Main Area and Open Discussion > General Software Discussion

Wave? Good-bye!

<< < (5/8) > >>

mahesh2k:
Wave a  G+ extension? Nah

G+ looks like a copy of diaspora with Google video talk (hangout) enabled in it. Wave on the other hand was different in terms of UI. I don't see any connection between wave and G+. Wave looks like a mix of gmail, messenger, shared wiki (collab package in general). I don't see any of wave's feature migrated to the G+.

rgdot:
^ All have the same thinking in common, doesn't matter if the features or code base are much the same. Do stuff in the browser, Google more than others is vested in this idea.

IainB:
Its use would have been apparent - if it had been of any use to anyone[...]-IainB (November 27, 2011, 02:40 AM)
--- End quote ---

I disagree. I see this quite often with new innovations. ...
-Deozaan (November 27, 2011, 12:19 PM)
--- End quote ---

Well, though I wasn't wondering whether anyone agreed or not, I do appreciate your gratuitous disagreement, but I do think I phrased that badly.
My apologies, but my comment was a bit disjointed as I was trying to write whilst trying (unsuccessfully) to put up with nearby interruptions. I would rather say:
Though its use might have been difficult to perceive at first, having been open-minded and interested enough to give the thing a good "suck-it-and-see", its use would probably have become apparent to the user - if it had been of any use to anyone - and then it might not have needed all that nonsense.

--- End quote ---
I have edited the post appropriately.

You make the valid point about innovation.
The precursor to innovation is usually the invention of something (which can subsequently be subjected to innovation). The output from many Japanese manufacturers, over the years, has been held to show classic examples of innovation.

Modern history shows that some of the most useful discoveries/inventions of mankind's were the result of experimental discovery, or trial and error, or accident. The rest were largely attributable to deliberate research/design.
As examples of accidents, you have penicillin, and polythene. In the case of polythene, I recall my father-in-law (he was a an industrial chemist) telling me that whilst they were making napthalene (I think it was that) at the ICI plant in Northwich (UK) during the WW2 years and afterwards, there was this horrible gooey stuff produced as a by-product and which they had no use for. It was apparently polythene, or the precursor to it. The accidental creation of something, the use for which (the invention) remained unrealised for some time.

I don't think the same could necessarily be said about Wave though.
I think Wave would probably have been made to a deliberate design - a prototype - so it would probably have had an objective. I have no idea what that objective might have been.

Maybe, as @wraith808 seems to be suggesting, Wave was intended to be a prototype precursor to Google+. But then I have the same reservations about G+ as I did about Wave.
It seemed as though it was an interesting solution to an undefined/nonexistant problem.
--- End quote ---

If that seems a bit unfair, then let's pose a question: How many different designs of mousetraps do we actually need in the marketplace, for us to be able to feel secure in the knowledge that we each have a good choice of mousetraps and that we are probably using what feels like the "best" or optimum one for us?

Maybe the answer is unknown, and yet there is the tantalising prospect/possibility of hitting pay-dirt if we "just keep on digging".
In the development of information technology, this may mean that an acceptable business approach is for producers to take a commercial risk by tweaking/perfecting already perfectly good mousetraps, and applying innovative thinking like mad.
This is what the Japanese electronics manufacturers have been doing for years, and it seems to have paid off for them. They release most of their prototypes into the home market before exporting more widely. The prototypes ("gadgets") often have a short lifecycle. Sometimes the gadgets are testing out the viability of a particular method or technology, and sometimes those gadgets get bundled into a subsequent integrated product.

The marketing term for this is "product development and test marketing", and it is a classic, methodical approach.
This is arguably what Google might be doing - and it seems more likely the case if you consider that they have recently discontinued/shut down a raft of their unsuccessful prototypes. Or maybe they were successful prototypes and Google learned what they needed to from the test marketing.
If there is some truth in this, then it could further support @wraith808's suggestion.

mahesh2k:
Correct me if i'm wrong here but Wave looks more of project collab or social collab tool than social networking script like Google+.

Deozaan:
I can see shadows of Wave in Google+ but I think Wave was more than that.

The best way I think I could describe my interpretation of Wave is to say it was like Microsoft OneNote in the cloud but with privacy settings (who can see/edit what) for just about all content you added to it, and extendable with apps and bots to add even more features.

@IainB I wasn't meaning to single you out before. I was just offering a different viewpoint than the one you shared and it was convenient for me to quote the words which got my brain going on the train of thought that followed. :Thmbsup:

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page