[Google Wave] OPEN TO ALL: invites no longer necessary!

Mr_Rose · July 2009

So, Google Wave.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v_UyVmITiYQ
What is it?
Above is a video of the Google IO developer conference preview of Google's latest project. The basic idea, on the face of it at least, is to integrate every communication system you've ever heard of on the web; e-mail, IM, BBS, blog, twitter, whatever. All integrated into a single user interface.

Now, this has been attempted before; various people have tried to integrate any number of chat protocols, you can e-mail to twitter and theoretically get an RSS back of the replies.

Wave is taking a slightly different approach; take the "conversation" concept from gmail and make it apply to everything. Then make it extensible with both client-side and server-side plug-ins that will allow two-way communication between multiple protocols and web-tools.

Google also have this to say for themselves.

The developer preview includes, thus far:

Combined e-mail- and IM-like behaviour for typed text, with live per-character updating
Branching structures for the above, allowing you to interrupt a conversation to add a comment, starting a new sub-conversation
Drag-and-drop web-integration using Gears to add photos and other media
Live, simultaneous collaborative editing of all of the above by al participants in a conversation (Wave).
Two-way communication with a blog - comments added to an article get updated in the associated wave and vice-versa, all in realtime.
Similar two-way comms for Twitter, bug reporting tools, etc.
Dynamic addition of new participants
Playback - step forward and back through entire conversations so that latecomers can catch up.
Multi-language support including RTL and complex input (they show Chinese and Hebrew being added to a document simultaneously)
Mobile support (everything mentioned so far, except for the gears-based drag and drop, is HTML 5.0 code in a browser)

Google hopes to add more later:

Spreadsheet-type functionality
Two-way integration between multiple waves for collaborative document production
Anything else you can think of - the whole shebang will be Open Source.

So, have Google done it again? I think they just might; I for one am thoroughly impressed and already thinking of ways to incorporate a tool like this into my office. I can see the addition of language tools to create translations, text-to-speech and voice recognition extensions, and so on. With the kind of extensibility they've shown in the preview above, I would not be surprised to see this getting absorbed into video-games as a chat client, if a lightweight enough extension/robot can be made.
Then there's the location-aware stuff; like automatically creating an open wave that adds people using mobile devices within an arbitrary distance, 50ft, say? Basically, this is the back-end all those Augmented Reality front-ends have been waiting for, I think.

Anyway, I could go on, but I want to know what Penny Arcade thinks:
Has Google done it again?
What would you add to/integrate with Wave?
Are we finally about to start living in The Future (again, for the last time, for the first time)?

Further information can be found on the Wave developer blog, the development/API section of the site, and by signing up to receive more information here.

Since we are now getting invites in and out to peeps, I guess this is also now the Penny Arcade Wave Thread:

Captain Cactus And The Water Preservation Squad wrote: »

Ross Mills wrote: »

So why hasn't a PA Wave been created and put in the first post?! ^_^

There is a PA wave, but I don't know why it's not mentioned in the first post.

Anyway, if you have wave, just do a search for "with:public penny arcade" (in the inbox/search panel - you may need to delete the "in:inbox" that's there already) and that should bring up a couple of waves.

HOW I MINE FOR INVITES?!
OK, here's how it works:
It doesn't, not any more: As of a few minutes ago, wave.google.com has started handing out wave accounts to anyone that signs up/in. [strike]days ago, I have been getting way more invite donations that requests. Accordingly, I am assuming that no-one else really wants an invite and am shutting this thing down.
If you get into the beta, PM me with however many invites you want to share with the PA crew and you get your name put up in lights in the OP here (if you want; say so if not).
If you want an invite, PM me with the address you want an invite sent to (one address ONLY per applicant please) and you get your name up here too. I will then connect invites and invitees on a first-come, first served basis. If you get an invite this way, please give at least one back so we can continue the chain. Please also note that these are not instamatic g-mail a-like invites; they are manually collated and processed by actual humans at Google and therefore may take a while to get out - we have seen averages of 2-3 days, with some outliers of a week or more.[/strike]

Spoiler:

Aridhol · July 2009

devoir wrote: »

Really need to sit down and watch that video. But it's an hour and twenty minutes -_-

That's what I thought too so I just threw it on before bed thinking I'd fall asleep. I actually watched the whole thing, got out of bed to post here and twittered about it, it's worth watching.

ArcSyn · July 2009

Isn't MS Groove supposed to be something like this for workplaces?

Mike Danger · July 2009

Count me as another person who is excited to try Dungeons and Dragons in this. (Although the idea about using it to collaborate on school stuff is a tremendous idea.)

SAW776 · July 2009

God damn, don't tease me like this! I suddenly saw this thread and thought maybe the beta had been released and I had missed it.

The possibilities for this are awesome.

And for things like D&D it'll be amazing once it gets off the ground--the ability to collaberatively edit maps and such with a proper gadget? You could essentially do away with maptools and invisiblecastle and myth-weavers all together, because you could do it all right in Wave.

Mr_Rose · July 2009

ArcSyn wrote: »

Isn't MS Groove supposed to be something like this for workplaces?

OK, I just looked up Groove and wow is it ever limited in scope compared to this.
From what I can tell, Groove only runs on sharepoint server and only shares Office documents; it has the same dynamic on/offline thing and the simultaneous collaborative editing, but it costs $sharepoint + $Office (per client) + $Groove == $Texas
It also doesn't seem to include all of the dynamic web-publishing stuff like blog integration etc., or any modular extensibility.

Whilst Google hasn't published a price list yet, OSS + open protocol means that even if the big G charge equivalent prices, someone else almost certainly won't.

Also, what do you mean by "for workplaces" exactly?

LoneIgadzra · July 2009

I don't really understand all these gadgets and robots and things, but I assume it will be clear enough when this is out and I get a chance to play with the API's.

Basically, this looks awesome, and I'm thinking of ways to use it already. Plus the openness of the protocol means you can have a real nice desktop app instead of going through the browser (which is still sub-ideal tbh due to inability to properly leverage OS facilities such as the task bar or dock).

In the long-term, I really like the idea of potentially moving from email to something based off a uniform web-app interface though. I'm always having to explain the ins and outs of email clients and web email clients to my mom and how to access her webmail and how to log into AIM which is a completely un-related technology and all in all if, the future, our ISP was just running a Wave server, life would be so much easier.

Darmak · July 2009

I wonder when the tinfoil hat people are going to come in here and talk about how evil Google is and how this is an awful idea and will ruin the internet.

LoneIgadzra · July 2009

I feel fairly certain that google is the scariest company out there at the moment, but it's hard to argue with free, open source, open protocol.

SAW776 · July 2009

If Google can hide a bunch of scary shit in an open source project like this, they deserve to be our overlords. I cannot imagine how many people are going to be pouring over every bit of it to prove that Google is actually run by Satan.

Mr_Rose · July 2009

Especially since, and this may be a first for Google, they are specifically making their own client/server architecture in such a way that it can be installed as a local server by a private company then completely walled off from the internet so that only their employees can use it.
Or connected via a firewalled gateway with a packet sniffer etc. for the paranoid who also want customers.

ArcSyn · July 2009

Mr_Rose wrote: »

ArcSyn wrote: »

Isn't MS Groove supposed to be something like this for workplaces?

OK, I just looked up Groove and wow is it ever limited in scope compared to this.
From what I can tell, Groove only runs on sharepoint server and only shares Office documents; it has the same dynamic on/offline thing and the simultaneous collaborative editing, but it costs $sharepoint + $Office (per client) + $Groove == $Texas
It also doesn't seem to include all of the dynamic web-publishing stuff like blog integration etc., or any modular extensibility.

Whilst Google hasn't published a price list yet, OSS + open protocol means that even if the big G charge equivalent prices, someone else almost certainly won't.

Also, what do you mean by "for workplaces" exactly?

I admit that I didn't watch the video yet, but from the comments/article I saw it sounded similar to groove, but yes, groove is much more limited in scope.

True, Groove requires Sharepoint and Office to run properly, but hey, we already have a Sharepoint server, and everyone has Office? So those two points are taken out of the equation and using an official MS program to do collaboration vs. using a third party and hoping it integrates well is an easy choice for most IT departments. Even if it does cost more than Google. This is what I meant by workplaces - offices where they already are so deep into MS where going anywhere else really doesn't make sense unless they feel like doing a total conversion or need something that MS doesn't provide.

I can, however, see this software (if it's free or cheap) really taking hold in the consumer market where people don't have a sharepoint server or other central system to base software on, where Wave would be able to integrate the many different systems that they already use into one centralized piece of software.

Mr_Rose · July 2009

Speaking as the IT department of a company that is very much not hip-deep in MS code, I can definitely see myself installing a Wave server downstairs, if only so I can get the staff to ditch their MSN chat windows.

Plus, our lead developer can see as far as I can with regards to replacing a significant chunk of our software's back-end with a custom Wave implementation. And the marketing guys would love the ability to basically e-mail/chat right into the system live during demos, then sell that feature as part of the package.

Fake Edit: Also, have added a few links to the OP for more information/signups.

Michael H · July 2009

LoneIgadzra wrote: »

I don't really understand all these gadgets and robots and things, but I assume it will be clear enough when this is out and I get a chance to play with the API's.

Basically, this looks awesome, and I'm thinking of ways to use it already. Plus the openness of the protocol means you can have a real nice desktop app instead of going through the browser (which is still sub-ideal tbh due to inability to properly leverage OS facilities such as the task bar or dock).

In the long-term, I really like the idea of potentially moving from email to something based off a uniform web-app interface though. I'm always having to explain the ins and outs of email clients and web email clients to my mom and how to access her webmail and how to log into AIM which is a completely un-related technology and all in all if, the future, our ISP was just running a Wave server, life would be so much easier.

You can already sign up and get access to the API information. They're also getting people on the list for beta users.

Here's a linky link: http://code.google.com/apis/wave/

Mr_Rose · July 2009

Michael H wrote: »

You can already sign up and get access to the API information. They're also getting people on the list for beta users.

Here's a linky link: http://code.google.com/apis/wave/

Linky link also now in the [post=10972659]OP[/post], BTW, as well as a couple others.

And would you look at that; someone already added some voice/phone integration: Twilio phone robot. It parses messages for 'phone numbers and makes them links, then calls both parties, connects them and transcribes the call to the Wave.

Frem · July 2009

Yeah; pretty much everyone in the beta right now is either a Google employee or a developer. We should have a few more pretty sweet plugins by the time it launches.

(By the way, if you actually know how to write web applications and want to mess around, your chances of getting in early are dramatically higher than for the rest of us. link)

ArcSyn · July 2009

Holy cow. I'm finally watching the video and even just the starting stuff is awesome!

Rohan · July 2009

Dark Shroud wrote: »

Meh.

Yeah, pretty much.

Aridhol · July 2009

Rohan wrote: »

Dark Shroud wrote: »

Meh.

Yeah, pretty much.

Yeah I don't know if this interweb thing will catch on abloo bloo bloo

LoneIgadzra · July 2009

Michael H wrote: »

LoneIgadzra wrote: »

I don't really understand all these gadgets and robots and things, but I assume it will be clear enough when this is out and I get a chance to play with the API's.

Basically, this looks awesome, and I'm thinking of ways to use it already. Plus the openness of the protocol means you can have a real nice desktop app instead of going through the browser (which is still sub-ideal tbh due to inability to properly leverage OS facilities such as the task bar or dock).

In the long-term, I really like the idea of potentially moving from email to something based off a uniform web-app interface though. I'm always having to explain the ins and outs of email clients and web email clients to my mom and how to access her webmail and how to log into AIM which is a completely un-related technology and all in all if, the future, our ISP was just running a Wave server, life would be so much easier.

You can already sign up and get access to the API information. They're also getting people on the list for beta users.

Here's a linky link: http://code.google.com/apis/wave/

Yeah, I don't actually want to develop web applications, I just want to use the thing, so it doesn't really matter. I'm just have trouble conceptualizing how the add-ons work based on the explanations in the video. I figure when it's properly released I'll probably download the api's and play for a bit, just for the hell of it. But right now I'm not going to go to the effort of pretending to be legit.

Rohan · July 2009

Aridhol wrote: »

Rohan wrote: »

Dark Shroud wrote: »

Meh.

Yeah, pretty much.

Yeah I don't know if this interweb thing will catch on abloo bloo bloo

I a) doubt I'll be using this at any point soon,
b) doubt this has the same significance behind it as the "interweb", and
c) stand by my "meh"

devoir · July 2009

There are always stick-in-the-muds.

1970s: "Why do I need e-mail when I can fax someone? Meh."

Nightslyr · July 2009

While some of the stuff is damn neat (rudimentary version control and realtime collaboration, realtime translation, realtime blogging, etc), I'm really excited about the e-mail/IM merger. I can't count the number of long e-mail chains I've had sent to me - usually conversations between family members - where I couldn't figure out what was going on because some people fucked up quoting the others. Just having a little indented box that says "This is a comment inserted by your brother" will clear that shit up in a nice, unobtrusive way. Sign me up.

SAW776 · July 2009

Nightslyr wrote: »

While some of the stuff is damn neat (rudimentary version control and realtime collaboration, realtime translation, realtime blogging, etc), I'm really excited about the e-mail/IM merger. I can't count the number of long e-mail chains I've had sent to me - usually conversations between family members - where I couldn't figure out what was going on because some people fucked up quoting the others. Just having a little indented box that says "This is a comment inserted by your brother" will clear that shit up in a nice, unobtrusive way. Sign me up.

Not only that, but the fact that you can replay the wave from the beginning, so you can read each message as its made in the order it was made, rather than having to sift through a giant wall of text.

Rohan · July 2009

devoir wrote: »

There are always stick-in-the-muds.

1970s: "Why do I need e-mail when I can fax someone? Meh."

I just don't see myself using it, is all. Doesn't mean I can't see the potential behind it, and why people are so excited.

ArcSyn · July 2009

devoir wrote: »

There are always stick-in-the-muds.

2009: "Why do I need e-mail when I can fax someone? Meh."

Fixed that for you... Ugh.

Mr_Rose · July 2009

ArcSyn wrote: »

devoir wrote: »

There are always stick-in-the-muds.

2009: "Why do I need e-mail when I can fax someone? Meh."

Fixed that for you... Ugh.

This. A thousand times this; we have, in a lonely corner at the back of the production office, a lone facsimile machine that is for the exclusive use of government customers because they haven't quite figured out e-mail attachments (oh noes, viruses!) yet. We haven't replaced it with a e-mail-to-fax device yet because the MD is just as backwards and doesn't actually believe such a thing can exist. gWave would annihilate what's left of he mind, I think...

Dark Shroud · July 2009

I just don't see this taking off beyond niche use. I would also like to see business pricing.

Mr_Rose · July 2009

Yeah, a niche use like e-mail. Are you sure you've entirely apprehended the implications of an open, licence-free protocol and an open source application?

Seriously, even if Google don't have a price that's right for you, someone else will.

ArcSyn · July 2009

Heh, one fax? We have at least 1 per floor and they all get used daily.. However, things are looking up as my IT manager is pushing for a fax server so at least in the building we won't have to use faxes anymore. But yeah, people are sticklers for what they're used to. We have typewriters on most of the floors too because people just won't get away from their multi-part forms..

I'm curious if they'll open this up to the public for free, ala Google Mail/Chat/etc. Perhaps just replace that all with Wave.

Mr_Rose · July 2009

Looks like that's at least part of the plan. Actually, given the way Google already roll stuff out to free gmail accounts without telling anyone beforehand, I wouldn't be surprised if one day your g-mail account looked like the Wave client and there was a nice new message from Google telling you that they just replaced your mail and g-talk accounts with a wave account and added an e-mail robot so you can keep in contact with everyone else....

Shorn Scrotum Man · July 2009

Just watched the vid... hooooooooly shit that looks awesome. As a web developer the possibilities... dear god.

Oh man I can't wait to get access to this!

Jasconius · July 2009

Started watching the video... 20 minutes in...

I think the thread based e-mailing is pro.

My three primary concerns right now are:

1) Corporate adoptability - almost non-existent. Microsoft is likely to casually ignore Wave or try to reinvent it, and Microsoft owns US corporate e-mailing. This is a major blow to Wave taking a hold, to say nothing of IE8's lax or non-existent HTML 5 support.... and IE8 is very likely to become the new IE6 in terms of mass adoption and dumb users not upgrading.

2) Live text based messaging. It's cool, but I'm not a fan. One of the great advantages to text based messages is premeditation and deliberation on what you say and how you say it. Per-character transmissions breaks that and I think it would actually make communication more quirky and hard, especially if you are backspace-prone.

3) E-mail marketing? Marketing e-mails boil down to something circa HTML2 or 3... HTML 2 in a HTML 5 wrapper? I don't see it. Unless they propose to totally change e-marketing, which they won't, considering it's still stuck in 1996 and Gmail is no less guilty of making life hard.

It's fun and cool, but it's day is not here... maybe one day.

Will I still try to develop for it? Shit yeah.

Mr_Rose · July 2009

They address corporate uptake at the end; the Wave Protocol spec is open as will be their basic client; Microsoft could easily just drop Wave support into Outlook 2012 (or 1010 if they get a hurry on) without blinking; just one more comms protocol.
There are plans to implement a button that lets you not update live; it's even there in the UI already, just non-functional in the preview.
Uh, what? E-marketing would have to be different in Wave anyway; it's not really possible as far as I can tell to create a wave that doesn't permit instant feedback from whoever received it then share that feedback with everyone else automatically. he version of HTML used is completely irrelevant at that point.

Jasconius · July 2009

Yes.

It would have to be different.

And that is the point.

If you've ever worked with e-Marketers you will understand that this will simply not happen. They have a hard enough time with the concept of text only e-mail blasts. Ask them to design within a whole new concept of "threads" and their heads will explode.

The big concern was not the interaction as a result of thread based marketing, but instead the presentation, which will be weakened, and marketers only like shiny things. If they can't have shiny things, they aren't interested. At the very least, Wave minimizes screen space available to e-mail designers.

OK LOOK DON'T GET UPSET

It's not going to stillborn the project. But it's a big issue that someone is going to have to deal with eventually if they are serious about making this the global standard.

MKR · July 2009

Mr_Rose wrote: »

They address corporate uptake at the end; the Wave Protocol spec is open as will be their basic client; Microsoft could easily just drop Wave support into Outlook 2012 (or 1010 if they get a hurry on) without blinking; just one more comms protocol.

There are plans to implement a button that lets you not update live; it's even there in the UI already, just non-functional in the preview.

Uh, what? E-marketing would have to be different in Wave anyway; it's not really possible as far as I can tell to create a wave that doesn't permit instant feedback from whoever received it then share that feedback with everyone else automatically. he version of HTML used is completely irrelevant at that point.

This is not something Microsoft is known for doing. They only did this for e-mail, newsgroups, and RSS because the former two were firmly established before Microsoft's founding, and RSS was firmly established before Microsoft took notice of it.

They have made a minor shift towards being more cooperative with the rest of the software development world in the last few years, so it's possible, but I won't be anticipating it.

Michael H · July 2009

MKR wrote: »

Mr_Rose wrote: »

They address corporate uptake at the end; the Wave Protocol spec is open as will be their basic client; Microsoft could easily just drop Wave support into Outlook 2012 (or 1010 if they get a hurry on) without blinking; just one more comms protocol.

There are plans to implement a button that lets you not update live; it's even there in the UI already, just non-functional in the preview.

Uh, what? E-marketing would have to be different in Wave anyway; it's not really possible as far as I can tell to create a wave that doesn't permit instant feedback from whoever received it then share that feedback with everyone else automatically. he version of HTML used is completely irrelevant at that point.

This is not something Microsoft is known for doing. They only did this for e-mail, newsgroups, and RSS because the former two were firmly established before Microsoft's founding, and RSS was firmly established before Microsoft took notice of it.

They have made a minor shift towards being more cooperative with the rest of the software development world in the last few years, so it's possible, but I won't be anticipating it.

I don't know; in light of recent events this is exactly the type of thing that I can see MS getting on the bandwagon with. In the past few months I've seen them take a decidedly "un-Microsoft" position on a lot of things.

I believe that they're coming around to the realization that the while the world has revolved around them for a long time THEY actually need to get on board with the popular culture of the web and other applications.

I would guess that they had a relations/marketing shakeup with the recent job cuts and are taking a new tack on things. Integration with Outlook would be a smart move. While work and business environments are the bread and butter of MS Office usage (and especially Outlook), many home users are moving away from email clients in general to web-based mail interfaces.

Jasconius · July 2009

I doubt it. Keep in mind also that Microsoft is notoriously segregated in terms of departments. The people who run Live might as well be a different company from the Office team.

Also keep in mind that e-mail formatting support actually got WORSE in 2007, instead of better. Outlook is focused on office coordination and productivity, not on improving existing e-mail functionality in any sweeping way, nor do they have any incentive to adopt such a radically different protocol, for much the same reason why eBay can't redesign their site...

I know it's hard to imagine but you and I also believe that Google is forgetting that most people, in fact a super majority of people, are fucking retarded. Regular e-mail is still a mystery to them, introducing a whole new scheme will just not go over well.

OK YES, Wave is very cool. But it isn't the 4 horsemen riding on a tidal wave of awesome that will fundamentally change the landscape of online communication anytime in the actionable future on a meaningful scale.

LoneIgadzra · July 2009

I think people are still mystified by email because, even in 2009, it's just not simple. If you want to run a desktop client, you have to go through all this configuration that sometimes doesn't work because the people who who run your ISP's mail server are retarded. If you want to use webmail, there are dozens of popular clients used by both ISP-driven and free services alike. IMAP is totally different and confusing across different mail servers, let alone different clients. And it's just confusing as hell.

Wave looks to have the potential to change that up. All the early adopters will just be logging into one central google server/implementation in the beginning, with one web client, and as it gets more popular, the consumer-oriented clients available will be forced to look a lot like Google's. Basically, it seems to me that the wave-verse will start out quite homogenous and simple, and it won't be in anyone's interests to change that for consumers because consumers don't like things that are different and confusing. I'm sure we'll eventually see completely bizarre wave clients designed to suit someone's whims, but you won't see these kinds of different things in the mainstream the way you do with email.

Mr_Rose · July 2009

Jasconius wrote: »

I doubt it. Keep in mind also that Microsoft is notoriously segregated in terms of departments. The people who run Live might as well be a different company from the Office team.

Also keep in mind that e-mail formatting support actually got WORSE in 2007, instead of better. Outlook is focused on office coordination and productivity, not on improving existing e-mail functionality in any sweeping way, nor do they have any incentive to adopt such a radically different protocol, for much the same reason why eBay can't redesign their site...

I know it's hard to imagine but you and I also believe that Google is forgetting that most people, in fact a super majority of people, are fucking retarded. Regular e-mail is still a mystery to them, introducing a whole new scheme will just not go over well.

OK YES, Wave is very cool. But it isn't the 4 horsemen riding on a tidal wave of awesome that will fundamentally change the landscape of online communication anytime in the actionable future on a meaningful scale.

I fail to see how Outlook being all about "office coordination and productivity" means MS wouldn't want Wave integration, what with the whole point of Wave being office coordination and productivity...

ALSO there's no need to shout randomly at people. It lowers your public image.

Jasconius · July 2009

It's the only way to get through to the Google apologists sometimes.

Penny Arcade

[Google Wave] OPEN TO ALL: invites no longer necessary!

Posts