Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Communications Google Businesses Social Networks Technology

Google Kills Wave Development 327

Posted by timothy
from the harshing-on-mellow dept.
We've mentioned several times over the past two years Wave, Google's ambitiously multi-channel, perhaps plain overwhelming entry in the social media wars. Now, reader mordejai writes "Google stated in its official blog that they will not continue developing Wave as a standalone product. It's sad, because it had a lot of potential to improve communications, but Google never promoted it well, denying it a chance to replace email and other collaboration tools for many uses."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Google Kills Wave Development

Comments Filter:
  • First wave (Score:2, Funny)

    by jlar (584848)

    First wave (oh no, they killed it)

  • by cencithomas (721581) on Wednesday August 04, 2010 @05:50PM (#33144188)
    ...and nothing of value was lost.
    • by HeckRuler (1369601) on Wednesday August 04, 2010 @05:58PM (#33144292)
      That's because it's chat with a couple of features.
      Now, the feature where you can chat in between previous lines of chat is nice and all, but what killed the wave is that starry-eyed marketers got a hold of it and sold it as the new revolution.

      Like sharepoint. It's a web framework with some extra features. Or, it's a collection of prebuilt web pages with an SQL backend. But they don't sell it as that. They load it with 200% of Marketese and Weaselish and it can bring you a sandwich. (Just not out of the box).
      • Re: (Score:2, Funny)

        by Eirenarch (1099517)
        Wait. Do you claim Sharepoint is dead like Wave?
      • by melted (227442) on Wednesday August 04, 2010 @06:47PM (#33144788) Homepage

        Except Sharepoint actually makes money. And not just a few bucks, but $1B in yearly revenue (I know, it's not profit, but it's profitable).

        http://www.ameinfo.com/152875.html [ameinfo.com]

        And that's not counting the sales of SQL and Windows Server CALs that you will need to run it properly. If you study this market carefully (I did) you will see that Sharepoint is the only semi-decent product, and, e.g. Alfresco (which positions itself as the strongest competitor to Sharepoint) is a half-baked, broken piece of crap, with or without the yearly support contract.

      • Sure it is chat with a couple of features, but it is done in such a way as to make it very unique.
        Having used Wave in all its current greatness and even more amazing potential I would still state that wave is the future, or at least a program/service that has very similar features is the future.

      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by rsborg (111459)

        Like sharepoint. It's a web framework with some extra features.

        Sharepoint is Microsoft's implementation of an enterprise content management (ECM [wikipedia.org]) system. You can do much of the same these days with a large number of open-source projects (Alfresco 3.x is great out of the box), most of which work well with each other due to open standards. I bet you're glad you never had to deal with a sucky SP 1.0 implementation in a windows only shop. It may not suck that bad anymore, but it was great to get away from th

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by bonch (38532)

        Google Wave just got Kinned!

        Every drooling tech blog proclaimed Wave to be a historic achievement of mankind, reciting the history of email at the beginning of every article to drive home the point that Wave is as historic as the introduction of email itself. I questioned its viability back then and was modded down on Slashdot. Yet here we are witnessing its cancellation despite enormous levels of hype from Google-friendly outlets. With Wave's cancellation and the bundled crapware from carriers on Android p

      • by LordLimecat (1103839) on Wednesday August 04, 2010 @11:29PM (#33146638)

        That's because it's chat with a couple of features

        Only in the sense that a car is a horse with a couple of features, otherwise, youre just wrong. Among its "couple of features" (unashamedly pulled from an earlier post, as it seems this, like so many myths, persist...)

        1. All server-to-server communication is TLS encrypted and authenticated. All wave origins are verified using digital signatures, so, to quote from wikipedia,

          Therefore, a downstream wave provider can verify that the wave provider is not spoofing wavelet operations. It should not be able to falsely claim that a wavelet operation originated from a user on another wave provider or that it was originated in a different context.

          Thus, spam really ceases to be an issue

        2. Waves can be embedded. Blog comment sections can be replaced by waves; forum threads by waves. All comments would appear in your inbox. Email cannot even hope to replicate this other than with the clunky-and-annoying "notify me when someone responds" forum setting.
        3. You can easily add people to the discussion. The only way to do so with email is to re-forward the whole chain of emails to them and ask them to reply-all; or to include them in the next reply-all and hope that noone else responds first. This is a pretty glaring flaw of email that Wave fixes.
        4. There are of course a ton of other reasons [slashdot.org] why Wave was more than just "chat with a couple of features", but these were big. Wave had the chance to completely redo how we communicated, freeing people from having to keep track of 10 different IM networks + email + forums + blog comments. All of this was, and is in its current implentation, able to be taken care of from a wave inbox. Spam would have taken a hit, as would phishing, because you wouldnt be able to forge "accountservices@capitolone.com". Email chains would have ceased to be a gigantic disaster of people forwarding, reforwarding, editing, reforwarding, and generally mucking up inboxes with garbage. Most importantly, a portable interface could have been crafted around all this, practically for free-- dont need a custom client for each feature, just a client for wave.

          Its a little disheartening to see so many people (even techies) who dismissed it out of hand given how much better it was (with no disadvantages that I can discern). I understand why, sort of, since it really wasnt explained at all, and it took me several hours of screwing with to figure out just what it was, and could do. But one would hope the prevailing attitude on slashdot would be "that looks interesting, lets test it and find out if its any good" rather than "that looks complicated, im going to stick with what I know because this scares me".

          I mean, if its taking this long to get IPv6 rolled out, and this just failed to take off, what hope have we of ever being rid of rickety old SMTP? Do we just need to keep extending the thing to death until its major flaws are fixed (if thats even possible)? Are we to be stuck fiddling around with seperate interfaces for every form of communication we use (IM, IRC, email, messageboards, comments) for the forseeable future?

          Finally, given the above, how can people POSSIBLY be responding "and nothing of value was lost" in an honest to goodness impressive attempt that was completely opened to the public (source for the servers was released!)? Is everyone really that in love with MS Exchange?

        • by DerekLyons (302214) <.moc.liamg. .ta. .retawriaf.> on Thursday August 05, 2010 @01:36AM (#33147158) Homepage

          Finally, given the above, how can people POSSIBLY be responding "and nothing of value was lost" in an honest to goodness impressive attempt

          Because most of your 'above' is either irrelevant or very selective comparing of features to existing systems.
           

          Its a little disheartening to see so many people (even techies) who dismissed it out of hand given how much better it was (with no disadvantages that I can discern).

          Other than being slow as hell, clunky as hell, counterintuitive as hell, having a crap UI, and not behaving in any way resembling the systems it was meant to replace - no, it didn't have any disadvantages.
           

          But one would hope the prevailing attitude on slashdot would be "that looks interesting, lets test it and find out if its any good"

          Well, the cool thing is is exactly the attitude Slashdot took - and when they got a chance to test it, they found that not only did it not live up to it's hype, it wasn't any good (at least not in the "dessert wax and a floor topping" sense Google kept insisting on). It simply didn't work beyond being a cool collaborative editing tool - and wiki's do that far better.

        • by nigham (792777) on Thursday August 05, 2010 @04:23AM (#33147698) Homepage

          All server-to-server communication is TLS encrypted and authenticated. All wave origins are verified using digital signatures, so, to quote from wikipedia,

          Therefore, a downstream wave provider can verify that the wave provider is not spoofing wavelet operations. It should not be able to falsely claim that a wavelet operation originated from a user on another wave provider or that it was originated in a different context.

          Thus, spam really ceases to be an issue

          DomainKeys does similar things for e-mail.

          Waves can be embedded. Blog comment sections can be replaced by waves; forum threads by waves. All comments would appear in your inbox. Email cannot even hope to replicate this other than with the clunky-and-annoying "notify me when someone responds" forum setting.

          First, I might not want all this integrated into my e-mail inbox. Second, Facebook (and probably OpenSocial, Google's other thing) does this - integrating forums, discussions, comments, likes into posts, which are arguably wave-like.

          You can easily add people to the discussion. The only way to do so with email is to re-forward the whole chain of emails to them and ask them to reply-all; or to include them in the next reply-all and hope that noone else responds first. This is a pretty glaring flaw of email that Wave fixes.

          I'll argue it's much easier to scan through an e-mail thread than do a playback on a wave. Real-time playback is cute but I don't have time for it. And reading the wave linearly doesn't help since people can modify things in between.

          There are of course a ton of other reasons [slashdot.org] why Wave was more than just "chat with a couple of features", but these were big. Wave had the chance to completely redo how we communicated, freeing people from having to keep track of 10 different IM networks + email + forums + blog comments.

          Google couldn't even integrate GMail with wave. One of the main reasons I gave up Wave was having to keep track of two Google inboxes.

          Its a little disheartening to see so many people (even techies) who dismissed it out of hand given how much better it was (with no disadvantages that I can discern).

          I don't think people dismissed it out of hand. When it first came out, people lined up for accounts. It just didn't offer anything much in addition to what we had.

          Finally, given the above, how can people POSSIBLY be responding "and nothing of value was lost" in an honest to goodness impressive attempt that was completely opened to the public (source for the servers was released!)? Is everyone really that in love with MS Exchange?

          Maybe nothing of value was lost precisely because everything has been opened up anyway? Anyone who wants another shot at convincing people that this is a Good Thing(tm), can quite easily do so. I agree that there was phenomenal engineering involved and that may well be used in many scenarios.

  • To Wave Goodbye.

    Get it?

  • Not Open (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Skinkie (815924) on Wednesday August 04, 2010 @05:57PM (#33144288) Homepage
    The problem probably with wave is that there was no community behind it. Widget could be developed with some pain. But the entire frontend stack was not available to experiment with. It is also sad that the development of the eJabberd guys (Process One) never was launched as Wave server alternative. Personally I found the demo's more impressive than my own experiences with it. But the experiences I did have, were good.
  • UI was weird (Score:5, Insightful)

    by saikou (211301) on Wednesday August 04, 2010 @05:58PM (#33144294) Homepage

    And performance was a bit sketchy too. But most of all, it didn't have a clear 30-seconds or less explanation on what exactly it should be used to, and be better at it than email/IM.
    So, wow factor was there, but users got bored, and went back to the regular bulletin boards. Where it's not that important to see that someone is typing right now, everything is more or less static and easy to understand.

    I suppose online support could use it to communicate with customers, but then it'd need some heavy tweaking...

    • by SpryGuy (206254)

      They should have marketed it as a niche product for scrum/agile development teams with remote members to do collaboration and sprint planning and such. Our team found it very useful for that (as we found Etherpad before it). Problem is, with those two products now gone, what do we use for real-time collaboration and planning? Email cannot cut it, and neither chan "chat". This is seriously going to suck unless we can find a decent (free) tool to replace it.

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Antity-H (535635)

      They did not realize that today everyone has a favorite mean of communication, wether it's email, im, twitter, whatever. Wave was not integrated with anything.

      Until fairly recently there was no mail notification, no twitter update, nothing that would allow you to know that something happened in wave. I got invited to waves and found out weeks or months later as I connected by chance to have a look at something else that someone had tried to talk to me.

      The activity level was never high enough that I would lo

    • Re:UI was weird (Score:4, Informative)

      by mdmkolbe (944892) on Wednesday August 04, 2010 @09:49PM (#33146180)

      But most of all, it didn't have a clear 30-seconds or less explanation on what exactly it should be used to

      They should have just said:

      It is a wysiwyg, distributed, real-time, personal, sharable wiki, with a few extra features that any good wiki could use including tracking conversation threads, subscribing to updates for a page, notifying friends of pages you think they'd be interested in, and easy user access control. In detail:

      • First and foremost it is a wiki: it is easy to edit a page, it is easy to collaboratively edit, pages are persistent, you can view the history of a page.
      • It is (in theory) distributed: you can control and host your own content and it still inter-operates with the rest of the "wave-scape".
      • It is real-time: you can use it as a chat for quick back and forth.
      • It is personal: you can put whatever you want on it. No limits on topics and no fighting over page namespace.
      • It is sharable: you can write pages that only you can see, share them with a few friends, or even the whole world. It is up to you.
      • It does threaded conversation: most wiki's have a "talk" or "discuss" page, but don't really support threaded conversation. User's have developed conventions to get around this (like text nesting levels), but how they don't have to work around it. It is built in.

      Ok, maybe that was more than 30 seconds, but you get the idea. When I thought of it as "chat" or "e-mail" it didn't make sense, because I already have perfectly good chat and e-mail. What I don't have is a wiki where I can put my private notes or share my designs with colleges to let them update/fix/annotate them.

      It is a shame Google is giving up on it. Fortunately if you drop the distributed aspect (which I think got Wave bogged down in technical details), it shouldn't be too hard to clone the ideas there. For that matter, with just a few tweaks it could even be a Facebook killer. After all, being "wysiwyg, real-time, personal, sharable" isn't too far from being "social". (I mean "social" in the sense of Facebook, not just "social" in the sense of collaborative content creation.) Google came this close to inventing the "social wiki". Now I guess it is up to us.

  • I really liked it (Score:4, Interesting)

    by thetoadwarrior (1268702) on Wednesday August 04, 2010 @05:59PM (#33144310) Homepage
    Clearly I am in the minority but it was really useful and good for collaboration, imo. Then again I enjoyed Google Notebook too. It will be a shame to see it go.
  • by mrbene (1380531) on Wednesday August 04, 2010 @05:59PM (#33144324)

    Wave was somewhere between IM, email, forums, and The Wall. It never made much sense to me - it was kinda like asking me to cook dinner Swiss Army Knife - yeah, I can open wine, cut the meat, saw open the bread, and, well, do something with a screwdriver, but the specialized tools are much better suited for each task.

    Maybe some folks did find value in it, but it seemed that the easiest thing to do on Wave was to talk about ways that Wave was theoretically good for doing stuff. And then I'd end up going and doing that stuff with the tools I'd been using to do that stuff up until now with, anyway. Either way, a product with as significant an identity crisis as Wave had from the get go isn't meant for greatness.

    • by geekoid (135745) <[dadinportland] [at] [yahoo.com]> on Wednesday August 04, 2010 @06:05PM (#33144390) Homepage Journal

      Once my team and I 'bought in' to using it, it became a marvelous tool. Very helpful, very speedy.

      But ahead of it's time. Like handing someone from 1980 a smart phone.

      • Agreed, I don't use it much for my personal life but I used it loads at work for communication amongst team mates. It was very easy to communicate and get a clear break down of conversations and I do believe something similar will pop up in the future.
      • by Angst Badger (8636) on Thursday August 05, 2010 @12:28AM (#33146900)

        Once my team and I 'bought in' to using it, it became a marvelous tool.

        Almost everything works well if everyone involved "buys in". Technical history (and politics, religion, hobbies, etc.) is littered with cult followings that coalesced around one thing or another that failed to catch on with the general public.

        Success depends on either everyone buying in, which almost never happens, OR cases where the product/service works well for its users without everyone else having to use it. Email and the web are rare examples of the former; the enormous variety of mail clients and web browsers are examples of latter.

        But ahead of it's time. Like handing someone from 1980 a smart phone.

        The overwhelming majority of the public doesn't have smart phones and isn't terribly interested in them. But they are wildly successful in their niche precisely because you can have an iPhone and still call your grandmother's rotary dial land line phone.

    • Well you actually made a good analogy - it being more like a Swiss Army Knife and that specialized tools being better.

      But if that were always the case - there'd be no market for Swiss Army Knives and they probably wouldn't exist.

      So I guess its just a little more surprising that a product like this didn't work, being that jack of all trades that some of the market might have liked.

    • by farnsworth (558449) on Wednesday August 04, 2010 @06:36PM (#33144692)
      I always thought that their webapp was just a demo of how the protocol works and what it could do. I for one was looking forward to forums such as slashdot changing their backend to Wave. There are so many great communities that have terrible software that could benefit from a robust backend that has all the cool features that Wave has.

      It's not clear if the backend aspect of Wave is dead or not, but it kinda seems that way. And that's too bad. I guess the protocol is technically OSS, but it seems unlikely that an installable instance of it will ever come to be.
    • I thought Wave was great. Yes, it was just a combination of a bunch of other tools that people were using, but there is something to be said for unification of those tools into one cohesive whole. I, for instance, am glad that my phone is also a camera and a calendar. The big problem with Wave was that it was slow and buggy. It would crash constantly and if you had over 50 posts on a wave, it would become unusable. Also, it was hard to get people to know when an update on the Wave was posted. By the time th

  • by Bruce Perens (3872) <bruce@perens.com> on Wednesday August 04, 2010 @06:00PM (#33144334) Homepage Journal

    Although Google has said they plan to Open Source the Wave software, there has only been a partial release so far. Can we have the whole thing, please? Of course Open Source is a good way to make sure that some good comes of a discontinued product.

  • Gaming (Score:3, Informative)

    by Bigbutt (65939) on Wednesday August 04, 2010 @06:02PM (#33144362) Homepage Journal

    We used it to run games but it got so overwhelmed we'd have to create new Waves every 50 or so posts. So I'd have a In Character 1, In Character 2, Table Talk 1, GM to Player 1, GM to Player 2, etc... At one point we had 30 or so different Waves.

    [John]

  • by TopSpin (753) on Wednesday August 04, 2010 @06:03PM (#33144366) Journal

    I really enjoyed watching Chrome swell up to 3GB resident memory, and then detonate, while wading through all that dynamic "content." The core files were... remarkable.

  • Once you got usde to it, it as awesome; however it's hard to explain to people why and get them through the learning curve. I suspect there will be something like this used as corporate communication in the future. Man, so freaking awesome.

  • Well, it was a cool concept. I can see different parts of the framework they've created being useful for specific implementations.

    Maybe they'll just open source wave entirely. That would be neat...

  • by Z8 (1602647) on Wednesday August 04, 2010 @06:07PM (#33144404)

    Even if Wave was a bad idea, perhaps Google should have continued to support it.

    Why throw resources into a bottomless pit? Because time and time again it's not the best technology that wins, it's the one that everyone thinks everyone else is using. (Examples (debatable of course): qwerty keyboards, VHS, SQL, windows, C++, XML, javascript)

    In the future, Google will unveil other major initiatives and will try to reach critical mass with them. Now that people know Google is willing to abandon a large project so easily, they will be less likely to commit to future Google projects.

    • Now that people know Google is willing to abandon a large project so easily, they will be less likely to commit to future Google projects.

      So now the projects will actually have to have some merit? Sounds good to me.

      • by Z8 (1602647)

        So now the projects will actually have to have some merit? Sounds good to me.

        Ideally you're right, but often which projects have merit in the long term is a self-fulfilling prophesy. A decision to switch to a platform is a long-term commitment, and necessarily is about what will have "merit" 5 years from now.

        Google is up against Apple and its Reality Distortion Field and Microsoft with its 90 thousand employees and its Windows/Office cash cow monopoly. Google must convince people that its platforms will h

      • by yyxx (1812612) on Wednesday August 04, 2010 @08:33PM (#33145718)

        So now the projects will actually have to have some merit? Sounds good to me.

        Google Wave had tons of merit. But three months out of closed beta just isn't enough time for any new software product to prove itself. None of the big, successful tools you use today would be here if they had been dropped that quickly.

  • by FleaPlus (6935) on Wednesday August 04, 2010 @06:08PM (#33144416) Journal

    I'll predict that we'll instead see most of Wave's functionality/technology incorporated into gmail, either as a separate panel like Buzz or integrated pop-ups like Google Talk is. It really didn't make sense to have it be a dedicated site, since it made it harder to integrate with one's other activities. I imagine that within a few months Gmail will probably introduce functionality to convert an existing email and/or chat thread into a wave.

  • by neonKow (1239288) on Wednesday August 04, 2010 @06:08PM (#33144422) Journal

    Google never promoted it well

    It never took off because it was slow, buggy, and unintuitive. I got better frames per second on Team Fortress 2. Entire sites [easiertoun...anwave.com] were made dedicated to how Google Wave made us feel like old people using computers. Initially, Wave didn't even work on Google's own Chrome browser.

    Google Wave got plenty of coverage. It didn't take off because it was bad.

    On a related note, has anyone tried those collaborative diagramming tools that already exist? I expected (and would've been happy with) a multiplayer version of MS Visio over a real-time forum.

  • This was a few months ago so perhaps things changed - 1) It was slow and buggy and crashed a lot. It didn't work on internet explorer. 2) You couldn't use it for your ordinary email. It tried to replace it rather then extend it. 3) It was horribly confusing. It tried to do too many things but it wasn't obvious how to do any of them! But the idea was great. Hopefully something will spring up from it's ashes.
  • I really like the concept, so much in fact that I've started to write a simplified version of it for an in-game messaging service.

    The problem was with the UI. The interface was crap, and beyond a certain number of postings, waves started to slow down so much it was unbearable.

    It needed more way to clean out old crap and make a wave readable and useable even after having been used for a while. Hopefully, someone else will take the concept and the protocol and make it work.

  • No big surprise (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Andtalath (1074376) on Wednesday August 04, 2010 @06:33PM (#33144652)

    Wave had a lot of cool ideas.
    The problem was that it was a steaming pile of junk.

    Since it was a browser-bound experience which didn't even have good functionality except in Gecko and Webkit it really didn't have all that much going for it.
    Inefficient interface, really steep system requirements and not enough actually useful stuff to counter the disadvantages.

    Also, even without allt the problems it had, it was just another form of communication without any hook to actually use it daily.

    Remember, even if a service is technically superior to what it is supposed to be replacing, that alone is definitely not enough, you need something else (if I knew what apart from symptoms I'd be rich beyond imagination).
    Also, if a service is inferior in speed it means it's a pain to use, and, with the market slowly realizing that you need to accept that there are slow computers on it wave really didn't fit, not only should every form of communication work on a netbook, but these days it even needs to work on a bloody cell phone.

    So, yeah, bloatware with few real places where it could be used to good effect doesn't gain critical mass?
    No big surprise.

  • by blahplusplus (757119) on Wednesday August 04, 2010 @06:35PM (#33144680)

    ... of something like google wave given the ineptitude of the masses is idiotic, something that would replace email/IM is going to take time to build (like on the order of decades). Why are companies trying to get an "instant win"? This lack of effort is disturbing. If it's not adopted immediately an din large numbers it's suddenly niche and a flop?

  • Buzz next? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by sugarmotor (621907) on Wednesday August 04, 2010 @06:40PM (#33144730) Homepage

    Is Google Buzz next to go ?

  • by gilgongo (57446) on Wednesday August 04, 2010 @06:52PM (#33144830) Homepage Journal

    If you read TFA, is says things like "we want to drive breakthroughs in computer science that dramatically improve our users’ lives" and "we are proud of the team for the ways in which they have pushed the boundaries of computer science."

    Earth to Google: a computer scientific achievement does not a user experience make.

    Really. It's not that hard. Just becase you can putting together bunch of crazy-ass techno doesn't means people will flock to your door any more than I should be president of the United States if I can solve a Rubuik's cube in under 10 seconds.

    Pizza-munching geeks. It's crap like Wave that reassures me in my job as a user experience designer.

  • Why have a huge announcement and generate the buzz and then not let anyone use it? I signed up the first day after they announced it because I thought it might make a cool tool for my dev team, which tends to be remote most of the time. I didn't hear anything back for a while and then just kind of forgot about it. Part of their user adoption problem might just be the fact they didn't let anyone try it.

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by cowscows (103644)

      Closed beta, plus when you finally found someone with an invite to give you, then you'd still have to wait for a few days for some reason. What did they need those three days for? Were they doing background checks on me? Did they have one stressed out intern entering all the invitees' email addresses into a database? I was excited when one of my buddies offered me the invite, but by the time I actually got to sign up, much of that excitement had already passed.

  • by jolyonr (560227) on Wednesday August 04, 2010 @07:23PM (#33145146) Homepage

    *waves*

  • Dissapointed (Score:3, Interesting)

    by GWBasic (900357) <slashdotNO@SPAMandrewrondeau.com> on Wednesday August 04, 2010 @10:47PM (#33146426) Homepage

    I was disappointed with Wave. About a year ago I spent a week trying to understand their source code because I wanted to use their data structures as a database and eventually build it into ObjectCloud [objectcloud.com]. Their code was about 20,000 lines that essentially ran a text-based chat with no way to persist the data. I asked twice on their mailing list which interfaces I should plug into to persist the data, but I got no responses.

    Basically, they tried to solve too many problems at once. If they just open-sourced a nice way to have concurrent data structures, it might have taken off; but the system for concurrent data structures was too difficult to understand or work with.

    Google promoted Wave well, I remember sitting behind some Wave developers at Google shortly before they were going to show it off and they kept saying things like, "when everyone's using Wave..." Well, it takes a long time to build that kind of critical mass!

  • by Minwee (522556) <dcr@neverwhen.org> on Wednesday August 04, 2010 @10:56PM (#33146468) Homepage
    I guess the guys at Google couldn't figure out what it was for either.
  • google wave... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by smash (1351) on Thursday August 05, 2010 @12:05AM (#33146810) Homepage Journal

    ... was a solution looking for a problem. In addition, i think there is a bit of stigma with using a free, beta, un-proven technology for business purposes.

    There were also performance issues once waves got large.

    Had a look at it, played with it a bit, but really couldn't see the point. Don't think i've even logged into my wave account in about 6-9 months.

    I'm sure maybe SOME people found a use for it, but by and large, most people struggled to find a purpose for it, other than sharing porn, etc.

  • No tables (Score:3, Interesting)

    by AdamHaun (43173) on Thursday August 05, 2010 @01:28AM (#33147126) Journal

    A friend and I tried using it, mostly as a joke, and one of the first things I discovered was that there was no obvious way to make a table. I know the web is based around format-independent data, but I wish more sites would provide a simple way to do aligned columns. It makes so many things so much easier to read.

  • by Dr_Barnowl (709838) on Thursday August 05, 2010 @04:17AM (#33147680)

    Ok, WE did. But the people I tried to get using it for meetings and the like just didn't want to know. They're happy with their voice conferences plus one person presenting a powerpoint over a screen sharing app.

  • open source it! (Score:3, Insightful)

    by StripedCow (776465) on Thursday August 05, 2010 @04:36AM (#33147756)

    Hey now that google considers it useless, maybe they should open source it...

  • by upuv (1201447) on Thursday August 05, 2010 @04:53AM (#33147810) Journal

    Google has publicly stated. "That the future is mobile platforms."

    How does Wave fit into this future of mobile platforms? It doesn't. It's gone.

    Buzz is arguably a bigger dud. But it is still hanging on. ( How much longer is debatable. ) Why? Buzz can work on a mobile platform.

    Just a theory.

The first Rotarian was the first man to call John the Baptist "Jack." -- H.L. Mencken

Working...