Google Wave has developers buzzing
The support of developers at Google I/O could make or break Google Wave, and the early returns are positive.
(Credit: Stephen Shankland/CNET)SAN FRANCISCO--When developers are comparing your new product to the unveiling of the iPhone, you know you've probably got something on your hands.
Such was the reaction at Google I/O in the hours following Google's first demonstration of Google Wave, a bid to redefine the way people communicate on the Internet by blending e-mail, instant messaging, file sharing, and collaboration software into one service. Following a session in which developers were given a peek under the hood at the technology and what it might let them do, several were quite impressed and already pondering what Google Wave would allow them to create.
"I haven't been this jazzed since the release of the iPhone," said Michael Rexroad, a software engineer with Cisco's telepresence systems business unit. He was referring to the way ideas immediately sprung to mind Thursday morning regarding how to use the technology demonstrated Thursday to create new types of applications, much the same way Apple's first public demonstration of the iPhone in January 2007 inspired a generation of software developers.
Developer support is crucial to the success of Google Wave. The company is releasing Wave as a developer preview to attendees on Thursday, and it is still filled with lots of rough edges, bugs, and incomplete details.
But the genius behind Google Wave is not in the individual parts, rather in the way Google has assembled a set of existing technologies into an attractive platform for developers, said Andreas Schobel, chief technology officer for mobile start-up 3Banana.
A demo of Google Wave at Google I/O
(Credit: James Martin/CNET)Schobel compared Wave to how Google Maps (perhaps not coincidentally developed by the same people behind Google Wave) awoke developers to the possibilities presented by Ajax technologies, which had been around for some time but had yet to gain traction as some of the core technologies used to build the modern Web.
Daniel Jefferies, president of Newmind Group, a Google Apps reseller, is not a developer, but was intrigued by the possibility of using Wave as an internal tool for improving the productivity of his company. Newmind provides consulting services for helping small and medium businesses implement Google Apps inside their groups, and thought he could better manage his team, their tasks, and their relationships with clients with this sort of tool.
Perhaps the most ringing endorsement came from a software engineer employed by one of Google's rivals, who declined to be identified for obvious reasons. "This will revolutionize e-mail," he said.
While that may be a stretch at this juncture, developers filling the halls of the Moscone Center are definitely buzzing about Google Wave.
Tom Krazit writes about the ever-expanding world of Internet search, including Google, Yahoo, online advertising, and portals, as well as the evolution of mobile computing. He has written about traditional PC companies, chip manufacturers, and mobile computers, spending the last three years covering Apple. E-mail Tom. 
http://wave.google.com/
Thee guys are SUPER smart and this is all great idea's. I'm not knocking that. I'd love to see these guys, come into an enterprise with 20,000 users dealing with wireless, telecomms, utility, banking transactions. I think they could work with business to create something truly game changing there...
I app system will enable companies to build there own systems and addons for it.
- by DesElms June 2, 2009 4:12 PM PDT
- Thinking of Wave in terms of "replacing" such as GMAIL (or even email, itself) is just silly. Not every Internet communication needs to be (or even should be) as would be in Wave. Traditional email, at the very least, should (and likely will) never go away. Of this, I think there should be little fear or doubt.
- Reply to this comment
-
(5 Comments)Now, that doesn't mean there won't be a place -- and a potent one, indeed -- in our lives for such as Wave and its ineluctable variants. It, too, will be useful, under the right circumstances. In fact, from my admittedly only-cursory analysis of it to date, I'm thinking that what actually MAY be "replaced" by Wave, as a practical matter, is traditional "chat," as we now know it (though traditional chat, mark my words, will continue to be around for years and years, too, no matter how good Wave ultimately gets).
Regardless, one thing about which we should all be clear in our minds is that we're not talking about the mere replacing of anything, here. Wave, for better or worse, seems very nearly of the nature of paradigm shift... and far be it from me to suggest that that's, necessarily, a bad thing, here.
It does, however, come with pitfalls about which we should all be watchful, if not actually downright concerned. For example, though it's now coming out in articles (and/or rebuttals to such as I am posting here) that it's likely to be user-configurable, initial writings about Wave touted the ability (and represented it as essential to Wave's very way of operating) of all persons in a "wave" (or a thread) to be able to see, in real time, all others' keystrokes, as they type.
Let me repeat the salient words of that, here: AS. THEY. TYPE.
Think about that, please, for just a moment. It's a far larger problem than, perhaps, it initially seems. Like how sausage is made (or, as some joke, like how laws are passed), some things in life may better be left something of a mystery to those who ultimately consume (or are regulated by) them; and, most importantly, solely at the creator's option.
The ultimate impact and meaning to the reader of anything written would be inordinately influenced by said reader's having been a witness to its creation. If one is a thoughtful writer who doesn't just blurt out every wayward thing which flits through one's brain, then one is going to pause to think while one types, and back-up and delete and re-type, and whatever else behind-the-scenes activity goes into what ends-up being the finished written product. If the reader were able to witness what the writer merely paused before writing; or actually did write, but then thought better of and either removed or changed to something else, then the bell of what the reader saw along the way cannot be un-rung; and the reader's ultimate interpretation and understanding of the final written result will be indelibly affected in ways (even if not immediately obvious) more likely than not to be inherently bad for all concerned.
Now, if it's true...
SEE: http://www.greggdeselms.com/google_wave.html