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. Karoline 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 (612)625-2906