4 ms·

combined Chat and Wiki and then threw some API for mashing up. Made it pretty and Ajaxy. Don't fall in the trap of using word choice to make something sound in

combined Chat and Wiki and then threw some API for mashing up. Made it pretty and Ajaxy. Don't fall in the trap of using word choice to make something sound insignificant. Having several people edit the same document in real-time without problems, clearly see when and who updated what, and quickly look at the document's history (honestly, sites like Wikipedia's history feature is just ugly and clunky) can't really be called a wiki. The interface looks really busy from the screenshot and generally doesn't look like products Google usually makes (Chrome, Gmail have pretty clean interfaces, but maybe that's because I'm accustomed to them). If anything, I'm more interested in using the protocol and building a stripped-down version of it.

boundlessdreamz 17y ago
Yeah. The playback feature alone is a very difficult feature to successfully implement. The possibilities of this product is mind boggling. But will the complexity and learning curve be a stumbling block in adoption? Even if the consumer product doesn't take off, I expect wave to be hit in companies where people need to collaborate frequently especially since they can host their own wave server and not worry about hosting data with google.
- stcredzero 17y ago
  Just hide the levels of complexity, but make it easier for the user to delve into what they want. If they can make a web app that can let users unify their various notification/collaboration streams (Blogs, Twitter, Facebook, delicious, Flickr, IM, email...) then they have a winner. Especially if they can make a slick mobile version.
DannoHung 17y ago
I think it'd be more Googly if they got rid of the avatars, drop shadows, funky buttons and rounded corners (seriously, looks like someone barfed web 2.0 all over a screen) and ditched the 3 pane system, so clicking on a thread switched you over to the conversation itself rather than having the convo in a pane on the same page.
- Zaak 17y ago
  You can maximize the conversation box to fill the page if you want. I expect it wouldn't be hard to tweak the client to do that automatically.
- anigbrowl 17y ago
  My understanding is that this is just 'a' waves client, just as there are a bunch of quite different applications that let you use Twitter or GMail in a variety of different ways.

boundlessdreamz 17y ago

Yeah. The playback feature alone is a very difficult feature to successfully implement. The possibilities of this product is mind boggling. But will the complexity and learning curve be a stumbling block in adoption? Even if the consumer product doesn't take off, I expect wave to be hit in companies where people need to collaborate frequently especially since they can host their own wave server and not worry about hosting data with google.

stcredzero 17y ago
Just hide the levels of complexity, but make it easier for the user to delve into what they want. If they can make a web app that can let users unify their various notification/collaboration streams (Blogs, Twitter, Facebook, delicious, Flickr, IM, email...) then they have a winner. Especially if they can make a slick mobile version.

DannoHung 17y ago

I think it'd be more Googly if they got rid of the avatars, drop shadows, funky buttons and rounded corners (seriously, looks like someone barfed web 2.0 all over a screen) and ditched the 3 pane system, so clicking on a thread switched you over to the conversation itself rather than having the convo in a pane on the same page.

Zaak 17y ago
You can maximize the conversation box to fill the page if you want. I expect it wouldn't be hard to tweak the client to do that automatically.
anigbrowl 17y ago
My understanding is that this is just 'a' waves client, just as there are a bunch of quite different applications that let you use Twitter or GMail in a variety of different ways.