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!

Google Wave Out of Beta

CmdrTaco posted more than 4 years ago | from the still-a-bit-slow dept.

Google 255

googlePLEXS writes "Google Wave is open to all users at wave.google.com, as a Google Labs product — no invitation needed. Google Apps administrators will also have the option to add Wave as a Labs feature for their domains, helping groups of people communicate and work together more productively." If you haven't played with it, it's worth your time just to try to think beyond the bounds of IRC/Email. It's not going to change your work flow, but I still think it's worth a bit of your time to see it.

cancel ×

255 comments

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

Yay? (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32639618)

Now more people than ever before can not use Wave.

Re:Yay? (1)

pdboddy (620164) | more than 4 years ago | (#32639628)

Haha, think Wave will get Slashdotted?

Re:Yay? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32639744)

no, it's just the CueCat of social networking

Re:Yay? (2)

berwiki (989827) | more than 4 years ago | (#32640326)

Google Wave might be the biggest *Techno Bust* I can think of in a long time.

It had a mountain of hype surrounding it, yet is less effective than a multiple person Chat Room, and 15 times as laggy/chunky/choppy.

Re:Yay? (2)

ronsr (1653189) | more than 4 years ago | (#32640476)

It had a mountain of hype surrounding it, yet is less effective than a multiple person Chat Room, and 15 times as laggy/chunky/choppy.

Oh come on, Wave is much more than that! The advantage is that you can spend all your time deleting what other people have written and replacing it with "I'm gay!" or other such witticisms.

At least that's all I've seen it used for. Luckily as you noted, Google have a built in feature which will stem the flow, as participants have to dedicate more and more RAM to their browser just to open the wave.

Re:Yay? (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32640606)

Yea but it's a Google product, so stop hating and get with the program, bitch.

Re:Yay? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32640664)

you are the bitch, AC

Heh... (1)

pdboddy (620164) | more than 4 years ago | (#32639620)

Probably the fastest a Google product has ever gotten out of beta. :) It's definitely worth a look though!

Re:Heh... (4, Insightful)

tarscher (1000260) | more than 4 years ago | (#32639706)

Google Chrome came out of beta in just 3 months

Re:Heh... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32639936)

Chromium has perhaps the fastest development pace of any open project I've seen. It's unreal. Anyone know just how many employees Google has working on it?

Dupe? (4, Informative)

icebraining (1313345) | more than 4 years ago | (#32639626)

Re:Dupe? (5, Funny)

hedwards (940851) | more than 4 years ago | (#32639656)

Nope, that's just a glitch in the Matrix. It happens whenever they change something.

Re:Dupe? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32639990)

1. Open to all
2. Coming out of Beta

Different things.

Re:Dupe? (1)

Lunix Nutcase (1092239) | more than 4 years ago | (#32640110)

Except that the summary links to the same press release from May 19th as the article the GP posted. And the press release states nothing about coming out of beta.

Re:Dupe? (2, Insightful)

AnswerIs42 (622520) | more than 4 years ago | (#32640508)

Well, it did not work the first time to get people to use Wave... so maybe submitting the "story" (or is it advertising now?) again will get people to use it... doubt it.

How old is this news? (3, Interesting)

neiltrodden (981196) | more than 4 years ago | (#32639642)

It's been out of beta for over a month as the DATED press release states!

Great! (5, Funny)

pknoll (215959) | more than 4 years ago | (#32639670)

Now everyone can try to figure out what the hell it's for.

Re:Great! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32639732)

Secret government databases.

Re:Great! (1)

MrNaz (730548) | more than 4 years ago | (#32640644)

Doesn't Facebook already do that pretty well?

Re:Great! (5, Interesting)

thenextpresident (559469) | more than 4 years ago | (#32639750)

It's actually not difficult to see what it can be used with. Basically, anything you type can be a wave. Any content you create can be a wave. The problem is people see Google Wave as the product. Google Wave is just the interface. Gmail would be useless if Email wasn't as widely used as it is. The Wave protocol exists for a reason.

These comments here could all be waves. Facebook could be based on waves. Forums as well. You would still use the same interfaces as you do now, but you'd have the added benefit of a standard API to access that information, the way email works today.

Google Wave is Thunderbird. Wave is Email.

Re:Great! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32639814)

Just because it can be, doesn't mean it should be.

Re:Great! (3, Insightful)

xtracto (837672) | more than 4 years ago | (#32639964)

Moreover, just because it can be, it does not mean it actually IS.

Wake me up when someone has built an interesting application/solution using the Wave platform.

So far I see a bunch of applications that are nothing more than gimmicks.

Re:Great! (2, Interesting)

LordLimecat (1103839) | more than 4 years ago | (#32640738)

Reading your comment, I had a sudden vision of someone saying the same thing about email-- "wake me up when someone can build an interesting application using the email platform".

It doesnt have to be "interesting" to be phenomenally better or useful.

So why should I care? (1)

betterunixthanunix (980855) | more than 4 years ago | (#32639872)

I can already send any data through email, so what exactly makes Wave worth my time?

Re:So why should I care? (5, Insightful)

MosX (773406) | more than 4 years ago | (#32639958)

I can already send data through the US Postal Service, so what exactly makes email worth my time?

Sometimes we do send data like that (3, Funny)

betterunixthanunix (980855) | more than 4 years ago | (#32640158)

Never underestimate the bandwidth of an envelope full of DVDs.

Re:Sometimes we do send data like that (2, Funny)

Jazz-Masta (240659) | more than 4 years ago | (#32640260)

Or Pigeons with SD cards on their legs.

Re:Sometimes we do send data like that (2, Informative)

BrettJB (64947) | more than 4 years ago | (#32640602)

I'm not sure if you were trolling or being serious (haven't had my morning caffeine infusion yet), but here's a real-world example of pigeon-net doing exactly what you describe:

http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_6209735 [denverpost.com]

Or... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32640434)

...the bandwidth of a fully loaded 1968 Chevrolet Caprice Station Wagon

Re:Or... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32640538)

or the bandwidth of my 1988 Buick driving down the highway at 40 mp/h.

Re:Or... (1)

Ambvai (1106941) | more than 4 years ago | (#32640610)

Or pigeons with envelopes full of DVDs on their legs in a fully loaded 1968 Chevy Caprice?

why you might care (3, Interesting)

jDeepbeep (913892) | more than 4 years ago | (#32639986)

I can already send any data through email, so what exactly makes Wave worth my time?

Real-time collaboration.

Re:why you might care (2, Interesting)

jimicus (737525) | more than 4 years ago | (#32640304)

But what you wind up with is something that looks like an interactive chat session - you can put together ideas that way but there's no structure to the end result.

If you're collaborating on something that, say, will eventually become a document, it's next to useless because you still need to re-write the fruits of your labour into that document. With a Wiki, that's a non-issue because you're working towards the final version.

More useful would be real-time collaboration integrated with Google Sites and Google Docs.

extensions? (2, Insightful)

jDeepbeep (913892) | more than 4 years ago | (#32640424)

But what you wind up with is something that looks like an interactive chat session - you can put together ideas that way but there's no structure to the end result

Isn't that where extensions would come in? I'd prefer that Wave itself not define what an end product would be and impose that on me.

Re:So why should I care? (1)

Lumpy (12016) | more than 4 years ago | (#32640014)

people can watch you type the email.

Re:So why should I care? (1)

PerfectionLost (1004287) | more than 4 years ago | (#32640252)

lol. So people like me who need to put the 5 minute delay on their email to stop them from sending stupid emails are best off skipping this all together.

Re:So why should I care? (2, Funny)

Dishevel (1105119) | more than 4 years ago | (#32640342)

I would think that you are better off skipping a lot of things.

Re:So why should I care? (3, Informative)

Ephemeriis (315124) | more than 4 years ago | (#32640190)

I can already send any data through email, so what exactly makes Wave worth my time?

Real-time collaboration.

Wave isn't intended to have you compose a message and send it off. And then somebody else reads the message later and replies to you. It isn't intended for a thread-like conversation.

The idea is to have multiple people contributing to a discussion more-or-less simultaneously.

Kind of like if you were to cross email with AIM, Microsoft Word, and WebEx.

Re:So why should I care? (1)

LordLimecat (1103839) | more than 4 years ago | (#32640442)

Because you can post to whatever forums you want, whatever slashdot articles you want, and if they are set up as waves, you will be automatically subscribed to those waves and can view them all from a single inbox. Additionally, email is to wave as txt is to html. You can "do the same things" with both, in only the weakest sense-- Wave is far more capable and (as I understand it) should eliminate a great portion of the anonymous spam that we see now were it to replace email.

Re:Great! (2, Informative)

OverlordQ (264228) | more than 4 years ago | (#32639938)

It's actually not difficult to see what it can be used with. Basically, anything you type can be a wave. Any content you create can be a wave. The problem is people see Google Wave as the product.

No, most people see it as a solution in search of a problem.

Re:Great! (1)

Xest (935314) | more than 4 years ago | (#32639984)

I'm still a little lost, perhaps it's one of those things that isn't obvious until you've used it. But what advantage does creating content as a Wave have over just creating it normally? If it's just a protocol for information interchange that wraps around content which is what it sounds like from your description, then what was wrong with XML, or is it literally just a pre-defined XML schema for content?

Or I suppose to put it another way, what does it let us do that we couldn't do just as well already?

Re:Great! (1)

icebraining (1313345) | more than 4 years ago | (#32640070)

It's a realtime protocol, not simply a document format. For example, the federated protocol uses XMPP.

Re:Great! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32640264)

Yes. And one of the things i realized after trying wave is that the web doesn't really need realtime editing for most of the use cases.

Re:Great! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32640132)

Or I suppose to put it another way, what does it let us do that we couldn't do just as well already?

Mass scale collaboration:

Example, this is how we do code today you type it you submit it and you retrieve things done by others. Wave does this but on a much more practical level, where each edit is ONLINE all the time. So you can see where what somebody is typing. Making it easy for you to fix their mistakes while they are there. like saying hey did you spot this bug?

Hardly anybody outside programming does this regularly. Wave wraps this one up.

Second let us say you have a massive array of data that needed sorting, put it in wave and if you have enough participants it starts to magically solve itself in pieces before your eyes because its self organizing

Its a bit gimmicky on top yes. But it actually does work fairly well much better than mail.

its legally not so good tough :)

Re:Great! (1)

mikes.song (830361) | more than 4 years ago | (#32640804)

It's awful for general conversion, but it's great for working together with others.

Basically, it's a real time wiki, without the stupid name. What are wiki's good for creating? Well, documents and articles. Wave is good, perhaps better, for the same thing.

Re:Great! (1)

solanum (80810) | more than 4 years ago | (#32639994)

Am I the only one that is none the wiser for that post? What is a 'wave' supposed to be or do? Can someone explain in plain English what the purpose of Google Wave is?

Re:Great! (1)

tpholland (968736) | more than 4 years ago | (#32640232)

Sure: Wave is a new paradigm that disrupts preconceptions about how users can be empowered to create collaborative social content in real time, and it's situated at the convergence of several key web 2.0 technologies.

Re:Great! (4, Funny)

Macrat (638047) | more than 4 years ago | (#32640556)

Can someone explain in plain English what the purpose of Google Wave is?

No.

Re:Great! (5, Informative)

LordLimecat (1103839) | more than 4 years ago | (#32640696)

Several points.
  1. It seems (so far as I can see) to be a direct replacement for email if it gains enough adoption. All data is encypted, and (as i understand it) all senders are verified, so spam and eavesdropping problems are pretty neatly dealt with. It extends the functionality quite a bit too, allowing for native video, widgets, etc.
  2. It simplifies multi-person communication vs what you get with email-- currently adding a new person to a chain of emails is rather clunky: you have to forward the chain to them, and then hope that they correctly reply-all, otherwise the whole chain is messed up and if you need to add another person, he misses chunks.
    With wave, just click the "add another person" button, and they can see the entire conversation-- unless you want to keep certain parts private (which is easy to do)
  3. It consolidates messaging on the internet. Currently, you go to JoeSchmoes blog, 2 forums, and slashdot, and leave posts at each. In order to check your replies, you need to visit each site and dig around to find your post.
    With wave, the blog comments could be a wave, the forum threads each could be waves, and the slashdot comments be waves. You reply, and your inbox now reflects the subscriptions to each. You could reply from your inbox, while others reply from slashdot or the blog-- but its all one messaging system, which means that doing it mobile is now a lot easier as well (you just need a mobile wave client).

Point 3 is especially big. Its kind of hard to see the benefit until youve actually tinkered with it and seen what it can do. For example I created a blogspot account, set up a test blog, and embedded a wave with an embedded sudoku board, and added the "everyone" member. Within seconds, on my blog, i had about 3-4 people playing sudoku and leaving comments-- in real time and with no refresh. I could later check my wave inbox and see any changes that had been made.

THAT is a big leap forward IMO-- if we can have a better messaging system with unified contacts and a unified interface, thats huge. All of a sudden we dont rely on 30 different websites producing an interface suitable to a 5 inch screen; we can just look for a suitable mobile client.

Re:Great! (1)

morgan_greywolf (835522) | more than 4 years ago | (#32640046)

Ermmm...kind of.

Wave is kind of a mashup between wikis, e-mail, and IRC and IM. Think of it as digital whiteboarding with chat and messages. I see it as a great tool for brainstorming. I think it would work well for an online classroom environment as well.

I love wave (5, Interesting)

Gnaythan1 (214245) | more than 4 years ago | (#32640330)

last week my wife made a schedule for potluck plans, in a wave.

bulleted list of items, detailed dates and times, some friendly ribbing about doing the dishes, and a lot of things involving many other people.

she included me in the wave, but no one else at first.

some side bar sort of things got added, I sent some funny pics, we added a little "will you attend" applet, deleted the whole dishes thread, added the potluck menu items, and went back and corrected my spelling.

she looked over that, made a few more changes while I was watching this time, then added several other people to the wave.

they then looked at it... MORE side bar conversations happened,the potluck items started including pictures and diet information, and we got a rundown of who was coming.

an hour before the potluck, one person changed his rsvp, and several more people wanted to come, we added them to the wave, they saw the entire thread of events, and picked up complementary things from the store on the way over. we threw in a map. and used a sketching tool to draw on it.

I love wave.

the coolest thing about this is how seemless that all was. My mother in law, and several non-techy neighbors were able to puzzle out the entire thing and add to it with very little problem.

on a completely unrelated series of waves, I'm having political debates, discussing singularity related web-finds and running a hell of a mage game.

Re:Great! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32640280)

The reason email is so popular is because it's not centralized. Everyone can communicate, with everyone. Wave seems to try to replace email, but can't. When 1 in 5 of your contacts have a Google account, it's fucking useless for personal use.

Shit, for every-day common people, it's even worse. They still use Hotmail, Yahoo, AOL, and etc. For them, it's more like 1 in 20. One thing I've noticed is that only technologically literate people have Google/Gmail accounts.

Re:Great! (2, Interesting)

Tom (822) | more than 4 years ago | (#32640414)

Yes, if only now someone who understands something about good interfaces came out with a Wave client, I'd be happy.

I love the concept behind Wave. But Google Wave is a close-to-unusable mess. And yes, I've tried pretty hard to use it, with several different groups of people.

Re:Great! (1)

Yvanhoe (564877) | more than 4 years ago | (#32640540)

Well, the interface sucks and this jeopardize the spread of Wave as a protocol. That is sad because the idea is certainly worthwhile.

Re:Great! (1)

xtracto (837672) | more than 4 years ago | (#32639956)

Deffinitely. I opened an account back (about one month ago) when it was news that wave had come out of beta.

I had a look at it and even played with it trying to setup a meeting for an actual project I am working on. Unfortunately I decided not to go with it due to the awkward interface.

Right now we do our conferences using skype or Flash Meeting. I have also used DimDim for when you fancy doing a presentation or having video feed of everyone else (DimDim is just OK albeit a bit slow).

In Wave I found it to cumbersome to prepare a meeting, specially aimed to scientists who do not have time to be tinkering with the darn technology. We usually work with one-click solutions (doodle, DimDim direct link, etc).

IMHO Google has already fire two of their bullets and missed great deal with Buzz and Wave. Nobody really cares about these two technologies because there are already other easier and more familiar ways to do the same.

Re:Great! (1)

nmg196 (184961) | more than 4 years ago | (#32639972)

It's exactly the same as Facebook, except it doesn't have any of your contacts on it.

Re:Great! (1)

PerfectionLost (1004287) | more than 4 years ago | (#32640138)

No, I think it has your gmail contacts on it.

Re:Great! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32640488)

And all the contacts from your Android phone, including SIM card....

I would assume it also includes Youtube contacts, and any other services that Google manages.

Re:Great! (1)

Dishevel (1105119) | more than 4 years ago | (#32640296)

Good. I have gotten tired of trying to find a use for it all by my self. Much harder to figure out alone than sex.

Re:Great! (1)

tpholland (968736) | more than 4 years ago | (#32640352)

You can be as arch as you like, but until this "Slashdot" thing allows me to respond to your comment by inserting an interactive Sudoku, I'm sticking with Wave, thank you very much.

Re:Great! (1)

unwesen (241906) | more than 4 years ago | (#32640788)

Hey, I had tons of invites, perhaps we could've done that before... but nobody asked for them for some reason.

Too late (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32639680)

Too late, Google. The hype is over.

You should have made GoogleWave open since the beginning.

Re:Too late (1)

Lunix Nutcase (1092239) | more than 4 years ago | (#32639788)

Google Wave has been open since May 19th going by the date in the press release linked in the summary.

No email integration (1)

slasho81 (455509) | more than 4 years ago | (#32639700)

No email integration == no future for wave.

Re:No email integration (2, Insightful)

icebraining (1313345) | more than 4 years ago | (#32639904)

The Wave is a federated protocol. You could easily write an email gateway.

But Google themselves should do it, I agree.

Re:No email integration (2, Insightful)

slasho81 (455509) | more than 4 years ago | (#32639982)

It's their ship to launch. If they don't do it proper, no one else will care.

Re:No email integration (1)

UpnAtom (551727) | more than 4 years ago | (#32639998)

You get email notifications. I guess people trying to read via email would make all the amazing stuff that Wave does rather useless.

Re:No email integration (2, Insightful)

canix (1176421) | more than 4 years ago | (#32640118)

You miss the point: Wave should include email functionality so that people have a "one stop shop" not waves should be forwarded to email to read.

Re:No email integration (1)

UpnAtom (551727) | more than 4 years ago | (#32640692)

2nd sentence: "I guess people trying to read via email would make all the amazing stuff that Wave does rather useless."

But yeah, Google should provide an open-source (who would trust them otherwise?) offline email reader that covers POP3, Gmail, Wave, Buzz & RSS with Bayesian anti-spam.

Sadly, the IE Frame for Wave is borked and hence only FF & Chrome support Wave.

Wave is superb though - best thing to happen to the internet since Slashdot. ;)

Re:No email integration (2, Insightful)

Ephemeriis (315124) | more than 4 years ago | (#32640154)

No email integration == no future for wave.

Why would wave integrate with email? Or, rather, in what way do you think it should?

IRC doesn't integrate with email. AIM doesn't integrate with email. HTTP doesn't integrate with email. BitTorrent doesn't integrate with email.

Wave is a new protocol. It isn't really supposed to replace email. It's supposed to be a different way to communicate and collaborate. Somewhere between Microsoft Word and WebEx.

Re:No email integration (1)

Esospopenon (1838392) | more than 4 years ago | (#32640258)

No email integration == no future for wave.

Check out the Mr-Ray extention, it's featured too. http://wave.to/projects/mr-ray [wave.to]

Re:No email integration (1)

IamTheRealMike (537420) | more than 4 years ago | (#32640386)

You can get email notifications of changes to your Wave inbox now. Use the little drop down next to the Inbox label.

it wan't a beta before! (1, Flamebait)

dougmwne (958276) | more than 4 years ago | (#32639722)

I think that this implies that Wave has moved INTO beta, as in being feature complete, but full o bugs. previously it was a barely working alpha that lacked major functionality.

Re:it wan't a beta before! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32639884)

I believe "Beta" is what Google calls their finalized public release version. Even Gmail is in Beta still. Wave may not have been in Beta before, but because it is now doesn't mean it's full o bugs.

Re:it wan't a beta before! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32640410)

Even Gmail is in Beta still.

Wrong. You can add the beta logo back with a Gmail lab feature though.

Wave (1)

dandart (1274360) | more than 4 years ago | (#32639768)

Google Wave releasing on time.

Sorry, I have an addiction.

IRC With Pictures (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32639800)

I have this brilliant idea, ready to hear it? You'd better be sitting down, buddy.

Ok, so you take IRC, right?

Now you take that and you . . . wait for it . . . add the ability to post photos! Holy shit! I am a genius!

For my bonus, I will take a million shares of GOOG, thanks.

Re:IRC With Pictures (1)

icebraining (1313345) | more than 4 years ago | (#32640020)

It's like IRC, except the "channels" are all by private invitations (there's no public wave list), you get the messages even when offline, and it's way more media rich, and the servers are federated*
It's like email, except you can write in real time and collaborate in writing documents.

There's probably some more similitudes - but it's not quite the same as anything else. The thing is, is it useful?

*so like in email, you can use different Wave providers and talk to each other.

No federation (1)

Dishwasha (125561) | more than 4 years ago | (#32639820)

You'll notice that Google hasn't finished the federation stuff and what they currently have loses all data on restart.

Re:No federation (1)

butlerdi (705651) | more than 4 years ago | (#32640120)

Federation has been out for a while. Have been running it on our servers for some time due to the Operational Transform features. Not using a front end but for M2M stuff. It is a bit buggy but not too bad. It will federate with anything other than wave.google itself. It federates with the sandboy and all non google installations.

A bit of time.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32639850)

but I still think it's worth a bit of your time to see it.

It'll take a bit of your time just to write a sentence.

Out of Beta? (1)

somaTh (1154199) | more than 4 years ago | (#32639878)

So, it's further along the development cycle than Gmail?

Re:Out of Beta? (1)

theREALtimewarp (1828054) | more than 4 years ago | (#32639962)

Gmail has been out of beta for nearly a year.

Re:Out of Beta? (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32640288)

Well, that's embarrassing. It's times like this I wish Slashdot had a "-(infinity) User wishes this never to be seen again"

google gives us the finger (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32639906)

as the # 1-3 answer for all web searches in our category on all search engines for several years, were we ever dismayed when after adjusting to paid advertisers moving our spot to # 4-5, & after refusing our invite (30 emails so far) to adwords, our site disappeared completely on goo-goo, as if it were never there. that happened before (different search engines) when we were highly critical of the last softwar regime.

fauxking stock markup FraUD gangsters, just like the last/other ones. f**** 'em, we're still up to our necks in it $sergi$, go f yourself some more, as you continue to deprive the public of what you originally plotted to do (genuine/unFUDged search results), just like robbIE who was a 'free' software advocate who now proudly advertises for the nazi/big brother (rat out your friends for money) style BSA. see you on the other side of it?, or maybe in glass cages, where some of you may be put on display, so we maybe will not forget so fast about placing greed/fear/ego ahead of our fellow beings.

phewww

Shiny! (0, Offtopic)

Arancaytar (966377) | more than 4 years ago | (#32639970)

:-)

Are you kidding? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32640062)

Wave should still be in the development phase now, it's completely unpolished (granted it's come some ways since they first released it). I think it's great and it's got plenty of potential, hell, I think Wave could even replace alot of Google's myriad services with one UI, but it will never fly with the internet as long as it remains as complicated and convoluted as it is now. Until they add email integration, table support, and make it easy enough for the average MSOffice jock to figure out it'll never fly. And if no one else uses it, what's the point? It's a communication medium, it needs people to function, otherwise why would anyone bother switching from e-mail if they have no one to communicate with on there?

Not to mention the "Settings wave" has been eternally 'under construction' since I first started up Wave.

How do I get others to use it? (5, Interesting)

PhrostyMcByte (589271) | more than 4 years ago | (#32640064)

Every time I've tried to use it, the conversation dies off quickly and new ones go right back to Email. As a last ditch effort I even added a small paragraph at the top of a Wave that explained how to use it, and still the very first reply to it was sent over Email.

It's just not intuitive or compelling enough to replace anything with.

Re:How do I get others to use it? (1)

ducomputergeek (595742) | more than 4 years ago | (#32640180)

We tried it a work, but it lasted less than a week before we went back to emails and skype. We couldn't figure out any advantage to it what so ever. It didn't replace anything in our existing work flow and it didn't add anything of value either. End of the day, Email for most stuff works and then we have skype for anything urgent.

Re:How do I get others to use it? (1)

D Ninja (825055) | more than 4 years ago | (#32640370)

Email for most stuff works and then we have skype for anything urgent.

I agree e-mail works for most stuff - assuming you have threaded conversations (Outlook...I'm looking at you), collaborative documents (something like Google Docs), and an instant message/instant access program (Skype, Communicator, etc). However, Wave does fill a very nice niche for certain people. But, I think the major problem is that most individuals just don't understand, or can't grasp, how Wave might actually be used.

Re:How do I get others to use it? (1)

PhrostyMcByte (589271) | more than 4 years ago | (#32640496)

I deal with some people who would rather wait a week to have a 30min phone call than have a short conversation over the course of a day via email between three people. Not for lack of trying, some people simply seem incapable and stuck in their old ways. I had hopes that Wave would give just enough extra interface over what email provides to make having these 3+ person conversations work for them, but it still wasn't enough.

Other than that, yea I didn't really know what I was going to use it for -- I'd hoped that if I could get someone to use it for longer than a week, some greater understanding would "click" and we'd find a good use.

Re:How do I get others to use it? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32640616)

>> We couldn't figure out any advantage to it what so ever.

The advantage is it makes you look cutting edge until all the other wanna-be's try it and also discover its uselessness.

Re:How do I get others to use it? (3, Informative)

diegocg (1680514) | more than 4 years ago | (#32640372)

Not surprising, at least, Gmail has a scroll bar. I mean, a real scrollbar, which apparently they are not cool enought for Wave.

Neat and cool, but necessary? (2, Insightful)

adosch (1397357) | more than 4 years ago | (#32640262)

Besides the Grocery List, Map Gadget and the Yes/No/Maybe gaget extensions, I don't see Google Wave making much of a dent in the social networking arena if that's their ultimate plan. This seems more of a collaboration tool for work, new ideas, coding, entrepreneurial type stuff. It has potential, but it's not developed around being friendly for someone to use personally on a daily basis. I like it, but it's something 'else' I have to log into to use it.

If Google were to integrate it into Gmail, then I'd be more apt to force myself into using it. But then again, I feel I have all the communication tools I need in Gmail: gtalk, e-mail and Buzz, not to mention my cell phone, txt messaging, ect. This whole drive by Big Company to come up with the next medium for real-time social interaction is exhausting; I don't want 10,000 ways to talk to my family and friends, I just want one that works.

Useful? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32640306)

This just in: Google Wave out of beta. This also just in: Google Wave still not useful.

OK - The WTF is Wave? - Open Challenge: (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32640512)

You have one sentence (bonus points for brevity) to explain WTF is Wave, what it does and why I need it? Replies using the word "revolutionary" will not be considered, thank you.

Winner lands a job at Google Research, VP of Justification of Vast Expenses upon Useless Projects in which No One is Interested Dept.

i think Google Wave is like the Apple Newton (2, Interesting)

circletimessquare (444983) | more than 4 years ago | (#32640672)

the Apple Newton is the Apple iPhone, 10 years too early:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newton_(platform) [wikipedia.org]

in other words, Google Wave is where we are headed, yes. but its too early. it has to be the most painful of technology-related efforts: your passion is correct, your efforts are noble... but no one adapts it only because there is no critical mass of people to use the tech to its righteous, intended effect, just yet

or more exactly, Google Wave is like AJAX. everyone knows AJAX as the ascendent internet development model that pretty much came to public conscience with Google Maps: "you mean i don't have to click and submit a form and reload the page entirely every time? wow!"

but did you know XmlHttpRequest (the X in AJAX) was originally a Microsoft Exchange Plug-in for IE 5.0 in 1999?

and that Microsoft dominance in browsers at the time (and its noncompliance) made use of the technology feasible, and therefore other browsers adapted it? too many people believe standards drive technological development. when the truth is, everything starts out as nonstandard, the standards only lag behind, making uniform the popular feature sets of the time. standards do NOT drive innovation. if you want to do exciting groundbreaking tech: fuck the standards

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XMLHttpRequest#History_and_support [wikipedia.org]

The concept behind the XMLHttpRequest object was originally created by the developers of Outlook Web Access for Microsoft Exchange Server 2000.[4] An interface called IXMLHTTPRequest was developed and implemented into the second version of the MSXML library using this concept.[4][5] The second version of the MSXML library was shipped with Internet Explorer 5.0 in March 1999, allowing access, via ActiveX, to the IXMLHTTPRequest interface using the XMLHTTP wrapper of the MSXML library.[6]
The Mozilla Foundation developed and implemented an interface called nsIXMLHttpRequest into the Gecko layout engine. This interface was modelled to work as closely to Microsoft's IXMLHTTPRequest interface as possible.[7][8] Mozilla created a wrapper to use this interface through a JavaScript object which they called XMLHttpRequest.[9] The XMLHttpRequest object was accessible as early as Gecko version 0.6 released on December 6 of 2000,[10][11] but it was not completely functional until as late as version 1.0 of Gecko released on June 5, 2002.[10][11] The XMLHttpRequest object became a de facto standard amongst other major user agents, implemented in Safari 1.2 released in February 2004,[12] Konqueror, Opera 8.0 released in April 2005,[13] and iCab 3.0b352 released in September 2005.[14]

The World Wide Web Consortium published a Working Draft specification for the XMLHttpRequest object on April 5, 2006, edited by Anne van Kesteren of Opera Software and Dean Jackson of W3C.[15] Its goal is "to document a minimum set of interoperable features based on existing implementations, allowing Web developers to use these features without platform-specific code." The last revision to the XMLHttpRequest object specification was on November 19 of 2009, being a last call working draft.[16] [17]

do you think Microsoft knew where their minor sideshow Exchange Server ActiveX tech was headed? Microsoft constantly lags in the innovation department: silverlight competing with flash, zune, their tablet technology upstaged by iPad, their moribund smartphone OS competing with blackberry, android, apple, etc.

and yet Microsoft actually had a truly groundbreaking world changing piece of tech on their hands... and they pretty much relegated it to Microsoft Exchange Server plumbing. hilarious

this will be the development arc of Google Wave:
1. eventually forgotten after the initial publicity blitz
2. then someone rediscovers it in obscurity, repurposes it, and reintroduces it
3. 5-10 years from now, Google Wave finally makes the mark it deserves to make

like Google Maps in 2004 turned an obscure 1999 Microsoft tech into the model for all of internet development. In fact, if there is a perverse sense of justice and irony in this world, it will be a Microsoft product, utilizing Google Wave, that finally puts Google Wave in the public conscience...

in 2015

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>