I think you both have valid points.  It's a very interesting tool from  
an experimental point of view; practically, it is still relatively  
useless.  It may morph into something more compelling, though, over  
time.

To me, it's kind of a large and unwieldy Swiss Army knife of a tool.   
Other things are more simple and more reliable.  Combining too much in  
one package results not only in the general buggyness of it, but then  
it also just becomes overwhelming to implement in daily life.

But the application aspect does have weight.  Twitter is another  
example more like email, that is more of a standard than just a  
proprietary channel (though it still is that, obviously).  But the  
range of desktop tools has liberated Twitter to reside on my desktop  
and phone, but in the background just like email.  I can choose to  
read often, or choose to read less often, yet keep them on all the  
time.  So they're omnipresent yet function well asynchronously.

I haven't tried anything like this with Wave yet, but I can't imagine  
logging into Wave and just leaving it on all day in a browser window  
in case something interesting happens.  It seems like it requires  
immediate attention and very intentional engagement for it to do its  
intended purpose. Though I could be wrong and maybe if I didn't find  
so much practical utility in Twitter, Wave might seem more appealing.   
But Wave seems more like an online presentation or meeting (or -- gasp  
-- a live webinar); Twitter is more just a casual watercooler  
conversation (though with more people).

And maybe these tools appeal to various people differently, depending  
on their personality types?

So anyway, see you on Twitter instead.  =)



On Dec 3, 2009, at 9:53 AM, Zachary Johnson wrote:

> Huh, you sure are giving Google a lot of credit!  Nothing wrong with  
> that I suppose.
>
> Me... I'm skeptical.  Email revolutionized communication and became  
> a standard way for people to interact on the internet, but there's a  
> thousand different email applications, both desktop and web based.  
> There's even the divide between plain text and HTML emails.
>
> The web browser may be a better example of a revolutionary  
> communications platform that (despite the variety of choices  
> available and the differences between them) comes close to  
> presenting a "standard interface through which the majority of  
> people interact" with the internet.
>
> Wave *may* just prove to be the standard protocol for a  
> revolutionized internet communication (still skeptical) but I just  
> don't see everybody interacting with the internet through some sort  
> of Google-made Wave Browser.  Google has at least been smart enough  
> to open up the protocol, which may make a future where there are  
> several competing Wave browsers on the market just like web browsers  
> now.  Perhaps you weren't suggesting anything more than that, Patrick.
>
> If Wave proves to be nothing more than another web application that  
> you interact with in your web browser, then I don't really see it  
> being *the* ubiquitous feature of post-Web 2.0.  I think it'll just  
> be one of many things we use.  Well... if we use it at all.  Not all  
> of Google's inventions are successful.  And so far, the few times  
> where I thought to myself "Ooh! I could use a Wave for this!" I've  
> been really disappointed with the User Experience.
>
> Ok, I'll give Google some credit, too: They must be doing something  
> right if we're even having this conversation.
>
> Zach
>
>
> Patrick Haggerty wrote:
>> Right now, I think Wave is more a toy than a full tool.  Part of  
>> that is its feature set isn't complete and part is that we're all  
>> treating it like a toy.  What I think Wave is ultimately going to  
>> become is a unified interface for Web 2.0.  If they manage to  
>> integrate the service into social networks and blogs and forums and  
>> so on, we'll have one interface for the majority of online  
>> contribution and collaboration.  Sure it's advertised as the next  
>> iteration of email, but I think its greater contribution will be to  
>> standardize the interface through which the majority of people  
>> interact with the web.
>> On Wed, Dec 2, 2009 at 9:19 PM, Peter Fleck <[log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask] 
>> >> wrote:
>>    Google Wave has been fairly successful in organizing the Other
>>    Future of News (OFON) conference. Julio Ojeda-Zapata provides some
>>    details at the Pi Press site.
>>    http://blogs.twincities.com/yourtechweblog/2009/12/local-media-writer-harnesses-google-wave-for-planning.html
>>    ======================
>>    Peter Fleck
>>    [log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>
>>    612-424-5107
>> -- 
>> -----------------------------------------------------------
>> Patrick Haggerty
>> Office of Information Technology
>>     University of Minnesota    Email: [log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask] 
>> >
>> Phone: 612-626-5807
>
> -- 
> ______________________________
> Zachary Johnson * Web Manager
> Student Unions & Activities
> (612) 624 - 7270
> http://www.sua.umn.edu/