Google is closing down development of its new-age communications platform Wave due to lack of interest. The Chocolate Factory said Wednesday that it's stopping development of Wave as a stand-alone product because of a lack of user adoption. The Wave site is being put on life support until the end of the year, with the …
Lack of interest?
Or maybe it was just another badly thought-out, half-arsed piece of crap software. Same as all Google software.
At the risk of feeding the troll....
That's right. Shitty code, like the search algorithms, GMail, Android and Google Maps.... All of which are far inferior to Bing/Yahoo, Hotmal/YahooMail, Windows Mobile/Symbian and <insert shit online map app here>
That is all.....
Looking at the amount of vote-downs it seems I have upset a few fanbois with a healthy dose of truth.
It was interesting...
...it just didn't solve comms problem any better than anything else. And some of the features just sucked donkey ball (showing people what you type, as you type? Pun-leeze).
It was newsgroups for Web 2.0 and it managed to not be as good as newsgroups.
Oh, and not havig stand-along apps was a fail. I don't want my comms in a browser, I want them integrated to my device/desktop.
I am sure that we'll see components/ideas in other offerings despite it's problems.
Want to solve my comms problems? Give me voice, video, instant messaging and email; all integrated. Encrypted, based on Open Standards and working seamlessly with MS Office (no matter how good OpenOffice is (and it is pretty good, i use it at home) it does not format/render documents etc *identically* to MS Office and some of us have to use it....grr...).
I thought the amount of vote-downs was due to the healthy dose of nonsense, to be honest.
(Not a 'fanbois' of google, btw. Some stuff they do is OK. Other stuff ... not so much. Wave, despite some initial promise, seemed to fit squarely in the latter category)
Why on earth would anyone be a "fanboi" for search engines / email / online mapping? Maybe lots of people like it and use it because it works, and is generally better than the competition? Sounds more like you have an anti-Google agenda, rather than anyone else being particularly pro-Google.
not upset just disagreement..Whilst I also am of the habit of saying I could do better, 'I' do think that in comparisson with the other (free) alternatives google do some things very well.
Note that I don't wish to change your mind or persuade you otherwise. I just wish to express My disagreement with your view of the truth.
Not a "Fan Boy"
I hate the deliberately misspelt "fanboi" tag... So childish. I happen to be a google services user, and do have slight concerns about privacy and exposing too much info to a search and ad provider, but please "shitty code"? Get real, as a proprietary software provider they are no worse and IMHO far better than most proprietary or open-source providers.
Please justify your assertions, without resorting to the hurrr-durrr google is shit and <insert competitor here> are far better.
Thanks for the huge list of great Google products. One problem: most of them seem to have come from companies that Google bought. See the difference there? Bought vs produced. Nice trick if you can get away with it.
Fanbois, got to love their blind faith.
Andriod:WIN. Wave:Fail. Google Maps:Win. Gmail:Win.
Win some lose some.
I can't wait to hear the verdict on Buzz..
Experimentation doesn't always kick up a winner
Edison's thousand crap lightbulb ideas and all that.
While Wave and Buzz didn't catch on, at least it shows Google are prepared to play with some new ideas.
Who else is experimenting in the software arena? And don't say MS.
Google Buzz - fail
re:Who else is experimenting in the software arena? And don't say MS.
MS. Did you not see only the other day: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/07/30/microsoft_street_slide/
Mind, it was the first piece of experimental stuff I've seen from them for ages (other than stuff like F# on the developer side).
Google Sky:Win - Docs:Win - Streetview:Win - Buzz:Fail
It seems to me that anything that requires such a lot of talking to explain is doomed from the beginning.
Talk talk talk
Did you ever tried explaining email or the internet to someone over 60, 10 years ago?
Declare my position
I should note that I also thought Wave was shit. I tried it, gave up quickly, tried again and finally ditched it for good with a sad shake of the head. It was dreadful.
I just don't think that being hard to describe necessarily makes something doomed from the outset.
The idea was good but the implementation didn't really work very well. Plus it needed to integrate with ordinary email a lot better.
Hopefully some ideas will arise from the ashes of this and something great will happen :)
So anyway this caused me to post something on Wave for the fist time in 8 months.
What's the icon for "mef" Sarah?
How long until it's gone?
I've rather enjoyed using Wave. How long until new Waves cannot be created? Edited? Is it going to be shutdown completely?
I just asked my friend if he'd heard of Google Wave. He said, "I got an invite and I couldn't understand it so I didn't bother again. It seemed a bit pants."
I, too, had an invite, saw nothing of interest in it, and haven't used it in months.
This seems to be the story. Got an invite, played with it once, never looked at it again.
I know that's the case for me. I thought it was like a really good e-mail client, but without an e-mail address to make it useful!
Kinda ruined an application you need other people you know on to work properly - from my experience anyway - yeah I had invites I could hand out but that made it "fiddly" and "geeky" to my non-monitor tanned friends.
slow, buggy, unusable - lack of invites saved me embarrassment
The lack of invitations was a big problem early - I had an invite but nobody else I knew. But as wave was slow, buggy and confusing, I decided to wait for a better release.
Several months later I got more invites and tried again - still slow, buggy and hard to use. I lodged bug reports and voted up feature requests.
A month ago wave added to my apps domain so all my colleagues could use it. But it was still slow, buggy and hard to use. Bugs I saw and reported months ago still present.
The poor invites process did hurt wave. But its deeper problems are what killed it. In the end the lack of invites mainly saved me embarrassment by limiting the number of people who's time I wasted.
The general idea - of blending chat, email, collaborating on documents, etc., into a single thing - was a good one.
But the execution was woeful. It's not much use unless it's accessible to all your friends/colleagues - and the invitation scheme didn't deliver that (well, not at the right time). The main round of invitations came out before it was really ready. The tutorials were too long and dull. I don't want to watch a video. It didn't integrate with anything else, so you HAD to learn that new interface, and you got no notifications when there was new stuff on your waves - so you had to go looking. And the procedure for adding the interesting gadgets was truly arcane, so for most people it looked like nothing other than a slightly confusing chat system.
The idea deserves to come back - maybe in an extended version of gmail. A much more incremental roll-out could make it quite attractive.
@Andrew Martin 1
"The general idea - of blending chat, email, collaborating on documents, etc., into a single thing - was a good one."
Nah. We tried that back in the early '70s. See RFC 196, for one, and the XeroxPARC Alta's Pup protocol, et alia ... It didn't take half a decade to figure out that separate protocols and interfaces/methodologies for different communications methods just makes more sense than trying to unify 'em into one.
Note I'm talking interface and presentation here, not transport ...
well, the history of computing is all about re-inventing wheels... (both the round ones, and the less successful polygons)
but there *are* integrations that work - mail and calendar in Outlook or Thunderbird, for example. Or Facebook, which is part homepage, part instant message, part usenet, part photo-sharing, part link-sharing, part spam-laden crapware.
I thought WAVE was pretty good. My only issue with it was the fact that GMAIL was not integrated into it. I did not want to juggle 2 email systems.
Had GMAIL worked with in WAVE I think they would of had a much better response.... kind of silly they did not do it, maybe there was some technical reason for it I don't know?
Solution looking for a problem
And not even a very good solution.
You are the weakest link. Goodbye.
Needed integration to work
Wave's biggest problem was that you needed a separate login. If they had rolled out Wave as a feature of Gmail, it might have taken off. It was too much hassle to keep track of email logins and Wave logins and separate conversations in each.
I thought wave's biggest problem was that is required moving the whole communication into the googleverse. With gmail I can communicate with people that don't have gmail accounts even, occasionally, hotmail users.
Interesting app, shame it failed...
It was an interesting application that very much had a niche audience, IMO; namely teams that are spread out over a geographically large area.
Too niche unfortunately...
Even for that
I work as part of a team spread out geographically, and we tested it briefly. It didn't really do anything any better than our existing tools, and I for one hated the real-time typing thing: all it did was expose how clumsy I am with my two fingers and a thumb!
Plus all that scripting and whatnot was leaving it wide open to hacks etc in the long run. Solution looking for a problem.
Badgerbadgerbadgerbadger eeuuuuuu ssssnake!
The only person I ever spoke to who was enthusiastic about Wave was a friend who was just going through the first flush of a social networking obsession and had also just bought herself an iPhone. My god that was a nauseating few hours. On top of that she had slagged me off back in the day for using LiveJournal ("Oh my god why don't you just go to the pub and speak to people in real life like everyone else you total geek?").
Vindication, of a sort
I know an "IT person" who is a non-stop fan of anything Google puts out, and at the time of it's release was both praising it and repeating the marketing speak about how e-mail was obsolete and this was the "wave" of the future.
Big hint---if people really don't understand what your product is and it takes several tutorial videos to even grasp the concept, it's not gong to work. Maybe some good ideas, but a woeful execution.
Showing people character by character text messages was interesting but was it necessary, other than to see how poor a typist most of us really are? And like most people I was scratching my head---the document collaboration was useful, but aside from that just what to do with it?
It was also ironic (as many people are pointing out) that it didn't integrate with the e-mail it was supposed to replace. Sigh...I'd show this to that IT person but he's already forgotten about it and is on to the next widget that will save the world.
Never understood it..
I got used to Facebook, halfway used to Twitter (as in seeing the point-I barely do still), and like Tumblr for simple articles that look silly posted only on FB.
However, despite using other Google software for years, the Wave never actually made sense. It never broke over the rock of my understanding or made a splash in my online life.
Can anyone explain where your meant to go or what you are meant to do with this thing? :-).
For similar functionality within an office network, there is OneNote - it doesn't have a browser's limitations so is much easier and simpler to use and of course the content it supports is much richer. Wave was limited by JS and HTML and so it was a slightly weaker collaboration tool.
BUT, Wave was better for talking and sharing with people who weren't within the office network. I'm a bit surprised that there wasn't enough adoption!
Still don't know what Wave was...
Google, you baffle and delight in equal measure. Don't stop trying though.
If you build it...
they may not necessarily come.
Tried it briefly
Didn't get on with the interface or anything out of it so stopped using it. So I guess user apathy is right.
I liked Wave. It kept topics of conversations together without having to search through subject headers in email.
I wonder what will happen to Wave? Will all my waves be archived? At least with email I can have an offline copy on my computer.
The really big idea behind Wave was federation of the platform. Increasingly we rely on monolithic platforms such as Google Apps and Facebook. With Wave, we could all run our own Wave servers but still communicate with each other, much as we do with email.
Sooner or later email must die. Something will need to replace it. Much as we don't want to rely on a single company to provide all of the world's email or DNS services, we won't want to rely on a single company to provide our messaging/collaboration services. Wave may not be the answer, but we will need something along similar lines.
ah yes wave..possible worse then buzz...im a android owning fanboy as well but wtf ?
At least they're trying...
At least they're trying - it's better to try new things and see what value can be made from them than sticking with the same old crap and avoiding all forms of innovation. (i.e. MS Outlook - still featuring many of the same bugs and savage usability problems as it did 10 years ago)
So some things don't work out - lessons can be learnt, better plans made next time and anything useful in it may be useful in the future. This is much better than stagnation.
I worked on two small projects that used Wave™ to plan and coordinate the progress.
It seemed to work quite well at first, but then the Wave just became huge and hard to navigate.
I hope that some of the tech resurfaces somewhere, but I won't miss it.
My opinion would have likely been 'meh', it often is to google and apple stuff, but this idea of exclusive invites just pushes me away.
I don't needlessly sign up for stuff and give my email to yet another marketing dept (at best - or spam merchant at worst) so as a result i am not on any early adopter lists and did not get an invite to wave or spotify.
As a result, I wont go to the trouble of installing wave since i don't know what it is supposed to be and i am quite happy with pirate bay over spotify as most people i know listen to rubbish music.
The concept that a company will exclusively allow me to be their customer is absurd! Its like queuing to get into a shop to buy something. Wave is an example of when the company believes its own hype too much.
It was an interesting idea, although fellow monitored tanned folk didnt really get into it and figure out cool things to do with it.
One of its main failings is that it wasnt integrated. no single sign on intergration with other google products - i seem to recall it didnt even mail you to let you know there had been an update!?
have they shut down Buzz yet, or what everther their twitter like service was?
and finally, is it just me or is google groups also not the best implementation of discussion groups/forums/bbs the world had seen either?
however, as others have said... Search, Mail, Map/Street View are great. From a revenue perspective the Ads have been a sucess and sometimes to give you interesting and relveant ad links related to mail/searched
Orkut whistles quietly in the background
With toys made from gears.
But, seriously, being one of the older crowd, we still do lots of comms among friends via never-dead (until someone reboots the host) GNU Screen + BitchX. My much younger betrothed uses Facebook and SMS. Solution in search of a problem.
'"You will forget you are looking at a browser," he concluded.'
That's not a selling point for the 6.999 billion people who don't give a shit what a browser is.
- Comment Renewable energy 'simply WON'T WORK': Top Google engineers
- Nexus 7 fandroids tell of salty taste after sucking on Google's Lollipop
- Useless 'computer engineer' Barbie FIRED in three-way fsck row
- Game Theory Dragon Age Inquisition: Our chief weapons are...
- 'How a censorious and moralistic blogger ruined my evening'