Actual Google Wave And Linux discussion [Archive]

worMatty

5 Jun 2009, 22:23

Hi, guys.

I watched the hour-twenty-long video at http://wave.google.com and was very impressed. Just tonight I'm chatting with a work colleague over MSN and can imagine the benefit of real-time typing to speed up conversing. I could see this replacing email, it is 'the' solution for bringing all those media and content sharing tools together with the speed and convenience of instant messaging combined with the organisation of email.

I think the project deserves its own thread because it's just so amazing.

Hence forth with chat.

Matty

Akuryou13

7 Jun 2009, 04:13

so what IS it? I'd like to know the basics before I watch an hour video to get the details :p

AndrewTaylor

7 Jun 2009, 11:03

It's email, forum, chat and real-time document editing rolled into one.

You start a 'wave' by inviting people and typing a message. If they're online, they can reply in real time just like chat. If they're not then they can reply when they are and you'll see the wave as 'unread' like email. You can edit other people's messages and reply to anything in a wave inline rather than quoting it at the end. I think you can even reply to part of a long message while the author is halfway through typing the next paragraph.

Like most clever modern internet things, it does very little we couldn't do at all before, but it does a lot of hitherto disparate things neatly and in one place.

I tend to type stuff into chat windows and then delete it again. That will be a worse idea on Wave. I may have to start drafting in my head.

Xinos

7 Jun 2009, 11:29

I tend to type stuff into chat windows and then delete it again. That will be a worse idea on Wave. I may have to start drafting in my head.

Yeah I do that all the time. Live character transmission seems annoying, but luckily there is a toggle button for that.

But it could be a useful feature other than for the increased speed of discussion. I can imagine what hectic discussions will like on wave, people writing insults and leaving them in the text field for just a second before erasing. You can probably have entire conversations without ever hitting send.

AndrewTaylor

7 Jun 2009, 11:42

I expect so. It does store deleted text, though. You can play back the creation of a wave in order.

SupSuper

7 Jun 2009, 13:21

It sounds... interesting. And messy, like all new things. I haven't even completely gotten used to how Gmail handles e-mails as conversations and combines them with Google Chat.

On one side, I can finally fix any errors in my messages as I go. On the other, I have to keep much better tabs on what I write. There might also be some issues with typing speed differences.

Akuryou13

7 Jun 2009, 14:12

interesting. as you mentioned, it has some quirks that'll have to be sorted but I like the sound of the idea. nothing I'll be using any time soon, granted, but interesting still.

AndrewTaylor

7 Jun 2009, 15:55

It sounds... interesting. And messy, like all new things. I haven't even completely gotten used to how Gmail handles e-mails as conversations and combines them with Google Chat.

Really? Oh, I couldn't go back to regular email. Emails should be threaded and labelled. I can't imagine why anyone thought it was a good idea to do it any other way. Combining it with chat I can take or leave. I suppose you might as well.

SupSuper

7 Jun 2009, 16:19

Really? Oh, I couldn't go back to regular email. Emails should be threaded and labelled. I can't imagine why anyone thought it was a good idea to do it any other way. Combining it with chat I can take or leave. I suppose you might as well.
Threaded doesn't work so well with groups of people, although neither does e-mail. And eventually I can't decide if I want to reply with an e-mail or chat since it all merges into the same thing.

Don't mind me, I'm just being picky. :p

AndrewTaylor

7 Jun 2009, 17:18

Threaded doesn't work so well with groups of people, although neither does e-mail. And eventually I can't decide if I want to reply with an e-mail or chat since it all merges into the same thing.

Don't mind me, I'm just being picky. :p

Works pretty well in my experience. It gets confusing if you're constantly adding and removing people from the recipients list, but then, that's exactly the kind of thing Wave is supposed to fix.

worMatty

7 Jun 2009, 19:15

Exactly. It's like a group instant messenger chat that's not in real time, that presents itself in email form.

It's not in a linear form like a forum, but the whole conversation can be linear and bits of it commented on at any point. This means that individual points in a message can be discussed separately and not requoted many times, but it doesn't have to be like that.

Real-time chat can be useful and look like it will make conversations much faster by allowing people to formulate responses to things as they are written, like a normal speech conversation. Rather than waiting for your chat buddy to type, type, type, etc, then read the whole response, digest it and return, you see what the person is typing, giving you a chance to absorb it and prepare a response. This means whole conversations move with a faster pace, and if there is more than one attendee, people can see when certain points are being raised, and don't have to raise them themselves.

If you want time to draft a response, there is a toggle box right next to the text entry area. Just tick it for the duration.

Consider having a draft document, discussing it in real time, commenting on parts of it and editing it collaboratively! Each participant's cursor/position is shown by background highlighting the word they have just typed, in their colour.

Guys, you have got to watch the video. It will keep you enthralled, just watch the first five minutes and listen to what they have to say.

Vader

9 Jun 2009, 15:51

SupSuper

9 Jun 2009, 19:44

I started watching it a while back and what I saw did intrigue me. As Andrew says, it's nothing we couldn't have done before but this is like an all-in-one version. Like how mobile phones these days have cameras, web browsers, MP3 players, Tasers and so on. Would you really carry all those separate devices when you can just carry one which does all of it? Only if you have very large pockets.Only mobile phones do it all half-assed, I hope Google Wave doesn't. :p There's a delicate balance between doing only one thing but really well, and doing multiple things but only ok.

Vader

9 Jun 2009, 19:55

Oh I totally agree although that doesn't stop me from using my phone for its 'extra' features.

Muzer

9 Jun 2009, 20:10

There's a delicate balance between doing only one thing but really well, and doing multiple things but only ok.
And that's why Linux (and Unix in general) is so popular with people who are actually intelligent (and aren't held down by the stupidity of others - like games being only for Windows, etc.)

thomasp

9 Jun 2009, 20:44

And that's why Linux (and Unix in general) is so popular with people who are actually intelligent (and aren't held down by the stupidity of others - like games being only for Windows, etc.)
I thought Mac users were generally considered idiots by the rest of the computing world for using Macs :p

Muzer

9 Jun 2009, 20:47

I thought Mac users were generally considered idiots by the rest of the computing world for using Macs http://forum.team17.co.uk/images/newsmilies/tongue.gif
You see, they wouldn't be, if it weren't for the fact that there is an OS out there just as good as, if not better than, Mac OS, for absolutely no cost, that can run on everything, even a dead badger :p

worMatty

9 Jun 2009, 21:38

And that's why Linux (and Unix in general) is so popular with people who are actually intelligent

Thanks. Thanks a lot.

Muzer

9 Jun 2009, 21:40

Thanks. Thanks a lot.
That's taken out of context (the stuff in brackets is important) :p

worMatty

9 Jun 2009, 21:42

I'm not held down by the stupidity of others. I use Windows, it plays games. Surely it's you who is stupid for using an OS that doesn't support Windows games? That would be intelligent. ROFFLE!

Anyway, no more discussion about Linux, this thread is about Google Wave.

Muzer

9 Jun 2009, 21:44

I'm not held down by the stupidity of others. I use Windows, it plays games. Surely it's you who is stupid for using an OS that doesn't support Windows games? That would be intelligent. ROFFLE!
You completely misunderstood me. Oh well, I'll drop it since you're so keen to...

worMatty

9 Jun 2009, 21:46

Akuryou13

10 Jun 2009, 02:37

Nahh, you just made your point badly. I get what you are trying to say but calling people stupid is a little unnecessary. I'm intelligent and choose not to use Linux. I can't program but it doesn't make me unintelligent.this, exactly. by my understanding using Linux is kinda like buying an old used car. it'll work just as well and cost you far less but you have to know how to maintain it otherwise it won't work as well.

and just as with said old cars, I don't know how to maintain linux and as such I don't use it. that's pretty much the reason everyone else I know doesn't use it either.

bloopy

10 Jun 2009, 02:41

That's taken out of context (the stuff in brackets is important) :p

If the stuff in brackets is important in defining the context, you shouldn't have put it in brackets.

The reason why Linux is popular with intelligent people is because the things that Linux can do "really well" are mostly limited to things that only intelligent people are interested in doing. Linux is like a Jeep. Most people don't need to be intelligent to know that they don't need to drive a Jeep. :p

M3ntal

10 Jun 2009, 05:42

Back on topic, i think the main problem is that you don't need to go to a certain website to view a Wave.

While it may sound convenient to be able to access all Waves that you are interested in from one place (desktop client for example), not too many webmasters are going to be happy with people doing that rather than visiting their websites. Web traffic and advertising are big business, and the only source of income for many many websites.

Also, i noticed Google saying "HTML 5" a lot throughout that presentation. I only saw 2 things that couldn't be done in HTML 4. One was the drag-and-drop of files into the page, which uses a browser plugin (ie not HTML 5), leaving the only actual HTML 5 dependent functionality the instantaneous updating when stuff gets edited by other people (which i'm assuming uses HTML 5's WebSocket API implementation).

My final gripe, and this is with the audience rather than the product, is that they got a huge round of applause every time they demonstrated some javascript functionality. Admittedly, the realtime multi-user editing of Waves was nice (see "only HTML 5 functionality i could find" above), but the audience clearly had no clue about web technologies newer than 1998.

Now i've picked on the problems, the good stuff:

As said by others here, it's mostly stuff that any self respecting web dev could do, but nice to see it all used together. Google has used the resources and manpower (and womanpower by the look of their project manager) at their disposal to create something that no single web dev could do in a sensible timeframe. I'd even go so far as to say that only a company of Google's size would be capable of that amount of design, programming, and functionality in a single web product in 2 years.

Open sourcing it is a great decision. There are a lot more people proficient in the web languages than there are in others such as C++ (mainly because if you understand C++, web languages are childs play). Some of you will have an idea how many people contribute to C++ based open software, and how much better it makes the product. If Wave becomes popular, i can see it becoming much more than it is now due to the vast numbers of people creating new addons, modifications, etc. I can't really overstate how important this point is. Just look at what Linux is, and keep in mind there are potentially MORE developers contributing to Wave.

Maybe that last point is Google's main intention. It's common knowledge that they are working on ways to turn the web browser into the OS.

Anyway, after Maps, and Wave, i can't wait to see what Lars does next.

worMatty

10 Jun 2009, 20:26

I thought that taking traffic away from web adverts was also a bit concerning, but then i thought about RSS feeds. Some content providers are happy to provide those already. Hopefully the cost saved on the loading of a full page will offset the drop in revenue. Or, web ads could evolve to be included on mass-distributed waves. Finally, content providers could choose not to mass distribute via a wave, or perhaps summarise the contents of their site in a wave, encouraging the user to visit the site. I don't think the intention is to make web sites defunct, but I would rather have this exciting new technology than be concerned about other organisations' penny-watching.

Xinos

10 Jun 2009, 21:22

Who cares about advertisement? Get that **** away from me.

worMatty

10 Jun 2009, 23:24

What's the problem, Xinos? Don't you like advertisements? Unfortunately they are a necessary evil, though not necessarily evil, I would say! Not once you get used to them. Google runs on adverts! I should think a lot of companies supplement their hosting costs by using advertisements, as well as, of course, advertising things for people to find! No need for the harsh language, sir.

KRD

11 Jun 2009, 03:49

... as well as, of course, advertising things for people to find!

I dare you to prove this actually happens. :p

M3ntal

11 Jun 2009, 10:34

Who cares about advertisement? Get that **** away from me.Google exists because of adverts. Wave would never have happened without adverts. Don't be so naive.

bonz

11 Jun 2009, 15:46

I wonder if Google will ever disable my Gmail account because I use AdBlock.

SupSuper

11 Jun 2009, 16:34

Google exists because of adverts. Wave would never have happened without adverts. Don't be so naive.Doesn't mean I have to give a **** about them though.

Xinos

11 Jun 2009, 19:45

Google exists because of adverts. Wave would never have happened without adverts. Don't be so naive.

I'd gladly sacrifice Wave and other Google products for all advertisement I've been forced to see and listen too throughout my life. Imagine going through an entire day without some jerk telling you that your life sucks because your hair isn't natural and fruity enough.

Though my rage is more directed to ads on TV. Internet ads are pretty easy to ignore as they rarely interrupt my browsing. Google's ads are probably the easiest to ignore, unless of course there are some that are so subtle that I haven't even noticed them. Strange.. I feel an urge to go out and buy some new tires in case I should get a car some day.

FutureWorm

12 Jun 2009, 01:29

Xinos

12 Jun 2009, 09:57

haha, you have an opinion

SupSuper

12 Jun 2009, 10:07

You see, they wouldn't be, if it weren't for the fact that there is an OS out there just as good as, if not better than, Mac OS, for absolutely no cost, that can run on everything, even a dead badger :pFrom my experience, Linux will only work on the dead badger. :p It's a bit of a reverse-OS, in that the better the computer is, the better Windows/Mac OS will run, but the worse Linux will run. (and vice-versa)

Vader

12 Jun 2009, 12:20

If there were no adverts I wouldn't know about most of the things I enjoy. That's not to say I buy stuff because it's advertised but I do buy things I would enjoy and adverts bring those things to my attention.

Plus some TV ads are ace, such as Honda's Goldberg machine. Classic!

bonz

12 Jun 2009, 15:32

I tend to get all such internet stuff and news redundantly from many people linking it in their posts on a bunch of forums I visit regularly.
No need for any ads whatsoever. :rolleyes:
Plus some TV ads are ace, such as Honda's Goldberg machine. Classic!
The new one with the headlight matrix is nice too.

Muzer

12 Jun 2009, 18:17

the better the computer is, the better Windows/Mac OS will run, but the worse Linux will run. (and vice-versa)
Although that was true at one time, actually, most modern computers are pretty compatible with Linux. The only problems nowadays I hear about are WiFi and Webcams, and the former even has workarounds (ndiswrapper).

It's computers from a certain "era" that don't work - my old laptop (probably from the early '00s) has probably had the most hardware problems; it took me a while to get sound working, and the ethernet never worked. However, everything before and after that in my experience is almost perfect.

worMatty

12 Jun 2009, 19:38

This is not a Linux thread. Take it elsewhere.

SupSuper

12 Jun 2009, 23:17

Plus some TV ads are ace, such as Honda's Goldberg machine. Classic!If only they put as much money developing alternate car stuff (generalization) as they did in crazy advertising... :p

MtlAngelus

13 Jun 2009, 02:42

This is not a Linux thread. Take it elsewhere.
Why are you always so negative? Just because the conversation doesn't belong here doesn't mean it's causing damage to this thread. Discussion about wave is going slowly, so having an alternate topic of conversation doesn't really get in the way of that...

FutureWorm

13 Jun 2009, 05:27

This is not a Linux thread. Take it elsewhere.
uhhh QQ

Muzer

13 Jun 2009, 16:20

worMatty

13 Jun 2009, 19:59

Why are you always so negative? Just because the conversation doesn't belong here doesn't mean it's causing damage to this thread. Discussion about wave is going slowly, so having an alternate topic of conversation doesn't really get in the way of that...

First off, I'd like to know what makes you think I'm always negative, as I don't really post much in OD. I created this thread, which is a positive thing, and I have tolerated the posts about Linux up until very recently, which is also a positive thing as I was trying to grant some flexibility to my fellow ODers, but I saw the debate was getting heated so thought it best it should have its own thread, so it wouldn't debase this one, as I want to continue to discuss Wave in an organised fashion. And look, the thread already has twelve mostly meaningful posts, so it was a good idea. More positivity on my part.

Second, it'd be interested to find out why you became defensive in the first instance instead of heeding my advice and taking the discussion elsewhere. This is a forum, the idea is to discuss many topics in suitably-titled threads, so to insist we bash on about Linux in this thread is sort of missing the point. I know we don't have to only discuss Wave in this thread because it's up to the users at the end of the day, but on the other hand we don't have to discuss Linux or anything else than Wave in this thread, again up to the users, and I am one of them.

I also really don't have much to say about Linux other than I don't use it though I understand its point and uses (aside from using it at work on our tills), and I don't want to read anything about it, and I certainly don't want it bolstering up the thread about Google Wave unnecessarily because I am very interested in reading about that and would rather there be something about it in the thread when I click on it after seeing it has new posts. It's inconvenient.

Vader

13 Jun 2009, 21:41

If this were a wave there would never have been this problem.

FutureWorm

13 Jun 2009, 22:42

First off, I'd like to know what makes you think I'm always negative, as I don't really post much in OD. I created this thread, which is a positive thing, and I have tolerated the posts about Linux up until very recently, which is also a positive thing as I was trying to grant some flexibility to my fellow ODers, but I saw the debate was getting heated so thought it best it should have its own thread, so it wouldn't debase this one, as I want to continue to discuss Wave in an organised fashion. And look, the thread already has twelve mostly meaningful posts, so it was a good idea. More positivity on my part.

Second, it'd be interested to find out why you became defensive in the first instance instead of heeding my advice and taking the discussion elsewhere. This is a forum, the idea is to discuss many topics in suitably-titled threads, so to insist we bash on about Linux in this thread is sort of missing the point. I know we don't have to only discuss Wave in this thread because it's up to the users at the end of the day, but on the other hand we don't have to discuss Linux or anything else than Wave in this thread, again up to the users, and I am one of them.

I also really don't have much to say about Linux other than I don't use it though I understand its point and uses (aside from using it at work on our tills), and I don't want to read anything about it, and I certainly don't want it bolstering up the thread about Google Wave unnecessarily because I am very interested in reading about that and would rather there be something about it in the thread when I click on it after seeing it has new posts. It's inconvenient.
why are you so angry about a tiny message board on the internet that usually goes off-topic anyway. just inhale, exhale and go outside for a bit, dude

MtlAngelus

13 Jun 2009, 23:37

First off, I'd like to know what makes you think I'm always negative, as I don't really post much in OD. I created this thread, which is a positive thing, and I have tolerated the posts about Linux up until very recently, which is also a positive thing as I was trying to grant some flexibility to my fellow ODers, but I saw the debate was getting heated so thought it best it should have its own thread, so it wouldn't debase this one, as I want to continue to discuss Wave in an organised fashion. And look, the thread already has twelve mostly meaningful posts, so it was a good idea. More positivity on my part.

Second, it'd be interested to find out why you became defensive in the first instance instead of heeding my advice and taking the discussion elsewhere. This is a forum, the idea is to discuss many topics in suitably-titled threads, so to insist we bash on about Linux in this thread is sort of missing the point. I know we don't have to only discuss Wave in this thread because it's up to the users at the end of the day, but on the other hand we don't have to discuss Linux or anything else than Wave in this thread, again up to the users, and I am one of them.

I also really don't have much to say about Linux other than I don't use it though I understand its point and uses (aside from using it at work on our tills), and I don't want to read anything about it, and I certainly don't want it bolstering up the thread about Google Wave unnecessarily because I am very interested in reading about that and would rather there be something about it in the thread when I click on it after seeing it has new posts. It's inconvenient.

Whenever a topic derails you're always the only one to complain about it, and you usually come off as angry or upset about it(or at least authoritative) when it's not that big of a deal. I don't really mind whether the discussion of linux stays here or goes to another thread, I was just wondering why you are so easily upset about off-topic posts.

And I think your last paragraph is an exaggeration. I have no right to tell you how you should or shouldn't feel, but really, I don't see how it's that huge of an inconvenience.

Xinos

14 Jun 2009, 14:55

It's not like you can't go back to talking about Wave at any time just because some people went off topic.

SupSuper

14 Jun 2009, 15:10

Yeah you're only proving the point that there's not a lot more to say about Wave other than "well hey there's a video about it watch it".

AndrewTaylor

14 Jun 2009, 18:10

If that were true nobody would ever discuss Firefly. But they do, endlessly.

Vader

14 Jun 2009, 18:12

If that were true nobody would ever discuss Firefly. But they do, endlessly.

This is the first I've heard of Firefly.

****... now it's a discussion.

AndrewTaylor

14 Jun 2009, 18:58

I believe the Google Wave video has a couple of Firefly references in it.

You see how easy this staying-on-topic lark is.

CyberShadow

14 Jun 2009, 21:46

How about we use <OT> and </OT> tags to specify off-topic posts. Or enter [OT] in the reply title, which isn't as convenient since you can't do it from the quick reply form.

That said,
<OT>
I'll take Linux over OS X any day. I'll also take any chance to rant about macs.
<rant>
OS X's user interface makes me want to punch babies. And if you disagree with that, then 1) you haven't seen me use a computer (I can't stand programs where I can't use the keyboard as efficiently as possible) (seriously, Enter to rename and something as ridiculous as Command+O to do the most common action in file managers - "open"?) and 2) you haven't used computers or KDE long enough. Sure, since Apple makes their own hardware AND their software you won't see any BSoDs because there's no one to write crappy drivers for their hardware (most BSoDs you see in XP/Vista are due to faulty drivers). When I'm forced to work on a mac, before I'm able to get any work done I need to install Total Commander and run it under that commercial Wine thingy (which got released for free for one day), because it wouldn't emulate FAR (my primary choice of file manager/text editor), there is no good enough port of Midnight Commander, and any native mac apps were seriously underdeveloped (and were shareware - it seems there is much less freeware for macs, which, well, complements Apple's inflated prices).
</rant></OT>
Feel free to move this and related posts to a Linux vs. whatever thread. I'm not sure there's much to discuss about Wave until it's released or Google publishes more info, though.

Edit: oh yes, the presentation got me to actually get and watch Firefly. :D

Muzer

14 Jun 2009, 21:54

Ooh, I wonder if CS is going to visit OD more often. This could be interesting...

worMatty

14 Jun 2009, 23:57

Whenever a topic derails you're always the only one to complain about it, and you usually come off as angry or upset about it(or at least authoritative) when it's not that big of a deal.You must be confusing me with someone else. Can you quote a few times when I've done this so I understand what you mean? Like I said, I don't really contribute much here these days so I can't remember much of it. And if I were angry about something, I would starting using :mad: emoticons or say I'm angry. I can have an opinion without being angry, don't assume that I am. I don't use smiley faces to show people my mood, and I don't really tell people that I'm not angry in my threads because I hope it's unnecessary (so, Josh, take note. No chill pills or breathing exercises are required here). The only thing that makes me look angry is your impression of me as you read my posts, probably due to the fact I'm calling out something and you dislike it. Go on, read this reply again but imagine me with a smile on my face and you'll feel the difference.

And I think your last paragraph is an exaggeration. I have no right to tell you how you should or shouldn't feel, but really, I don't see how it's that huge of an inconvenience.Well I never said it was a "huge" inconvenience. But it is an inconvenience nonetheless, to me, even though it is a small one. So forgive me for having the odd niggle, I thought I was allowed just one seeing as how there are so many things in the negative thread and none of them are mine, not to mention the 'stupidity on the forum' thread, which I disagreed with after the leak then never read again.

MtlAngelus

15 Jun 2009, 10:33

You must be confusing me with someone else. Can you quote a few times when I've done this so I understand what you mean? Like I said, I don't really contribute much here these days so I can't remember much of it. And if I were angry about something, I would starting using :mad: emoticons or say I'm angry. I can have an opinion without being angry, don't assume that I am. I don't use smiley faces to show people my mood, and I don't really tell people that I'm not angry in my threads because I hope it's unnecessary (so, Josh, take note. No chill pills or breathing exercises are required here). The only thing that makes me look angry is your impression of me as you read my posts, probably due to the fact I'm calling out something and you dislike it. Go on, read this reply again but imagine me with a smile on my face and you'll feel the difference.
It's not like you do it all the time or too often, but that you are the only one that really does that here in OD. I can't quote you on the other times you've done it, but there's one recently when a maths discussion started developing, I think it was on one of the Events threads.

The perceived angriness comes from the authoritative tone of your post(s). "This is not a Linux thread. Take it elsewhere." sounds aggressive. Funnily enough, if you had used the :mad: smiley, it would have lost that aggressive tone, as that smiley is particularly silly and is commonly used to denote OTT angry silliness. I expect angry people not to bother using emoticons at all.

Well I never said it was a "huge" inconvenience. But it is an inconvenience nonetheless, to me, even though it is a small one. So forgive me for having the odd niggle, I thought I was allowed just one seeing as how there are so many things in the negative thread and none of them are mine, not to mention the 'stupidity on the forum' thread, which I disagreed with after the leak then never read again.
I just think it wasn't big enough to warrant splitting a thread in two.