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 Introduces Page Creator

Zonk posted more than 8 years ago | from the net-just-got-a-lot-more-crowded dept.

307

Seoulstriker writes "Google has introduced an AJAX web-publishing application called Google Page Creator. The app is great for getting whatever photos, information, files you want published, and it doesn't have to be in the typical blog format. The published site is hosted at the gmail user page. There are several templates and page formats to work from, and as far as I can tell, everything is WYSIWYG. The published HTML is very clean, but it does have some leftover fragments from editing pages repeatedly. If you want to be precise, you can manually edit the HTML. There is a Google Groups page available for the service. It took about 30 seconds to get a rudimentary page online." PC World has a quick rundown on the service at their site.

cancel ×

307 comments

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

file hosting limit (3, Informative)

Seoulstriker (748895) | more than 8 years ago | (#14783922)

Apparently the file storage limit is 100mb. Not sure if there's a limit to the data transferred.

Re:file hosting limit (5, Funny)

garcia (6573) | more than 8 years ago | (#14784077)

Not sure if there's a limit to the data transferred.

Well, it sure does look that way ;-)

Google Page Creator is having a little trouble right now. This is not because of anything you did; it's just a little hiccup in our system that will hopefully go away soon. We apologize for the inconvenience, and recommend you try reloading this page.

Either that or the Slashdot Effect has been renamed The Hiccups.

Re:file hosting limit (1)

Breakfast Pants (323698) | more than 8 years ago | (#14784370)

Google needs to enable users to have wiki like functionality, and an easy way to keep parts of the wiki private (makes for the ultimate PIM.. with full revision history). They also need to get the IM support they have within GMail into the personalized webpage. If they can do these things, they will finally bring what most hackers have had on their personal servers for the last 5 years to the masses (you do run a Jabber server and at least one client with a web front-end, don't you?).

How good is it (3, Interesting)

HBergeron (71031) | more than 8 years ago | (#14783923)

Does this replace the soon to be discontinued Frontpage for the unsophisticated user? Is MS retreating from the field just as Google takes it?

Re:How good is it (1)

TheNoxx (412624) | more than 8 years ago | (#14783953)

Good question... but quite frankly, the days of Frontpage being useful, or this Google page editor, are more or less over. If you have a real use for your site, such as a business, then chances are you'll hire someone for the design and maintenance. The days of amateur looking webpages being of any use to a legitimate company have come to an end; similarly, the days of everyone wanting his or her own webpage just to rant out a bunch of poorly stucture meme-junk are over as well. That's what blogs are for.

Re:How good is it (4, Insightful)

hcdejong (561314) | more than 8 years ago | (#14784021)

the days of everyone wanting his or her own webpage just to rant out a bunch of poorly stucture meme-junk are over as well. That's what blogs are for.

No, they're not. I've no interest in creating a blog [1], I just want to publish a few pages and some photos.

1: with the associated baggage of commenting, regular updates and whatever.

Re:How good is it (4, Funny)

kfg (145172) | more than 8 years ago | (#14784099)

. . .the days of everyone wanting his or her own webpage just to rant out a bunch of poorly stucture meme-junk are over as well. That's what blogs are for.

And thank God you don't need a webpage for that. I, for one, welcome our direct to the mind meme-junk beaming overlords.

KFG

Re:How good is it (1)

Eightyford (893696) | more than 8 years ago | (#14783955)

Does this replace the soon to be discontinued Frontpage for the unsophisticated user?

I'd say this is more of an upgrade for myspace, geocities, and tridpod. Frontpage may be ugly, but it is more than just a wysiwyg editor.

Re:How good is it (5, Informative)

NickFitz (5849) | more than 8 years ago | (#14783979)

The markup seems to be striving to be as bad as Front Page. Somebody should tell them that <font> elements are very GeoCities 1997, that <p> elements can't be nested, and that creating a bunch of <div class="foo"> elements isn't that much better than nested tables. I thought Google could afford to hire competent people?

Drew McLellan [allinthehead.com] has knocked together a page in which all of the above flaws can be seen. [googlepages.com]

I just tried it out (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14784047)

with ie7 beta 2.

I told my girl "hey, come see I'm going to make this here webpage for you" .. and then I logged into Google page creator (fyi my google name has nine characters) .. and well the default page title was "username's Ho"! Now I hope thats because I was using IE7 Beta 2, or maybe it was my username length either way .. the girls not happy.

Hmm maybe I could sue. Also the page functions dont work in IE7 Beta 2 (note to pagecreators or IE's developers).

It is because of IE 7 Beta 2 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14784189)

the default page title was "username's Ho"! Now I hope thats because I was using IE7 Beta 2, or maybe it was my username length

"[9 char username]'s Ho" = 14 characters. You were using IE 7 Beta 2. 7 * 2 = 14. There's your problem. When IE 7 Beta 3 comes out, your title can be 21 characters.

Re:I just tried it out (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14784298)

I am sure the Microsoft and Google engineering teams have printed out your post and have issued a corporate-wide memo out of it to make sure that you can use Page Creator BETA with IE7 BETA.

Compared to wiki engines... (1)

michalf (849657) | more than 8 years ago | (#14784065)

I have tried to create a few pages and the only conclusion is: the interface and features are very very poor compared to any wiki engine you can find at several wiki farms (mostly these wikimedia-based). google allows you to customize look&feel a bit and that is in +. but for me - usability is below average - I am a great wiki fan.

googlepages is beta (surprised?) and I hope interface will evolve. imho this is not the way I would like to create my pages.

we are currently working on a similar system based on wiki engine. and I can tell you - number of options is just not comparable. but I wonder if we will have eg. feed reader/integrator, flickr integration, blog integration etc. with googlepages.

I suppose eventually you will be allowed to put adsense on googlepages. ;-)

summarising: googlapages seem to be good for simple, personal pages. but I can not image creating more than dozen of pages with it.

michal ;-)

Re:Compared to wiki engines... (1)

Uber Banker (655221) | more than 8 years ago | (#14784305)

...we are currently working on a similar system based on wiki engine...

Do you have a site this is running on and people can try it out? IMHO one of Google's annoyances is that it puts out barely functional software, but while that software is lacking in features, they still put it out and it becomes one of their strengths. Get a prototype running, and even if it's basic it's good enough, and can be added to later, thus stealing a march on competition and locking into a philosophy at their websearch core, software should be constantly innovated upon and improved. Gmail, flickr, news, google.com/ig and others all being examples. It seems to work pretty well so far.

If you could make a public prototype (if the retail/individual consumer market is your target) and go head-to-head?!

Re:Compared to wiki engines... (1)

jacksonj04 (800021) | more than 8 years ago | (#14784414)

Minor point - Flickr is Yahoo! and not Google. I would prefer it Googlyfied in place of Picasa (Ugh), but we can't have everything.

Oops! (2, Informative)

trentblase (717954) | more than 8 years ago | (#14783925)

Google Page Creator is having a little trouble right now. This is not because of anything you did; it's just a little hiccup in our system that will hopefully go away soon. We apologize for the inconvenience, and recommend you try reloading this page.

Re:Oops! (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14783948)

Good lord. We Slashdotted Google. I guess those rumours about the impending death of the internet were true...

Re:Oops! (1)

EddieBurkett (614927) | more than 8 years ago | (#14784042)

I guess those rumours about the impending death of the internet were true...

Per yesterday's Dilbert, its just that the internet is now full.

Re:Oops! (1)

SubTexel (715118) | more than 8 years ago | (#14784310)

Lol, just empty it into the trash can.. ;)

A sterling job on the XSS defenses though (5, Informative)

buro9 (633210) | more than 8 years ago | (#14784031)

Had a play earlier as I was worried you might be susceptible to a similar thing as the MySpace "Samy is my hero" style XSS attack.

The following was witnessed:

  • Inserting script tags = tags removed before publishing.
  • Inserting style tags = tags removed before publishing.
  • Inserting element on events (onclick, onblur, etc) = attributes stripped before publishing.
  • Inserting basic element style attributes = tags left in, style applied.
  • Inserting advanced element style attributes (stuff that can rewrite DOM) = just those attributes stripped, formatting attributes left intact.

So for all of the basics, the Google Page thingy passes all basic tests on XSS attacks.

Well done :)

I'm even recommended it on my forum [bowlie.com] already because the security gives me enough peace of mind to not regret doing so.

Re:A sterling job on the XSS defenses though (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14784260)

What about <object>, <applet> etc.? Did it strip out MS "behavior:" and inline JS crap from CSS?

(X)HTML standards? (1)

CarpetShark (865376) | more than 8 years ago | (#14784328)

Did you happen to notice what version of HTML they're using? Presumably it generates nice XHTML with stylesheets accessibility and supports unicode? In other words, can I recommend it as a non-harmful tool for beginners?

Re:Oops! (1)

marcello_dl (667940) | more than 8 years ago | (#14784052)

This is not because of anything you did...

Those googlish infidels better start to acknowledge the power of slashdot *grin*

Re:Oops! (1)

nirnimesh (678098) | more than 8 years ago | (#14784057)

I hope it's not because of the slashdotting.

Re:Oops! (3, Insightful)

psycln (937854) | more than 8 years ago | (#14784082)

Google Page Creator is having a little trouble right now. This is not because of anything you did; it's just a little hiccup in our system that will hopefully go away soon. We apologize for the inconvenience, and recommend you try reloading this page.

That, i believe, is what people refer to as the digg effect [digg.com]

Re:Oops! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14784316)

With the greater number of people using Slashdot, that more likely occurred after it was posted to Slashdot.

Just what we need (2, Funny)

RagingFuryBlack (956453) | more than 8 years ago | (#14783927)

Woohoo. Lets see if google can pull this off better then freewebs. I hope google is prepared to deal with millions of 12 year olds creating seizure pages =D.

For a free service its not bad (5, Informative)

majortom1981 (949402) | more than 8 years ago | (#14783933)

for a free service that gives you 100mb of storage its not bad. I signed up and tested it. Your pages do not have any adds and you get 100mb for free. Even if you do not want to create a website its not bad for hosting picture files and other things.

OOPS (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14784069)

Oops! Google Page Creator is having a little trouble right now. This is not because of anything you did; it's just a little hiccup in our system that will hopefully go away soon. We apologize for the inconvenience, and recommend you try reloading this page. We've slashdotted Google!

Re:For a free service its not bad (1)

Saulo Achkar (843453) | more than 8 years ago | (#14784086)

"Your pages do not have any adds..." now while it's still Beta. Just wait and it will be filled with Google Ads, as we see today in Gmail...

Browser Support (4, Insightful)

Nikoth (934013) | more than 8 years ago | (#14783936)

Shame that it can't be used in Opera. I'll be loading up Firefox now to have a go of it though.

Re:Browser Support (1)

MentalMooMan (785571) | more than 8 years ago | (#14784046)

I like the message you get when you do try to use opera:

Oops!
Sorry, your web browser is not yet supported.

Our programming wizards tried their darndest to get Google Page Creator to work with as many browsers as possible. But alas, even the most expert practitioners of web sorcery must sleep now and again, lest their JavaScript magic run dry.

So, for now, you'll need either to download a new version of Firefox or download a new version of Internet Explorer (Windows only), and then come right back.

Re:Browser Support (5, Funny)

bartyboy (99076) | more than 8 years ago | (#14784084)

Just go to www.ie7.com [ie7.com] to upgrade browsers.

No safari either (1)

karvind (833059) | more than 8 years ago | (#14784129)

I use Safari (Mac OS X) and it doesn't support that either. Duh ..

Patent violation! (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14783939)

Doesn't this violate US Patent number 7,000,180?

Re:Patent violation! (1)

ahsile (187881) | more than 8 years ago | (#14784110)

Heh. You beat me to it.

Amazing that we have a system that violates a patent posted about right after a posting about the patent. It's perfect!

Already plenty of tools out there (2, Interesting)

CRCulver (715279) | more than 8 years ago | (#14783950)

This might be a valuable invention for very non-technical users, but there are already plenty of solutions out there for creating web content easily. Most weblogging systems already allow the user to create permanent pages outside of a weblogging structure, see Douglass, Little, & Smith's Building Online Communities With Drupal, phpBB, and WordPress [amazon.com] . If you can use Wordpress [wordpress.org] to make a huge e-commerce site, Grandma can certainly use it to put up a static but re-editable set of photos (once grandson has installed the backend). Google is definitely repeating past accomplishments here.

Re:Already plenty of tools out there (1)

Traegorn (856071) | more than 8 years ago | (#14784221)

It's not about whether or not someone has done it before, but rather whether someone has made it less intimidating before.

Grandma won't pick it up if it seems too complicated - even if it really isn't. Google has the public image to pull this off better than most. It's not about being new - it's about appearing easy.

Re:Already plenty of tools out there (1)

JaseOne (579683) | more than 8 years ago | (#14784332)

Wordpress is a usability nightmare even for advanced users it is a pain to use and that isn't for a lack of the community to try to get improvements made it is just the way they want it for some reason.

From what little I've played with it, Google Pages seems a lot more usability friendly and lets you create pages in a much more natural way.

ORM Patented - Google Introduces Page Creator? (1)

corcoranp (892008) | more than 8 years ago | (#14783961)

ORM - Online Rich Media is patented today and Google comes out with a page creator???? I can see the storm brewing already.

Re:ORM Patented - Google Introduces Page Creator? (1)

slimjim8094 (941042) | more than 8 years ago | (#14784070)

I just read an article about that. Crap, how long is that patent going to stand? Against Google?
Yes, this is probably redundant, but I think it makes a point, albeit mainly for that patent article. It will be interesting to see how they (the holding company) deal with Google "infringing" on their technology. As well as M$. Windows Live anyone?

Re:ORM Patented - Google Introduces Page Creator? (1)

IflyRC (956454) | more than 8 years ago | (#14784394)

This should be fun to watch. Hopefully we'll get a front row seat and be served popcorn!

This is Google's way of saying.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14783965)

Screw you Balthasar!

The Shotgun Effect (4, Interesting)

eldavojohn (898314) | more than 8 years ago | (#14783966)

From the article on PC World:
Anyone remember when Google did a very few things, like the search engine itself and Gmail, but did them spectacularly well? It's now doing many, many things with erratic results. Let's hope that its next step isn't to do an infinite number of things badly--a road that any number of growing technology companies have taken, sadly.
I believe what we are witnessing here is something of a bit of a "shotgun effect" where a company tries to offer many different things and invariably along the way gets something right.

Microsoft and Google have this in common. They both did one or two things extremely well which resulted in insane success. Soon after this, they both started producing products in all conceivable fields.

Now, I agree with the author in the case of Microsoft as they started making products that anyone would buy just because the name "Microsoft" was on them (Visual J++ [wikipedia.org] anyone?). I just created my homepage [googlepages.com] and was frustrated with how little I could do. Oh well, what did I spend on this? Nothing, a few seconds of my time, that's all.

I'm completely happy with Google trying to re-invent everything because when they do, it's more or less free for me. There's no harm because I didn't pay a ton of money for the product like I would have in Microsoft's case.

Re:The Shotgun Effect (1)

Moby Cock (771358) | more than 8 years ago | (#14784029)

I believe what we are witnessing here is something of a bit of a "shotgun effect" where a company tries to offer many different things and invariably along the way gets something right.

I prefer the analogy of: "Throw stuff up and see what sticks."

Mostly because a lot of tech companies offer products that are really regurgitated slop.

Re:The Shotgun Effect (1)

tpgp (48001) | more than 8 years ago | (#14784055)

Microsoft and Google have this in common. They both did one or two things extremely well which resulted in insane success.

What did Microsoft do extremely well?

(I guess you could say "ruthlessly crush the competition" - but I'm presuming you mean something in the field of I.T.)

Re:The Shotgun Effect (2, Insightful)

skubeedooo (826094) | more than 8 years ago | (#14784149)

What did Microsoft do extremely well?

Excel

Visual Studio

Re:The Shotgun Effect (2, Funny)

Guanix (16477) | more than 8 years ago | (#14784154)

Excel and VBA.

Re:The Shotgun Effect (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14784366)

VBA? Don't forget Bob

Re:The Shotgun Effect (2, Interesting)

resprung (410576) | more than 8 years ago | (#14784087)

There is no master plan.

Google is just a millionaire on a spree.

A bunch of their offerings are currently so trashy you wonder why they've put the embarrassments online:
- Google Video, the ugliest storefront on the web
- Google Pack
- Google Talk

Page Locked. (1)

bharatm (832940) | more than 8 years ago | (#14783968)

I logged into Pages. wen i read the post on Digg.. thats around 30 mins. back and Google Pages was working fine. But now when i log in it says "Page Locked" "The Page is locked by another user" "Return to the Site Overview" "Break the lock and edit.." Break the Lock... What are Locks....?

Re:Page Locked. (1)

luder (923306) | more than 8 years ago | (#14783996)

I don't know if it has any relation, but when I try to open http://gmailuser.googlepages.com/ [googlepages.com] I get "Not Found Error 404"

Re:Page Locked. (2, Funny)

Professor_UNIX (867045) | more than 8 years ago | (#14784023)

Break the Lock... What are Locks....?

They are used to bring a boat from a waterway at one elevation to a waterway at another elevation. Usually found in canals and such. If it's going uphill then the boat goes into the lock, the doors shut, and water fills up the lock until it is at a higher elevation, then the other doors open and it floats on its way. The reverse is done for going downhill.

Oh, you mean locks in a computer sense? They stop two competing processes from writing to the same area of disk/memory/whatever. A process locks what it is working on and then releases the lock when its done so another process can lock the area and write to it. If two processes were to write to an area at the same time without any kind of flow control they'd just end up overwriting each other.

Sample Page (1)

JFlex (763276) | more than 8 years ago | (#14783971)

Just a quick sample page [googlepages.com] I through together.

No Safari support yet (4, Informative)

Chris_Jefferson (581445) | more than 8 years ago | (#14783975)

Slightly annoying, no safari support yet, only internet explorer and firefox (couldn't check opera).

No opera either (4, Insightful)

SmallFurryCreature (593017) | more than 8 years ago | (#14784009)

Nothing new, google does firefox and IE first then months later opera and safari get their turn.

Gmail all of sudden stopped complaining that I was using opera and just worked. So they do work on it. Just have to wait for it.

Nope, no Opera 8.5 support either (1)

cogg (864885) | more than 8 years ago | (#14784010)

Google said: Sorry, your web browser is not yet supported. Our programming wizards tried their darndest to get Google Page Creator to work with as many browsers as possible. But alas, even the most expert practitioners of web sorcery must sleep now and again, lest their JavaScript magic run dry. So, for now, you'll need either to download a new version of Firefox or download a new version of Internet Explorer (Windows only), and then come right back

Images (1)

platos_beard (213740) | more than 8 years ago | (#14783977)

Now if they let you paste in an image, that would be really impressive. Probably the single most inconvenient thing about editing on the web is that once you copy an image, you need to create an image file, then browse or type in the path to upload it, then place it on the page. IMHO, simplifying that is more important than WYSIWYG for usability (I'm thinking Wiki text or ReST, not html).

great for targeted spamming (5, Insightful)

dutchwhizzman (817898) | more than 8 years ago | (#14783985)

username@gmail.com is equal to username.googlepages.com. By running a search on google.com for the item you want to send SPAM around for, limited to the subdomains of googlepages.com, you can easily find a target audience to send spam to, since you can derive their e-mail address from the hostnames you get hits on your search from.

Re:great for targeted spamming (1)

TedCheshireAcad (311748) | more than 8 years ago | (#14784016)

Perhaps this justifies GMail's spam filter.

Sued by previous article owners (1)

LiquidCoooled (634315) | more than 8 years ago | (#14783987)

Doesn't this conflict heavily with the proceeding patent story?

Why Google is still cool (5, Funny)

theskipper (461997) | more than 8 years ago | (#14783994)

A chuckle from the FAQ:

11. I don't want my landlady to find out about my pet ferret. How can I unpublish my pages?

Odd (2, Funny)

broothal (186066) | more than 8 years ago | (#14783995)

That's odd - I just signed in, and it said "This page is locked by another user". Now where did I put my tinfoil hat...

Re:Odd (1)

LiquidCoooled (634315) | more than 8 years ago | (#14784003)

I'm getting this:

Oops!
Google Page Creator is having a little trouble right now.

This is not because of anything you did; it's just a little hiccup in our system that will hopefully go away soon. We apologize for the inconvenience, and recommend you try reloading this page.

Re:Odd (1)

qsqueeq (586979) | more than 8 years ago | (#14784090)

Ha! Google has been slashdotted.

Re:Odd (1)

qsqueeq (586979) | more than 8 years ago | (#14784061)

I like this one...
Google Page Creator is having a little trouble right now. This is not because of anything you did; it's just a little hiccup in our system that will hopefully go away soon. We apologize for the inconvenience, and recommend you try reloading this page.

Why not just change their name to "Google Beta"? (3, Insightful)

elrous0 (869638) | more than 8 years ago | (#14784005)

They are really good at introducing new services, not so hot at finishing them.

-Eric (who has been using "Google Groups Beta" for several years now

Overall idea is to make more money (2, Interesting)

vivekg (795441) | more than 8 years ago | (#14784018)

Yup make more money from Free Web Hosting. According to netcraft [netcraft.com] "The free hosting ramp-ups by Microsoft and Go Daddy are a response to surging revenue from contextual ads on web sites. In its most recent quarter, Google reported $1.1 billion in advertising revenue from its own sites, and another $799 million from third-party sites using its AdSense program. The rapid growth of domain parking services has also illustrated the earning potential of large portfolios of web pages bearing contextual ads."

I am dam sure; they are going to introduce paid web hosting (Ghosting).

Misunderstanding of google strategy (5, Insightful)

Danathar (267989) | more than 8 years ago | (#14784036)

I think people forget that google does not nessesarily create these apps with a plan in mind. Many of them are the result of the personal time that google gives it's employees for personal projects. When one looks interesting they (google) elevate it within the company and wait to see where it goes.

Not bad.... (1)

Chanc_Gorkon (94133) | more than 8 years ago | (#14784045)

This can be nice....even for a technical user. Not all of us want to run a webserver at home. Some of us pay for hosting or web pages.

Google the new Yahoo? (1)

mmport80 (588332) | more than 8 years ago | (#14784049)

Next: Google doesn't rate search going forward, passes up chance to buy small innovative search engine - which turns out the be the next big thing :)

Re-edited summary for Google's Dark side... (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14784060)

...if Google is evil (censoring etc etc), the article summary would have read like this:

Google has finally published their own AJAX web-publishing application called Google Page Creator. The app is getting photos, information and files you want published ; it won't publish in the standardized blog format, however. The published site is only hosted at the google domain http://gmailuser.googlepages.com/ [googlepages.com] . There are a few templates and page formats to work from, and it looks almost WYSIWYG. The published HTML does have leftover fragments from editing pages repeatedly, but it could be called clean if you could look over that. For technical diehards, you could edit the HTML by hand, but who does that nowadays. As usual, there is a Google Groups page available for the service. It could take 30 seconds to get a rudimentary page online, but this will ofcourse take much longer for any real stuff.

...

In the long term... (1)

nmg196 (184961) | more than 8 years ago | (#14784071)

Who wants to bet that the final version will have compulsory adsense or sponsored links down the right hand side?

The HTML/CSS code is appauling. They haven't even bothered to put the CSS in a seperate file, so if you create a multipage site, it's going to keep downloading the came old crap again and again.

Re:In the long term... (1)

ynohoo (234463) | more than 8 years ago | (#14784172)

Who wants to bet that the final version will have compulsory adsense or sponsored links down the right hand side?

Who cares? It's what I would expect from a free service.

What I hate is how GeoCities was crippled by Yahoo with their traffic cap - your site can only get a pathetic number of hits per day before being shut off. I haven't bothered maintaining my GeoCities site since.

Re:In the long term... (1)

jonnythan (79727) | more than 8 years ago | (#14784269)

"Final version"

LOL!!!!

Dude, this is GOOGLE we're talking about!!

google vs slashdot (1)

necromcr (836137) | more than 8 years ago | (#14784072)

wooho!! fight of the titans!! .. cant wait to see who wins.. ..talking about slashdot effect everyone..

Hotlinking? (1)

Rob T Firefly (844560) | more than 8 years ago | (#14784074)

Does hotlinking off your Googlepages site onto another work? If so, this could be a sneak attack at image hosts like Photobucket and Flickr.

.Goo (1, Interesting)

mccalli (323026) | more than 8 years ago | (#14784078)

For once, it seems that Google is the one copying here. I'm speaking of .Mac, but not in its paid incarnation of .Mac but rather the freebie incarnation of iTools (think that was the name). I know other individual services have similar capabilities, but it's the tying of them all together that makes the service.

We have gPhoto and gWeb, Mail.app and Address Book. It's arguable whether Spotlight and Google Desktop share any direct inspiration (I don't think they do), but the upshot is the same there as well. Do they make gCal yet? Is gSync necessary even due to their web focus?

I await gMovie, gDVD, gTunes, gArageband with interest.

Cheers,
Ian

Great... (1)

Zog The Undeniable (632031) | more than 8 years ago | (#14784089)

The long-awaited infinite monkeys and typewriters scenario is just around the corner. I await an outpouring of classic literature ;-)

Re:Great... (1)

samureiser (903923) | more than 8 years ago | (#14784292)

We've heard that a million monkeys at a million keyboards could produce the complete works of Shakespeare; now, thanks to the Internet, we know that is not true.

        Robert Wilensky, speech at a 1996 conference

Re:Great... (1)

youngerpants (255314) | more than 8 years ago | (#14784371)

At first I laughed at your comment, then remembered a long time ago when Geocities had a "random page button" and cried a tear. I think a dozen monkeys have a better chance at producing literature than an infinite number of google home pages.

100MB only? (1)

Jesus IS the Devil (317662) | more than 8 years ago | (#14784094)

I've been using Topcities.com [topcities.com] for a while now and they offer 150MBs. Recently the bandwidth limit has been lifted too. It seems Google is just playing catch-up to the free hosting market. There's really nothing new to see here.

Five minute review (1)

Bogtha (906264) | more than 8 years ago | (#14784103)

As with most Google-related things, they've focussed on the interface, but skipped QA when it comes to the code they put out. Five minutes with a validator would have been enough to ensure that they output valid code, but it seems they haven't bothered.

I'm also surprised that they are generating XHTML rather than HTML. There's no benefit in this case, and given that Ian Hickson, author of Sending XHTML as text/html Considered Harmful [hixie.ch] , works for them, they should know better.

They use embedded <style> elements instead of simply linking to an external stylesheet - what a pointless waste of bandwidth. The default style reduces the font size by 15%, although they probably don't realise because it also uses Verdana. The visitors using other fonts are going to get very small text compared with the visitors using Verdana.

All in all, exactly what I'd expect from Google - decent interface, poor front-end code. They get a C.

google vs apple (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14784105)

its more google vs apple (.mac in this case) than vs microsft every day....

ob Simpsons (1)

outcast36 (696132) | more than 8 years ago | (#14784106)

30 seconds? but I wanna be online now
Link to episode [snpp.com]

Gotta love editable service agreement windows. (5, Funny)

cswiii (11061) | more than 8 years ago | (#14784127)

1. Highlight the entire agreement that you have to agree to abide by.
2. Delete it.
3. Enter the text "I agree that Google will pay me $1 Million Dollars (*cue Dr. Evil*) if Page Creator is ever unavailable for me to use."
4. Profit!

Email Address (4, Insightful)

SteveX (5640) | more than 8 years ago | (#14784140)

Unfortunately your gmail address is also the name used in the URL for your page. At least MSN Spaces set it up so your email address wasn't part of the site URL.

More conspiration theories (1)

zanderredux (564003) | more than 8 years ago | (#14784143)

I think that Google seeded this news into Slashdot so that they could get a cheap stress test for their platform.

I've been trying to use it for the last 30 minutes and all I get is a nice Oops! page:

Google Page Creator is having a little trouble right now. This is not because of anything you did; it's just a little hiccup in our system that will hopefully go away soon. We apologize for the inconvenience, and recommend you try reloading this page.

At least, I know it is not my fault (or is it???)

I like it (1)

Madcowz (904786) | more than 8 years ago | (#14784163)

I like it.

First thing I did was add links to all my sites to help them in their Google rankings. I wonder if Google adds weight to their own pages in the Page Rank system

/Mad

Google hosting usable without Page Creator? (1)

hcdejong (561314) | more than 8 years ago | (#14784175)

100 Mb free hosting sounds tempting, but I don't need YA application to build my pages, I just want to create locally and then upload via ftp. TFA doesn't specify.

Re:Google hosting usable without Page Creator? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14784324)

Just copy/paste the HTML. It is a bit more work, but you don't have to use their editor.

TOS (1)

Chainsaw76 (261937) | more than 8 years ago | (#14784192)

The TOS for the site are fully editable (am I the only one that checks every time I see TOS in a text box?). That should make for some interesting agreements.

I wonder if they store the TOS version you agree to. Cause right now they owe me $99 for each page I write and store on their server.

-Jason

Lightweight source? (1)

Winterblink (575267) | more than 8 years ago | (#14784195)

Doesn't anyone design pages to be light on bandwidth? Christ, I did a quick basic page and the resulting source code it sent to my browser contained well over 500 lines of stylesheet, browser tweaks, and other stuff, resulting in 12k of source in total. All for a title and a bit of hello worldy text.

Is it just me, or is the generated source possibly trying too hard?

Just a thought. I myself am a fairly minimalist person when it comes to web design, both from the design itself and the underlying source code.

Re:Lightweight source? (1)

Toreo asesino (951231) | more than 8 years ago | (#14784346)

You'd be amazed how much shite you have to define (especially in CSS) to get a page to look uniform across most browsers - every one seems to have it's own interpretations of defaults if not specified - margins for instance, so it's all got to be tightly defined.

Normally the CSS would be ripped out into a seperate file to save bandwidth, but I'm guessing Google's didn't think it was worth the extra hassle.

Future product : Google Webhosting Package (1)

brs165 (858581) | more than 8 years ago | (#14784224)

Does anybody else see this as the first step into a total web presence package for people/companies? Imagine being able to have goolge host your domain and offer all the tools to mange your site. Page Creator for the website, PicasaWeb for an image gallery, GoogleGroups for a message board, etc.

Slashdotted (1)

CmdrPorno (115048) | more than 8 years ago | (#14784226)

"Google Page Creator is having a little trouble right now.
This is not because of anything you did; it's just a little hiccup in our system that will hopefully go away soon. We apologize for the inconvenience, and recommend you try reloading this page."

Great, we've Slashdotted Google. Anyone have a mirror?

Re:Slashdotted (1)

qwertphobia (825473) | more than 8 years ago | (#14784409)

I did it. It happened when I clicked OK when it asked me to "Abort, Retry or Fail". Sorry, folks...

But seriously I saw this too, however I was able to get a up a page before it went down.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?
or Connect with...

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

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>