Google Wave is a game changer

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Bigguns has his sig changer set for automatic with hourly Partial quote updates it seems.

Actually not.

the first quote..that i changed today..was from the Admin. But, lo and behold it disappeared...without an email or explanation.

The second is indeed a Partial quote.

Amazing how some people get banned, while others call people cunts and douches.

[Partial]

Just a question since I don't have an hour and a half to watch a rich geek talk at me, but isn't this basically the same thing as SharePoint?

Sharepoint is god awful compared to this, are you kidding me? We use that POS at my job at its awful.

How can you know this if it hasn't been built yet?

It is built. It's in private beta for developers.

[MJZiggy]

Just a question since I don't have an hour and a half to watch a rich geek talk at me, but isn't this basically the same thing as SharePoint?

Sharepoint is god awful compared to this, are you kidding me? We use that POS at my job at its awful.

Things this does that share point doesn't (as far as I know, i'm not a power user or anything)

1. Update automatically in real time
2. Provide nearly the same quality of interface for threaded discussions
3. Where is the API to embed share point within other sites
4. No notion of "wave". A wave is basically an entire share point entity itself.
5. Does Sharepoint have version control? Wave has version control built in
6. Drag and drop, can you drag and drop into SP? If not, how do you handle bulk uploading without individually selecting each file. Drag and drop is infinitely faster
7. Automatic uploading and pushing, Does SP do this?
8. Free
9. Open source so anyone can make any modifications or improvements, or use the technology in any other products they wish (they biggest, most important point of them all)


That said, they're different beasts. I can envision a million and a half uses for Google Wave beyond the demo. Remote group programming IDE, is just one of many examples.

Well, I don't need it to update in real time, I just work on the document and save it back to the folder. What advantage does real time have over that?

Why do I need an interface for threaded discussions?

What the hell is an API and why would I want my company's internal documents embedded in other sites? If I want someone to have the link, I give it to them and then give them access. Oh. Does Wave have access control? If so, why would you want to embed a password protected document on other sites?

I don't even know what a wave is.

SharePoint IS version control. That's it's main function.

Yes, you can drag and drop documents into and out of SP. Provided you have the proper access.

Why do I need to automatically upload if I've already dropped the document into SP? And I don't know what pushing is, but thanks, I don't do drugs.

It's free to me...

We specifically don't want just anyone modifying our documents. Not only do WE not want that, but our dear Uncle Sam would be none too happy about it either.

I suppose then they are different beasts and while your company (or you personally) might get off on it, I don't see how it works for businesses that want to collaborate privately.

[Partial]

Zig, you're clearly not a technical person and thus I can understand you not seeing where this could be a huge benefit to companies.

Real time updates have many benefits. Perhaps not to what you're doing exactly, but there are definite fields that would benefit from this. Imagine a conference call code review, for example. Much easier in a real-time setting like this.

Threading is hugely valuable for keeping track of when, how, who and what point in the conversation something was said. This adds not only accountability, but it is a million times easier to jump into something and pick everything up. It adds order to what would otherwise require going through an revising, etc.

Have you ever seen Google maps on a page outside of maps.google.com? It has many uses, and it used in a wide variety of unique, functional ways. What about Google desktop search, or the many additional functionalities one can add to their Google experience with Google Gadgets? An API gives programmers access to the service calls, etc of an application. Since this is open source, developers are free to modify and extend it to their hearts content, potentially making it even more useful.

A wave is tough to describe. I think of it as a "blob" of real-time content with threaded public and private conversations, document sharing, etc. The "Push" technology behind the Wave is what makes it really cool from a technical standpoint. Instead of the client polling the server, the server is pushing the data to the client. Think of it as your email client at work polling the server for new messages versus a blackberry having messaged pushed to the phone as they hit the server. Wave's can be embedded in other sites. They don't have to be. They can function as 21st century email or instant messaging if you'd like.

Fair enough on the version control. That's fair. I don't think either is an ideal solution compared to say SVN, but they're both adequate and good enough for most instances.

You can drag and drop it from a browser? Must be an active X extension or something. There is some drag and drop javascript out there but it's not great. Google uses a Google Gadget to do it right now, but is patitioning the w3c to make it a standard of HTML 5.

I'm not saying it's exclusively a business product. I think Google will start implementing Wave's into GMail very, very soon as it is essentially a modern email replacement. I can think of a lot of benefits and uses in a corporate setting, especially one where all workers work remotely and are looking for a free product to track their discussions and to produce documentation. I would totally use a wave based development environment (especially if I can have my own sandboxed server environment).

[VegasPackFan]

This might be a really stupid question, but how does Google generate revenue from something like this when it is open source and free?

[Freak Out]

This might be a really stupid question, but how does Google generate revenue from something like this when it is open source and free?

Magic.....or maybe porn.

[pasquale]

This might be a really stupid question, but how does Google generate revenue from something like this when it is open source and free?

Basically all their money comes in from advertising on google searches, gmail, etc. I'm sure they have some other sources, but I can't imagine they are as huge as their advertising.

[Patler]

Isn't it a bit premature to get overly excited about Google Wave? All that is known about it at this point is what Google says it can do, and hopes that it will do.

It sounds to me like one of those things that the "computer nerds" will adore because of all of the "new technology" it has, all of the new features it puts forth; but one that the rank and file of computer users in the business world might be slow to accept.

[retailguy]

This might be a really stupid question, but how does Google generate revenue from something like this when it is open source and free?

Magic.....or maybe porn.

:P Mark to Market... just like Enron, which was the last company that really touted how great their products worked, before they were built....

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Isn't it a bit premature to get overly excited about Google Wave? All that is known about it at this point is what Google says it can do, and hopes that it will do.

It sounds to me like one of those things that the "computer nerds" will adore because of all of the "new technology" it has, all of the new features it puts forth; but one that the rank and file of computer users in the business world might be slow to accept.

Foolish thoughts. With Partial Evangelizing, mass adoption is but a mere week or two away.

[Partial]

Sounds like things are coming along nicely for Google wave:

http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/06/google-wave-dev-preview-hands-on-and-impressions/#continued

Ziggy, Sharepoint sucks! We have been using this for about 8 weeks now and it's awful. As a matter of fact, my team is protesting heavily to move to the JiveSoftware 'SBS' (Social Business Software) platform for collaboration. It's expensive at 300k to have an instance of, but my company already owns one for a project we're doing, so, it's pretty great.

As for Ty's comments, well, I never said mass adoption was bound to happen. I said it is a game changer because it has some awesome features. Large corporations are far too slow and set on buying tools with commercial support than using an excellent, free alternative. Why do you think so many companies use IBM's extremely overpriced product when you can typically get software that does the same thing (or very close to) for free? Also, are you implying that all software is created equal? Give me Jive SBS or 37Signals Basecamp over Microsoft Sharepoint crap any day of the week.

Also like to point out that Sharepoint doesn't have a mobile app as far as I can tell, nor does it have an extension engine, real time translations from one language to another, etc.

Also, unless you're buying an assload of M$ software, you can run sharepoint. Craziness. By the time you're done with all the licensing and massive staff to administer unstable windows servers, you're spending far more than it would cost to get a far superior product in basecamp/jive SBS.

[Tarlam!]

I never said mass adoption was bound to happen. I said it is a game changer because it has some awesome features. Large corporations are far too slow and set on buying tools with commercial support than using an excellent, free alternative. Why do you think so many companies use IBM's extremely overpriced product when you can typically get software that does the same thing (or very close to) for free?

Um. This makes a congruent line of thought, not.

You are declaring the "game" is played a certain way.
Then you observe something now will change the way said game will be played.
Then you say the major "players" won't play the game the changed way. Instead, they will continue to play the game the old way.
Yet, you maintain, the game has been changed, despite the lack of players.
The implication is the game will, indeed, not be changed.

[ThunderDan]

Sounds like things are coming along nicely for Google wave:

http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/06/google-wave-dev-preview-hands-on-and-impressions/#continued

Ziggy, Sharepoint sucks! We have been using this for about 8 weeks now and it's awful. As a matter of fact, my team is protesting heavily to move to the JiveSoftware 'SBS' (Social Business Software) platform for collaboration. It's expensive at 300k to have an instance of, but my company already owns one for a project we're doing, so, it's pretty great.

As for Ty's comments, well, I never said mass adoption was bound to happen. I said it is a game changer because it has some awesome features. Large corporations are far too slow and set on buying tools with commercial support than using an excellent, free alternative. Why do you think so many companies use IBM's extremely overpriced product when you can typically get software that does the same thing (or very close to) for free? Also, are you implying that all software is created equal? Give me Jive SBS or 37Signals Basecamp over Microsoft Sharepoint crap any day of the week.

Also like to point out that Sharepoint doesn't have a mobile app as far as I can tell, nor does it have an extension engine, real time translations from one language to another, etc.

Also, unless you're buying an assload of M$ software, you can run sharepoint. Craziness. By the time you're done with all the licensing and massive staff to administer unstable windows servers, you're spending far more than it would cost to get a far superior product in basecamp/jive SBS.

Maybe this thread should have stayed dead after a month!!!

[Partial]

I never said mass adoption was bound to happen. I said it is a game changer because it has some awesome features. Large corporations are far too slow and set on buying tools with commercial support than using an excellent, free alternative. Why do you think so many companies use IBM's extremely overpriced product when you can typically get software that does the same thing (or very close to) for free?

Um. This makes a congruent line of thought, not.

You are declaring the "game" is played a certain way.
Then you observe something now will change the way said game will be played.
Then you say the major "players" won't play the game the changed way. Instead, they will continue to play the game the old way.
Yet, you maintain, the game has been changed, despite the lack of players.
The implication is the game will, indeed, not be changed.

I think you're completely off base. This technology and open-source-ness will encourage other technology providers to "rip-off" (can you rip off open source) and steal ideas from. Then, they will implement it into a corporate package with corporate support that they will sell for lots of money.

The technology stack is the game changer. Big companies won't be using anything like this for years. This product will be a game changer for the fortune 50 million, not the fortune 500.

In my opinion, rarely is it the big companies that drive innovation. The fortune 500 are slow moving and have the money to have solid, developed processes. The fortune 50 million don't have that luxury, are less formal, use innovative solutions instead of paying IBM or Microsoft the big bucks... I would say that even for Google, putting something out like this is rare. If you think about it, they completely changed the way searching was done with their citation theory. Since then, what is a new technology they put out? They bought Grand Central. Email was basically the same with a few new pieces of flair. Google talk is basically the same thing as the other messengers. Google Payment is the same thing as Paypal. Google Maps were basically an evolution of Map quest. Basically, outside of search, docs and now Wave, Google has taken a lot of evolutionary steps, not revolutionary. The fact they have their finest engineers working on this project, and its actually something completely revolutionary versus evolutionary, I think that Google has lofty expectations for this. With that said, they have the sort of bank roll and influence to make this thing a success and I suspect it will be fantastic software.

I however think the biggest, most important things with Google Wave is the integration with other applications, what third party developers will do with it, etc. Google is giving people a gun and telling them where to hunt. Developers will have to do the hunting, so to speak.

[SkinBasket]

Tarlam, you boob.