3 ms·

1. Launch barebones, simplified product for free 2. Iterate on user feedback, often for years 3. Get tonnes of folks hooked 4. Begin charging

by zaidf 14y ago

mtgx 14y ago
You make it sound as if Google wanted you to use Microsoft's ActiveSync. They've only offered it so far for free (while having to pay Microsoft for it) because a lot of users needed it. But other standards have appeared since then, and they are pushing for the adoption of those, and less reliance on Microsoft's proprietary technologies. Apple is doing the same thing, too.
- UnoriginalGuy 14y ago
  What other standards have appeared that support calendar, contacts, and tasks sync? Google are doing this to stop third parties from offering Gmail integration without paying some kind of Google Tax (e.g. other platforms, apps, web-sites, etc).
  - elithrar 14y ago
    > What other standards have appeared that support calendar, contacts, and tasks sync? IMAP + IDLE, CalDAV, CardDAV? Whether they are a 1:1 feature replacement is another thing, but they are options.
    - UnoriginalGuy 14y ago
      And tasks? Plus that isn't really comparable since now instead of depending on a single connection (ActiveSync) you now need IMAP and a WebDAV server minimum. This entire area has been so controlled by Exchange Server for so long that there really aren't many true alternatives. The WebDAV based ones are messy at best.
  - buster 14y ago
    Ever heard of CalDAV and CardDAV? There is a world besides proprietary protocol crap out there. When will people learn...
    - jrabone 14y ago
      Where is the stable, open source CardDAV & CalDAV server, equivalent to Courier IMAP/POP? All I can see are Zimbra, some other half-finished Exchange replacements or PHP monstrosities, or an unmaintained mod_caldav for Apache. All I want is another piece of the Courier suite that integrates with my existing infrastructure, and uses the same modular authentication, TLS certificates etc. I don't want to maintain lots of different stacks in lots of different languages each with their own peculiar auth schemes. Perhaps I should just move the whole damn setup to Zimbra, but at that point it might as well just be Exchange.
      - buster 14y ago
        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_CalDAV_and_CardDAV_implementations https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_CalDAV_and_CardD... Edit: Everyones favorite company even has some calendar server that runs on linux, i am told: https://trac.calendarserver.org/ https://trac.calendarserver.org/ Did you try that?
  - rdl 14y ago
    None of the other stuff supports push very well.
    - TazeTSchnitzel 14y ago
      Nonsense. IMAP IDLE push works fine, but for some reason quite a few clients don't support it.
      - rdl 14y ago
        I mean the whole package -- even if a protocol exists, if the client I want to use/must use doesn't support it, it doesn't help. I mostly use iOS Mail on iOS, so I'm stuck there.
        rdl 14y ago
        ActiveSync also gives you some awesome benefits "for free" -- super lightweight MDM functionality.
        TazeTSchnitzel 14y ago
        I wonder if previously the lack of support for IMAP Push was to try and sell you MobileMe Push Email (which used a different protocol for some reason). Now I don't see why it lacks it.
        rdl 14y ago
        I think it's just that Apple is really really bad at online services (iCloud is doing better than anything they ever did before, and it's still not great). Safari is essentially the only top-quality piece of client software they've written, and even it 1) largely re-used something and 2) has peaked and sucks more and more now. I don't think they made a conscious decision to suck in a specific way to push their own product.
        TazeTSchnitzel 14y ago
        >iCloud is doing better than anything they ever did before But iCloud is simply the third incarnation of a line of online services. Of course it's better than before, because they've had a lot of time to improve it. >I don't think they made a conscious decision to suck in a specific way to push their own product. I suppose so.

1. Launch barebones, simplified product for free 2. Iterate on user feedback, often for years 3. Get tonnes of folks hooked 4. Begin charging

by zaidf 14y ago

1. Launch barebones, simplified product for free 2. Iterate on user feedback, often for years 3. Get tonnes of folks hooked 4. Begin charging

mtgx 14y ago

You make it sound as if Google wanted you to use Microsoft's ActiveSync. They've only offered it so far for free (while having to pay Microsoft for it) because a lot of users needed it. But other standards have appeared since then, and they are pushing for the adoption of those, and less reliance on Microsoft's proprietary technologies. Apple is doing the same thing, too.

UnoriginalGuy 14y ago
What other standards have appeared that support calendar, contacts, and tasks sync? Google are doing this to stop third parties from offering Gmail integration without paying some kind of Google Tax (e.g. other platforms, apps, web-sites, etc).
- elithrar 14y ago
  > What other standards have appeared that support calendar, contacts, and tasks sync? IMAP + IDLE, CalDAV, CardDAV? Whether they are a 1:1 feature replacement is another thing, but they are options.
  - UnoriginalGuy 14y ago
    And tasks? Plus that isn't really comparable since now instead of depending on a single connection (ActiveSync) you now need IMAP and a WebDAV server minimum. This entire area has been so controlled by Exchange Server for so long that there really aren't many true alternatives. The WebDAV based ones are messy at best.
- buster 14y ago
  Ever heard of CalDAV and CardDAV? There is a world besides proprietary protocol crap out there. When will people learn...
  - jrabone 14y ago
    Where is the stable, open source CardDAV & CalDAV server, equivalent to Courier IMAP/POP? All I can see are Zimbra, some other half-finished Exchange replacements or PHP monstrosities, or an unmaintained mod_caldav for Apache. All I want is another piece of the Courier suite that integrates with my existing infrastructure, and uses the same modular authentication, TLS certificates etc. I don't want to maintain lots of different stacks in lots of different languages each with their own peculiar auth schemes. Perhaps I should just move the whole damn setup to Zimbra, but at that point it might as well just be Exchange.
    - buster 14y ago
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_CalDAV_and_CardDAV_implementations https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_CalDAV_and_CardD... Edit: Everyones favorite company even has some calendar server that runs on linux, i am told: https://trac.calendarserver.org/ https://trac.calendarserver.org/ Did you try that?
- rdl 14y ago
  None of the other stuff supports push very well.
  - TazeTSchnitzel 14y ago
    Nonsense. IMAP IDLE push works fine, but for some reason quite a few clients don't support it.
    - rdl 14y ago
      I mean the whole package -- even if a protocol exists, if the client I want to use/must use doesn't support it, it doesn't help. I mostly use iOS Mail on iOS, so I'm stuck there.
      - rdl 14y ago
        ActiveSync also gives you some awesome benefits "for free" -- super lightweight MDM functionality.
      - TazeTSchnitzel 14y ago
        I wonder if previously the lack of support for IMAP Push was to try and sell you MobileMe Push Email (which used a different protocol for some reason). Now I don't see why it lacks it.
        rdl 14y ago
        I think it's just that Apple is really really bad at online services (iCloud is doing better than anything they ever did before, and it's still not great). Safari is essentially the only top-quality piece of client software they've written, and even it 1) largely re-used something and 2) has peaked and sucks more and more now. I don't think they made a conscious decision to suck in a specific way to push their own product.
        TazeTSchnitzel 14y ago
        >iCloud is doing better than anything they ever did before But iCloud is simply the third incarnation of a line of online services. Of course it's better than before, because they've had a lot of time to improve it. >I don't think they made a conscious decision to suck in a specific way to push their own product. I suppose so.