4 ms·

>1: Those products are build to run on Googles infrastructure, which you can't have if you're not Google. Not necessarily. At least with Google Wave [1], Googl

>1: Those products are build to run on Googles infrastructure, which you can't have if you're not Google. Not necessarily. At least with Google Wave [1], Google ensured that they made the necessary modifications to allow users to run Wave servers by themselves. There is at least one provider running wave-in-a-box [2], and there isn't any reason that this provider should be the only one. >2: Those products don't have customers, they have users. That makes spinning a profitable business off much harder. Harder yes, but it's still well short of impossible. I was thinking that the Wave Federation Protocol could perhaps be monetized as a shared-editing/collaboration service. It could be positioned as a combination of Sharepoint and chat. [1] http://googlewavedev.blogspot.com/2010/09/wave-open-source-next-steps-wave-in-box.html http://googlewavedev.blogspot.com/2010/09/wave-open-source-n... [2] http://waveinabox.net/ http://waveinabox.net/

mseebach 15y ago
The mechanism the OP referred to was picking up an existing product and providing a more or less uninterrupted user experience. It's a great benefit for a start-up to be able to hit the ground running with a user base and traction. In the case of Wave, there was a major gap between the product being declared EOL from Google and until the various bits and pieces for running Wave as an independent vendor was in place - and in that gap all reasonable people ran away, so non-Google Wave offerings are starting from scratch. As for money, no, certainly not impossible, but it's one more hurdle to hitting the ground running.