Google Pages to be Replaced by JotSpot

fyc writes "According to a presentation by Scott Johnson, ex-JotSpot executive and recent Google employee, the JotSpot wiki service acquired late last year by Google is to replace Google's own Pages service. The new service will be called as Google Sites and will launch next year. From the presentation: 'Based on JotSpot collaboration tools, Sites will allow business to set up intranets, project management tracking, customer extranets, and any number of custom sites based on multi-user collaboration.'"

Comments

good

[Instine]

Wierd (for me) that I was wondering when a Gwiki would be coming. I'm guessing this'll be free too? My question is, when do we get to host script and flash etc on Google's domain?

Are people still falling for this?

[Anonymous Coward]

Put all your valuable business information on our servers. Go ahead, do it. What could go wrong?

Re:Are people still falling for this?

[sqrt(2)]

I hope we're not at the point where merely having a dissenting opinion about the Google constitutes a troll post. There's a need, now more than ever for that opposition voice to be heard. Google is snatching up projects all the time, it's easy to see that their goal is complete control of the business of information management. When it's possible for a company to use Google for everything it's going to be too late to raise privacy and security concerns. Which is why we need to be having that discussion NOW. Google offers these services for free, largely, and if business begins switching over in large numbers to a Google centric data management system YOUR data and YOUR private info will end up in Google's hands just by you doing business with those companies. Now, currently I trust Google more than Microsoft to protect that, they've done nothing yet to shake that trust and they do offer some very valuable services for zero cost, but I do not want them to ever have a monopoly--in any area.

Re:Are people still falling for this?

[Instine]

It's a valid concern (at least for it to be discussed more), but whats the solution? Apart from simply avoiding the net app model? If you want to use the benefits of SaaS, how would you/anyone suggest these concerns are reduced/nulled? Not at all suggesting more can't be done. Just asking what people think should be done to avoid SaaS continually raising the priacy argument...

Re:Are people still falling for this?

[jellomizer]

Often a lot less then what could go wrong if you managed it at the business. Echonomies of scale, For a small business especially one not focused on IT. There data storage of important files are on some laptop which could die any second now. For most small IT Companies they have a server perhaps with some sort of raid, and know they should backup daily but usually get it once a month... Even for Mid sized companies managing all the data and keeping it safe is a lot of work and is expensive. It is expensive for google too but that is what they do and do rather well... So chances are that if you lost your data to googe and it was stolen is a lot less then if you try to manage it yourself, while having other jobs to do.

Re:Are people still falling for this?

[moosesocks]

If google wants to be taken seriously in the enterprise market (due to the obvious privacy implications you mention), they need to start offering network appliances that allow users to privately host their own google service locally without requiring a direct connection to Google.

Of course, that all said, I don't particularly feel that Google's applications are well-suited to the enterprise to begin with. Microsoft's got that market pretty well cornered, and the level of integration provided by Exchange is simply unmatched. Along the same lines, although I find GMail and GCal both to be fantastic, they're both missing that sort of "snappiness" that you'd get from a desktop application.

Google's services are attractive to anyone who can't afford their own server (and the staff to run it). Anyone else should probably look elsewhere (and hopefully, we'll start seeing some good OSS packages that can rival Exchange)

Re:Are people still falling for this?

[owlnation]

it's easy to see that their goal is complete control of the business of information management.

But... but that seems kind of evil to me. They said they're not evil.

Business (i.e. large Corporations) don't need to be evil. It's just that almost all are to a greater or lesser extent. Google providing non-evil services to corporations doesn't necessarily make them evil per se. However, I do agree that it's seems improbable that if you are hosting evil that you won't somehow be tainted by it.

It seems like a dangerous path to walk down for anyone with genuine integrity.

Re:Are people still falling for this?

[cmacb]

I would question whether Google even has a monopoly on search. Having the largest numbers does not a monopoly make.

They certainly don't have a monopoly on anything else. They are beaten easily by Facebook, Myspace, MS Office, Hotmail, Yahoo in areas where there is direct competition for specific products.

Why not just judge a company on what they HAVE done rather than on what they MIGHT do?

The reason Microsoft is still where it is is that people have not applied that principle. On the other hand, a company simply achieving a 51 percent market share doesn't make them unstoppable. Add to that the fact that it would be difficult or impossible for everyone on Earth to coordinate their product selections so that no company ever achieves a 51 percent market share.

I can't think of anything Google could do (other than buying Microsoft) that would lock users into their search technology, and certainly not their web page tool.

Likewise, I wouldn't have a problem using MS Office, if and only if I could use my preferred operating system (Linux) to run it. Office locks you into Windows; you only get full use of Live if you use Office and Windows; you can read your Hotmail with an offline reader as long as that offline reader is vended by MS. If you don't see a difference in the way Microsoft and Google do business, then you are not paying much attention.

I don't have a problem with people attacking Google when they screw up, but somewhere along the way they need to demonstrate that they're not just another Microsoft astroturfer. Comments with supporting evidence are much less likely to be modded troll or flamebait.

Let's agree to clean up the monopolists we already have, then worry about stopping the potential ones.

Re:great

[Jugalator]

?

I don't see how a blog is related to a wiki / project manager / multi-user collaboration system in any way at all.

Blogs are "web logs" where people can post stuff without multi user collaboration. A wiki, project manager, or collaboration system is a content managing system for user groups. How would these two be related exactly?

What about our existing pages/info?

[Peet42]

Will they maintain "legacy" URLs for early adopters who have amassed many pages and interlinked them with other websites/posted links where they can't edit them?

Re:As a google pages user...

[Vampyre_Dark]

GMail - Couldn't delete. They fixed this eventually, but everything had to archived otherwise. When they introduced chat, it was decided that it would be enabled by default, and everyone was allowed to see you. (Eventually, they let you log out, or hide).

Pages - Can't make folders, or do much else other than type in templates. They have been 'working' on bringing us the ability to make folders for 2 years now. Everything has to be in the main folder, and the main 'home page' has to be used when entering the site. You can upload html pages after that, but the sum of the parts don't add up to what geocities was in 1997.

Talk - Everyone added to my list, and has access to hear my mic 'at my convenience'. GTalk just went ahead and added everyone I ever sent an e-mail to to my contact list as soon as I clicked to run it the first time.

Google Notifier - Looks the same whether I'm online, signed in, signed out, or lost my connection.

Google products, from what I've seen, don't believe in the concept of user options, or even any user input at some points. They like to just make all the choices for you, and then make you stick to it, until enough people complain and it gets added in.

If google made a toaster, there would be one setting, and one setting only. If you wanted your toast lighter, or darker, it's just too damned bad. Because the guy who made the google toaster already decided that your toast only needs that one optimum setting. This is until they finally unveil their great new feature, the variable timer, like it's never been done before, or wasn't an obvious, expected feature from the start.

I'm sure the google techs print all those new feature releases up, and put them on their fridge. You know, the gFridge! The one where your ice cream is always rock hard, because google determined the proper gTemperature for you.