December 2009


Options: Use Proportional Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Karoline Dehnhard <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
UofMN CSS Web Development <[log in to unmask]>
Thu, 3 Dec 2009 17:05:11 -0600
text/plain (128 lines)
Here is an example of a very basic test of a wave embedded into a web 
page with a join wave button at the bottom: http://startupgrinder.com/wave

I may have found the answer to my question about privacy - unless you 
add [log in to unmask] as a participant, your waves remain private 
(within your group). I have not tried it though so I can't verify this info.


Kristofer Layon wrote:
> 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/

Karoline Dehnhard
Web Designer
272 Appleby Hall
University of Minnesota