4 ms·
A lot of the analysis of Wave so far has (stupidly) focused on the web app that Google was showing off, on the whiz-bang HTML5 bullshit that ultimately doesn't
by brecht 17y ago
A lot of the analysis of Wave so far has (stupidly) focused on the web app that Google was showing off, on the whiz-bang HTML5 bullshit that ultimately doesn't much matter. I think it's really important to think of Wave not in terms of the front-end they were showing off, but rather in terms of the underlying protocol that powered it. Google envisions it as a sort of SMTP 2.0, powering most person-to-person communication on the internet; if (and only if) the industry gets behind it unilaterally, I think it has a real chance of success.
The paucity of existing documentation can be forgiven, but only to a point -- it's definitely on Google to make the complex elements of that protocol (and there are many) developer-accessible. As cool as the technology is, it'll wither and die without proper support.
- foulmouthboy 17y agoAgreed. I especially am frustrated with the people who are excited because, "you can see each letter the other person types as they type it during chats!" There's very little appeal in that. Lots of people need to edit typos and want to formulate complete thoughts before letting others see them. On the other hand, the underlying technology that will make that process even possible is what's really exciting. I'm looking forward to what creative people will be doing with it.
- gfodor 17y agoNevermind the fact that I remember that being the norm almost 20 years ago on BBS systems :)
- bjelkeman-again 17y agoGoogle Wave as a tool is the way people visualise what the protocol can offer them, which makes it easy to discuss. Think of trying to have a discussion about http vs. a discussion about web browser with the people who are discussing it. (Most people wouldn't know a protocol if it hit them in the head.)