something about "open skull". I'll fucking kill you and your little Google too!

Re:Even a stopped clock can tell the right time (2, Insightful)

FatMacDaddy (878246) | more than 5 years ago | (#28272461)

"Microsoft: if you want to beat Google, find a way to develop a completely open search ranking system."

And this to me is the most delicious irony in this stinky stew. I think MS is perfectly capable of developing such a thing, but they will invariably find a way to shoot themselves in the foot. I remember hearing a while back that searching for Linux with the MS search engine produced thousands of results while searching the same term on Google produced tens of millions of hits.
 
Once you've demonstrated that you are willing to sacrifice results and accuracy for market share, it's hard to earn back that trust. MS has stepped into this mess over and over and doesn't seem to learn from their mistake.
 
So yeah, I agree. MS just has to build a superior product to succeed. Too bad that seems to be the path less taken.

Notes (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28271443)

The bloke responsible for Lotus Notes says something from Google is too complicated? Who's his writer - Randy Newman?

Another notable Ray Ozzie quote (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28271469)

Shhaaaaaaron!

Re:Another notable Ray Ozzie quote (1)

Culture20 (968837) | more than 5 years ago | (#28272389)

'Ih you av umfing, at i is ver naure ih ver ompleh, wi any goal... en you nee oen oure oo ave any in stan ces of ih becau nobohy ill be able oo do an unpendnd imprendrenshun of ih.'

Hi, Kettle? It's me, black! (4, Interesting)

wandazulu (265281) | more than 5 years ago | (#28271487)

As the guy who designed Lotus Notes, Ray Ozzie has no credit with me about complaining about complexity. What is Lotus Notes? Is it a database? Email system? Application development platform? How about all that and more! A good friend of mine was a Lotus Notes developer back in the day said "Lotus Notes is everything you want and need from now to the end of time, and it's all available to you right now."

That is not the hallmark of simplicity.

Re:Hi, Kettle? It's me, black! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28271711)

And if you ever had to use Lotus Notes, you know that while it may do everything, it does nothing well. The company I work for uses it for time sheets, I found it a large pain in the ass but it does have the benefit of not having to rely on some idiot with a single digit IQ checking my addition.

Re:Hi, Kettle? It's me, black! (1)

YMgod (127824) | more than 5 years ago | (#28271851)

Agreed, this guy has no credibility when it comes to software design. The bastardized POS that is Notes should die a horrible flaming death before I take anything he says seriously.

I watched the entire Wave presentation and I am awestruck at the concurrent editing and synch capabilities. It can't come fast enough.

Re:Hi, Kettle? It's me, black! (1)

RidiculousPie (774439) | more than 5 years ago | (#28271975)

"Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machinegun. It is the finest available" Wernstrom, Futurama. The wisdom of Futurama never ceases to amaze

Re:Hi, Kettle? It's me, black! (5, Informative)

diegocgteleline.es (653730) | more than 5 years ago | (#28272119)

That is not the hallmark of simplicity.

Let me quote what Joel On Software wrote [joelonsoftware.com] about Ozzie and all this "Mesh" thing:

And now Ray Ozzie's big achievement arrives and what is it? (drumroll...) Microsoft Live Mesh. The future of everything. Microsoft is "moving into the cloud."

What's Microsoft Live Mesh?

Hmm, let's see.

"Imagine all your devices--PCs, and soon Macs and mobile phones--working together to give you anywhere access to the information you care about."

Wait a minute. Something smells fishy here. Isn't that exactly what Hailstorm was supposed to be? I smell an architecture astronaut.

And what is this Windows Live Mesh?

It's a way to synchronize files.

Jeez, we've had that forever. When did the first sync web sites start coming out? 1999? There were a million versions. xdrive, mydrive, idrive, youdrive, wealldrive for ice cream. Nobody cared then and nobody cares now, because synchronizing files is just not a killer application. I'm sorry. It seems like it should be. But it's not.

But Windows Live Mesh is not just a way to synchronize files. That's just the sample app. It's a whole goddamned architecture, with an API and developer tools and in insane diagram showing all the nifty layers of acronyms, and it seems like the chief astronauts at Microsoft literally expect this to be their gigantic platform in the sky which will take over when Windows becomes irrelevant on the desktop. And synchronizing files is supposed to be, like, the equivalent of Microsoft Write on Windows 1.0.

It's Groove, rewritten from scratch, one more time. Ray Ozzie just can't stop rewriting this damn app, again and again and again, and taking 5-7 years each time.

And the fact that customers never asked for this feature and none of the earlier versions really took off as huge platforms doesn't stop him.

Re:Hi, Kettle? It's me, black! (3, Interesting)

Belial6 (794905) | more than 5 years ago | (#28272179)

It is a Database centric application development platform. You don't say that it is hard to understand what an OS is if it comes with an email application, or a web browser do you? Lotus Notes/Domino is EXTREMELY simple to develop on and use. It's biggest problem is that because it is and has been an Enterprise environment first all of the features that it pioneered got renamed and the look changed a little when competitors finally got around to trying to implement what Notes had been doing for years. Since the competitors were desktop apps, most people got their first taste of these features with MS or their like, and assumed that Notes was 'non-standard'.

The other problem Notes has is that it is so simple that companies frequently assign the first user to touch it as a developer. I'm not saying that it is impossible that the Kelly Girl Temp that is in your office this week is a great developer. I'm just say that on average, the code they tend not to be. So, a lot of companies have bad apps written by people who simply are not developers.

Oh noes!! (1)

y5 (993724) | more than 5 years ago | (#28271501)

I think we're missing the point. This isn't about Google or Microsoft, or even Wave. This is about some guy trying to achieve Jesse James Garrett status by coining an even more annoying buzzword than Web 2.0. Don't let it happen!!

Why can't we just stick with "...considered harmful" and move on, Ozzie? Please??

Makes sense (1)

slashdotlurker (1113853) | more than 5 years ago | (#28271523)

In Microsoftian terms, open source is evil. And Google has to resort to that "evil" to keep itself going.

Re:Makes sense (2, Insightful)

MozeeToby (1163751) | more than 5 years ago | (#28271895)

He's right as far as he goes, it's just that he doesn't go far enough. Google tends to open up their APIs and say to the developer world "Go play with this", Microsoft chooses not to take that risk (and yeah, it is a risk) and keeps a tighter lid on their software. It is absolutely true that this gives Microsoft more control over their brand image and software.

Where he stops short, however, is not looking at the final results. He just doesn't get that open source and open APIs work. Letting the developer world play with your product produces dozens of ideas that would never have occurred to the people who created it in the first place. That's what Microsoft has never understood.

What is this about Google Wave? (1)

Britz (170620) | more than 5 years ago | (#28271527)

I saw the video. Why is this better than a good php web forum software with some Web 2.0 (e.g. JavaScript interactivity) thrown on top? Email will always keep the bulk of messages. And if we were to use chat in a more serious manner, we would get the same result.

What I saw in Google Wave could be implemented using email,p2p chat or forum software.

I suppose I am just not smart enough to see how ingenious Google was with Wave. But what if more than 80% of the users out there are the same? (I am not saying that I am in the top 20% smart people, I am just smart with computers).

Re:What is this about Google Wave? (4, Informative)

ka9dgx (72702) | more than 5 years ago | (#28271587)

This allows you to share a document and make multiple simultaneous changes, providing a structure to do so all the way up and down... this framework gives you a standard way to do things, that can then be expanded upon in a whole new set of ways.

Yes... this stuff could be done in a web forum... just like you could program everything in assembler... but it's more efficient in many ways to spend a little CPU time to make up for hours of developer time.

This framework will allow others to reach much, much farther and do things you can't even imagine doing via php/javascript.

Re:What is this about Google Wave? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28271793)

But dude, this is all INTEGRATED!
INTEGRATED MANNN.

This takes all the things you mentioned, and integrated it into one easy-to-use package that anyone can setup.
Yes, you could easily go create it yourself, if you knew how to.
There are a few sites around that do similar things to this, but fairly small. (last time i used one, the site died...)
Nobody is really saying this IS the best, but generally, since it allows all the functionality of the things you mentioned, viewing the entire history, simple setup, collab on a level rarely seen in web apps... well that sounds pretty damn awesome to me.

I have been waiting for this for a long time.
Gmail was fantastic, this is Gmail on steroids running at the speed of light on the event horizon of a blackhole!

Re:What is this about Google Wave? (3, Informative)

Joseph Lam (61951) | more than 5 years ago | (#28272233)

If you just want to run a standalone web forum, then Google Wave may not offer much more than a ajax php forum. And if you just want email, then SMTP+IMAP/POP is surely good enough.

The power of Google Wave comes from the unification of various communication and collaboration paradigms, it's federated nature, it's extensibility and it's open-standard and web-centric approach. In the old model if I want to participate in a forum I'll have to register on the web, go back to my outlook to get the verification email, and then go back to web. I'll also have to subscribe to email alerts for new posts, then go back to the web to reply. All these context switching is totally unnecessary and can be frustrating when you have say 10 different web forums, 5 social networks, 3 photo sharing sites, and 2 IM networks and 1 blog. And there is no practical way to for me to search and browse through my entire communication history in one place.

Re:What is this about Google Wave? (3, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28272257)

Yes, Google Wave does not immediately offer any new features, but it does simplify many of those things. It is actually very similar to e-mail as it is a decentralized system for storing and transmitting data, except it is designed to be real-time, support threading/discussions easily, and embed various types of applications and rich data easily. This essientially raises an e-mail/IM medium such that it can be used instead of web for simple uses. IM is not suitable because, unlike e-mail and Wave, it does not persist on the server -- and I think the interesting applications of Wave rely on the persistance, not real-time communication.

Consider that currently services like Flickr/Picasa are often used to e-mail photos to people because e-mail/IM as it is currently implemented is practically unuseable for that application. In Wave, you could just put the photos into a wave, include an AJAXy photo gallery gadget to make it pretty, and invite whoever you wanted to see it -- and they could easily comment on the photos, etc. A blog is even easier as it is just text.

As the actual "application" there is part of the message, the server only has to be a normal Wave server, running no special software itself. Therefore, this makes it far easier to publish information on the internet without relying on a specific party to host the data/application for you.

captcha: detach (from overly-centralized web-based systems)

Quel Suprise. (4, Funny)

senorpoco (1396603) | more than 5 years ago | (#28271583)

In other News, Bill Gates and Steve Ballmer issued a joint statement saying "in their independent opinion as leading figures in the software industry, Live Mesh kicks Wave's ass."

Come on... (1)

NervousNerd (1190935) | more than 5 years ago | (#28271593)

They're just angry that Bing sucks. Bing, the decision engine that's gonna finally FUCKING KILL GOOGLE, or maybe not.

Re:Come on... (2, Funny)

kylben (1008989) | more than 5 years ago | (#28271961)

But It's Not Google

Just because its not based on HTTP? (1)

ickleberry (864871) | more than 5 years ago | (#28271657)

Well I see that as a good thing, all too many things these days are thrown on top of HTTP just because its convenient and the web 2.0 devs don't know anything else.

Since this project has the ambitious aim of taking over email I think they should start from scratch with their own protocol, rather than extending XMPP or piggybacking on HTTP, maybe a custom text based protocol with binary on the side for transferring files and the like. Sending stuff in base64 is one of the faults of email and XMPP currently and I think they should make these things as bandwidth efficient as reasonably possible.

What's also missing from Wave is a unified client-server protocol. They want to use HTTP for everything but web-based systems like this are inherently slow and inefficient and force a certain interface on the user. A client-server protocol would be much better

client protocol will happen, eventualy (2, Informative)

gd2shoe (747932) | more than 5 years ago | (#28272399)

When Gmail first launched, they did not support POP3 or IMAP. (no other web provider did either, for that matter) Today, they do.

Because this will be an open protocol (GWFP on XMPP), somebody will eventually develop a client protocol, or (preferably) extend the federated protocol to the client level. If it's any good, Google will eventually implement it. Right now, Google is stuck on Web 2.0 and HTML 5. (and cloud computing?) I think they can be broken free from that, it just takes some presure on a case-by-case basis.

Err.. isn't he correct? (1)

wall0159 (881759) | more than 5 years ago | (#28271695)

Isn't the fantastic thing about Wave that it _is_ anti-web? I mean, it is distributed and decentralised, which is the antithesis of what the WWW is about.

IMO, moving to such a decentralised internet is critical to the future of the web, which is why I think projects like this and OneSwarm, etc, are so important.

Re:Err.. isn't he correct? (1)

wall0159 (881759) | more than 5 years ago | (#28271719)

"moving to such a decentralised internet is critical to the future of the web, "

Damn it - I can't even get the bloody jargon right.
Critical to the future of the internet - the Internet! :-)

Re:Err.. isn't he correct? (2, Interesting)

gd2shoe (747932) | more than 5 years ago | (#28272493)

I mean, it is distributed and decentralised, which is the antithesis of what the WWW is about.

What planet did you grow up on? The "World Wide Web" is comprised of a decentralized, distributed (worldwide) set of computers running web servers owned and controlled by myriad companies and individuals (more specifically, the web pages and hyperlinks). You seem to understand that there is a difference between the World Wide Web and the Internet, but cannot grasp that the "www" part of the equation is thoroughly distributed and decentralized?

Open protocol isn't the same thing as open source (4, Informative)

DynamiteNeon (623949) | more than 5 years ago | (#28271875)

Where in Google's presentation did they say that implementations had to all be open source? They simply said they'd supply some of their own code and the documentation for the protocols to allow other people to implement their solutions. They never said all the other people had to open source their versions.

Idle invasion (1)

gmuslera (3436) | more than 5 years ago | (#28271897)

Moderators should stop posting funny idle.slashdot videos in main site. Whats next, lolcats?

Re:Idle invasion (0, Redundant)

Tetsujin (103070) | more than 5 years ago | (#28272173)

Moderators should stop posting funny idle.slashdot videos in main site. Whats next, lolcats?

..^^
= oo =

I can haz mod pointz?

It's no good unless you pay for it. (1)

kylben (1008989) | more than 5 years ago | (#28271915)

by decomposing things to be simpler, you don't need open source.

Let's see.... you could meet a beautiful girl and fall madly in love and have sex for free for the rest of your life...

Or... you could meet Ray the Pimp and pay $50 bucks for a night with his "best" girl, Grizelda. She even has most of her teeth!

And then you find out at the last minute that she'll sell you condoms for $200 each. No, the one in your wallet is not "compatible".

Re:It's no good unless you pay for it. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28272083)

Let's see.... you could meet a beautiful girl and fall madly in love and have sex for free for the rest of your life...

Losing half your income doesn't count as free.

isn't ozzie still on double-secret probation? (4, Insightful)

wardk (3037) | more than 5 years ago | (#28271923)

Lotus Notes = Ray Ozzie

if this man is speaking, I am not listening

Ozzie advocating simplicity? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28271951)

My god, this guy is the king of complexity. Maybe he's learned something after all these years, if his PR drivel is to be believed.

Notes was a steaming pile. Sure, it did get a lot of things done for a lot of people. But, it did so in a completely proprietary way, at a time when you could have seen that there were potentially simpler ways to do these things.

And I didn't think he had learned much from this experience when he designed Groove.

I'm glad he's finally come around.

Mesh vs Wave? (1)

Toreo asesino (951231) | more than 5 years ago | (#28271985)

Are they even similar? Mesh is a tool for sharing files across multiple machines.....Wave is a tool for communication and collaboration?

For the record, Mesh is a damned fine service; I use it to backup all my critical data over all my machines as well as for it's remote desktop to any of the meshed machines.

The Register (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#28271989)

The Register is a Rag British Tabloid for IT failures.

by taking wave so seriously (5, Interesting)

circletimessquare (444983) | more than 5 years ago | (#28272121)

ray ozzie tells the world that we should take wave seriously

if ray ozzie had ignored wave, then he would have implicitly communicated it would be safe for everyone else to ignore wave

by throwing a hissy fit over wave, ray ozzie is telling all of us that wave has real potential

google should cut ray ozzie a check for the free PR and advertising

when will people learn that there is no such thing as bad press? all exposure, positive or negative, is good exposure. that's why attempts at censorship often backfire (see: streisand effect)

Show of hands (0, Troll)

Vitriolix (660279) | more than 5 years ago | (#28272223)

Show of hands, who the fuck cares what Ray Ozzie thinks?

The current web is too complex (3, Insightful)

Ukab the Great (87152) | more than 5 years ago | (#28272285)

An ajax web app that tries to ape a simple desktop app is built with:

HTTP
HTML
CSS
XML
SQL
JavaScript
PHP/Python/Ruby/other scripting language

That's 7 different text-based (aka "simple") languages/syntaxes a developer has to learn just to be able just to get the same basic functionality as a simple desktop application. The current system as it is isn't simple.

Re:The current web is too complex (1)

Shoe Puppet (1557239) | more than 5 years ago | (#28272489)

Do you realy need to know HTTP to use it as a developer? I'd think the web server handles all that, you don't need to know TCP/IP either.

I know it's not the done thing... (2, Interesting)

Shemmie (909181) | more than 5 years ago | (#28272299)

I was showing a Linux user Live Mesh today - and I've got to say it's shaping up to be a really impressive 'something'. Not quite sure what it is, but it's impressive. 5 gig syncing across my desktop PC, laptop, home server, work PC, and mobile phone. So it's a cloud storage thingy, I hear you cry. Ah ha, but it also has built-in remote desktop. And you can invite other people to have access to your remotely shared files.

So... it's syncing cloud storage, and a remote control system thrown in. Maybe I don't get its place in the Universe, but there's no denying the technology works well.

This is me commenting on the technology I know about - not used Wave, but it read as a heck of a technology, on paper. I'd be very interested to get my hands on it.

Slashdot calls Ray Ozzie a tool (1)

kindbud (90044) | more than 5 years ago | (#28272331)

Next story!

Complex or Complicated? (1)

Stefanwulf (1032430) | more than 5 years ago | (#28272457)

It seems like what he is saying is more that it is too complicated, rather than too complex. Complexity [wikipedia.org] - in terms of many interacting agents, the difficulty of predicting emergent behaviors, and the ability to spontaneously form new structures - seems to be the key feature that made the web successful.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>