It seems to me that the entire key to having this whole thing work out is if we have as many of these as possible. I think it's great that these guys were willing to put in the effort before Google even brought their product to market. We're looking at a parallel dual network effect here: the product/client (ie, barring any unforeseen, giant occurrences, Google's client) will only take off if it manages to establish a large userbase for an unproven product. BUT: Wave, as a protocol, as a server type—as a web technology rather than a Google tool—will only take off if it manages to establish a large codebase of clients and servers for an unproven protocol. As far as I can tell the one thing that will have the biggest effect in a) ensuring Wave's success and b) actually IMPROVING Wave and shaping it according to the needs of the web at large is if as many people as possible do what PyGo has just done first.
EXTREMELY minimal, but I really like the openness and availability. At the very least, it's a good way to test your own gadgets. I'll certainly be playing with this more during the next few weeks.
Is he actually handling the multi-user communication, i.e. sending the gadget updates to the server and between clients properly the same way that Google does it? If so, then he did the hardest and most important part.
I skimmed the original story when it came out but this wave thing just hasn't grabbed me. Can someone give an elevator pitch for what's exciting about it, please?
This feels like a troll, but I'll respect anyone with a Karma of 996 and try my best to answer the question. First, it's important to watch the Google Video in which the product is introduced. Wave creates a new family of application categories. Etherpad is just one _instance_ of one _particular_ application category.
My elevator pitch (probably inaccurate, but it's mine) - "Real Time multi-way fedreated communication that creates secure rich-format conversation." It's the Real-Time element + the Multi-Way + the fact that people can drop in on conversations later on that make it exciting. What got people excited was the open-source nature plus (if I'm not mistaken in my memory) the decentralized aspect - multiple organizations could run their own wave server, so these conversations could be kept entirely internal, or interoperate with external Wave servers. It has elements of IRC, Instant Messaging, E-Mail, Lotus Notes, and WIKIs all rolled into one.
Thanks. I can see it's a faster, more interactive and dynamic version of a wiki (plus other stuff) - and speed-increases tend to be popular. It's a logical tech progression, but I'm not sure it solves a problem.
You mention Lotus Notes: I seem to recall reading Lotus Notes was a cool idea ("groupware") that didn't take off despite passionate proponents, and that it lead to Lotus being vulnerable to being bought by IBM and... ceasing to exist. Maybe today's tech foundation (HTML, web, etc) and now-online target market will cause a different outcome.
I hesitate a little when software is announced before it is released (e.g. google was just released); and when something is presented as a universal solution (but neither of these prove anything).
I think it must solve a problem that I personally don't have, so that explains my (personal) lack of excitement (note: many things have had massive success that I haven't been excited about, so this isn't a criticism of the tech). I tried to watch the Video of it, but it just didn't grab me enough to keep watching (again, just my personal reaction). Perhaps my perspective is really "we had non-interactive email... and we liked it!" and "get off my lawn".
PS: Re "troll". I thought I was asking a straightforward question, though skeptical. Observation: if a non-enthusiast's innocent request about a tech feels like a troll to that tech's proponents, it forms a barrier for adoption beyond the proponents. Not judging, just noting.
Re karma: I periodically start a new account on HN, because I believe karma distorts perceptions. Luckily I didn't ask this question at the start of a new account, or (it seems) I would have been dismissed as a troll.
The video answers your questions, though, so I'd highly recommend you stick through it if this is a topic you're at all interested in enough to inquire about. It's harder to explain in a convincing way and if the video doesn't excite you then our descriptions absolutely won't.
There's only so much of "new way of collaboration and communication" buzzspeak you can read in comments before it sounds like the same ol' thing. When I saw the video, it really hit home (for me) how this could really improve how I collaborate with my company (and friends) online. If the client, especially, is done right, that is.
I think Google has done a less-than-excellent job of describing/pitching Wave. Describing it as email if email was invented today sells it short, and although realtime wiki is accurate, what they do with that realtime wiki is much more important. My elevator pitch (sort of) is included in my review at: http://gcanyon.wordpress.com/2009/06/07/bing-wolfram-alpha-g...
What's exciting about it is that it brings communications power back to you.
See email, IM, shared text, blog comments, published pictures, all in one place - one interface, one site. Do away with long chains of email quotes, accidental reply-alls.
Watch the video, it's long but you don't need to watch all of it to get a feel for how wave works.
