Thanks again! Just to philosophize a bit ...
I've put a little thought into where Google might be going with Docs 'n such and it seems to me that ultimately, they'd (and we'd) be best served with some sort of *database-access* capability (multiple tables, with key'd rows and columns, even referential-integrity). At which, gadgets might otherwise be *forms* which may be layered modally ... the combination of which comprising a bona-fide database- application. I've done enough database work, for enough years, to know that the fundamentals haven't changed in about 30yr (if not more) and that such a thing is relatively simple to accomplish. The only caveat is Google's single-sign-on (for lack of better understanding). The guarantee of an authorized user to Google's servers is not taken lightly ... it's something that I believe has made Google so successful thus far. I only say "caveat" in that I'm unfamiliar with how these gadgets work to the extent of how this "single-sign-on" is implemented, and more importantly, *how* that *might* be extended to *generic* database-access. Such a thing would take us from giving away grocery-list gadgets for free, to small contact-management or accounting *applications* for $5/ ea or such (in an iPhone App kind of way). What small business would pass up the opportunity to have 100% of their business-data housed on Google's servers for $10/yr with $5 app's of their choosing to interact with it? No database server, no email server, no web-server ... just a line and however many workstations they want. As it is, I bet there's more medium-sized businesses than not who'd be interested in such a contact-management *application* regardless of their size. Add in a GMail API and I'd bet that'd be purdy slick. I only mention all this, not to suggest it to Google ... I can't imagine they're not already working on this ... but I'm wondering how far along they are? Because, as of yet, these gadgets are kinda like kissing your sister. :-/ I can't help but comment ... I started professional life on a mainframe ... with *dumb* terminals ... and as the years go by, I find myself (and quite a few others) anxious to turn our PC's (and, to a lesser extent, Mac's ;-) into *dumb* terminals. I suppose the *truth* of that's lost on most folks around here ... but ya never know. ;-) On Jan 28, 3:44 am, String <[email protected]> wrote: > On Jan 27, 9:06 pm, "Del N. Quent" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > I can set a DEFAULT_VALUE of about 1,200 characters (though I'm not > > sure if this is COMBINED with my other user-pref's or not) ... past > > that, as I try to change it in the gadget, I risk blowing it up ... > > closer to 1,500, and it never displays properly to begin with. > > This issue has been explored (for iGoogle) in the past; see > > http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Gadgets-API/browse_thread/threa... > > > I'm adding gadgets BY URL in GMAIL ... it seems no matter what, I > > can't have more than 5 gadgets BY URL (removing one of the *standard* > > labs gadgets doesn't *free* up a spot) ... the BY URL gadget actually > > tells me I have too many if I try to add a sixth ... I don't know > > exactly why ... but I'm guessing Google doesn't want me filling my > > GMail page with all the gadgets I need, and possibly using up all > > their bandwidth. > > Yeah, that seems to be a hard limit. I doubt it's bandwidth, given > that you can add hundreds of gadgets to iGoogle. I'd guess it's more > about not wanting ordinary users to bog degrade the performance of > their GMail page, then give up (and leave GMail) because of it. But > nonetheless, it's a pain for power users. > > String --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "iGoogle Developer Forum" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Gadgets-API?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
