I think you are on to something... for one, I don't think Google can
keep delivering new features to satisfy an ever growing and demanding
audience while also maintaining quality. Quality for simple software is
exponentially easier to deliver. I've even started to notice that GMail
and Google Maps aren't as impressive as they once were. Seems like
"becoming the next Microsoft" is the perfect analogy?
Andre Leroux wrote:
> I think it all comes in "waves" - pun intended
> early 80's it was IBM and the personal PC
> late 80's the Macintosh in schools
> 90's Windows hammers the majority of the market
> 2000's Google becomes the new windows, microsoft office, and internet
> I would say we can draw some simulations of google's current existence
> to the windows 95/NT days.
> Soon every business will be using them, and eventually everyone will be
> saying google is evil.
> Perhaps that is already happening in the "LEET" status.
> Anyone remember 98-2003.
> Every office had windows and nothing else was compatible with it.
> 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.
>> 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.
>>> Peter Fleck
>>> [log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>
>>> 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