On Friday, December 3, 2010 2:28:44 AM UTC+1, Alex North (Googler) wrote: > > On 1 December 2010 09:42, STenyaK <[email protected]> wrote: > >> (...) > > > > I think we can all agree that Wave is suitable for replacing many >> communications forms: email, mailing lists, forums, doodles, wikis, >> google docs... Each one of these existing communications forms exist > > and is widely used, because it suits certain usage patterns. >> >> If[*] wave's "purpose" is to be able to replace all of these other >> forms, the groups/permissions system must be a superset of all the >> options available in current communication forms. Otherwise, we'll >> find use cases in which Wave is not suitable for some reason or >> another, therefore giving people valid excuses not to migrate to Wave, >> and keep the current mess of communications we have nowadays. >> >> (...) >> >> [*] That's what I'd like wave to become, but other people may >> disagree. I'm not sure if there's even an official definition of what >> wave tries to be? > > > > > I'm going to have to disagree here. Trying to be all things to all people > was one of the fundamental weaknesses in Google Wave. It led to a complex > product that was kinda good at lots of things, but not fantastic at any. > Over time we iterated towards document/wiki style collaboration as one use > case at which Wave particularly excelled, but it was still a bit confusing. > > I don't think having a "purpose" of replacing all those systems is a good > idea. It will lead to huge amounts of both product and technical complexity. > I would much prefer WIAB focussed on a smaller target, at least to start. > The one I would suggest it's closest to already is small group > collaboration. > > But that's just my opinion. Perhaps this community should work towards > agreeing on a target ideal. >
Hi Alex, I'd like to share my opinion (even if this mailing list is going to be off soon) as I partly disagree here. What I immediately loved about Wave is it's ability to replace a lot of web services I was using... I could imagine myself doing almost all my web-things from it (write mails, write Note to myself, paste web content I want to save, write blog articles - collaboratively or not, use it for forum-like usage on topics I'm interested in, wiki-like usage, chat usage, social usage, etc...). It may not be absolutely perfect at all those things but having one tool instead of ten was such an improvement. In fact from November 2009 to July 2010, I think that 75% of my previous time spent on the web became time spent on Wave ! Let me also quote a nice blog-post : *"* (...) Wave is a flexible and generic platform, one that can be used for groups discussion, for diary entries, for event commentary, for surveys. Of course, there are existing solutions for doing each of those things - but there is not one solution that does all of them. (...) There are of course reasons for using specialized tools (...) but when you're collaborating with your group of colleagues (...), I've found it's better 99% of the time to have the flexibility of Wave than the specialized features of 10 different services at once. That's why I will find it hard to stop using Wave (and I hope I don't have to), because I would have to replace it with myriad different tools. *"* The source is http://blog.pamelafox.org/2010/12/why-i-loved-wave.html ;-) Of course, I'm not saying that WiaB purpose should be to replace all existing communication tools, that's an utopia and that would be a huge mistake. I agree that Wave's complexity was a fundamental weakness of the product... but on the other hand, it's its flexibility that made it so great and revolutionary ! I think it's great right now to target small group collaboration, but I hope the WiaB project won't let Public waving aside... This ability to add Public to our waves was IMHO a breakthrough feature, one that really differentiated Wave from Email. Of course with public waving also came public wave vandalism and trolling... That brings me back to this thread's topic : permissions. Google Wave's setting "Full access" meant vulnerability, and "Read only" meant the end of public inputs and open collaboration... According to a live chat with Lars Rasmussen a year ago, a third setting "Reply only" was on its way... This was badly needed IMHO ! As I said, I hope Public waving will live on with WiaB, and I hope you'll find the correct permissions settings to manage it. Thanks to all of you guys for keeping the Wave technology alive ! Best regards, Jeremy. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Wave Protocol" 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/wave-protocol?hl=en.
