Google Open Sources Wave Protocol Implementation

eldavojohn writes "Certainly one of the most important steps in adopting a protocol is a working open source example of it. Well, google has open sourced an implementation of the wave protocol for those of you curious about Google's new collaboration and conversation platform. It's been reviewed, skewered and called 'Anti-Web' but now's your chance to see a Java implementation of it. The article lists it as still rapidly evolving so it might not be prudent to buy into it yet. Any thumbs up or thumbs down from actual users of the new protocol?"

Comments

Re:OK, now what does it do?

[jtdennis]

I've read reviews of it as real time collaboration. Think of it as private e-mail, IM, and document collaboration all in one system.

Re:When does the Litigation Start?

[d3l33t]

I for one feel bad for the helpless telecoms. They have done everything in their power provide nothing but exceptional service to customers over the past 30 years, including protecting our privacy and investing in infrastructure ~/sacrasm. Regardless of 'infringing' business models, we should be rejoicing the opportunity to compliment the current, and broken, communication model. By providing an alternative protocol with specific functionality it's not replacing current technology, simply enhancing it. Let's just hope it's not a product of the PR machine.

Re:Oh, well, if there's a Java implementation

[Smegly]

It might be pro-GoogleOS. I would not be surprised if it becomes a communication hub for Google's netbook OS.

It's too early, but...

[SebaSOFT]

I think that every web developer that misses this out, will pay it hard.
Experts say that true innovations are hard to detect. I would say, keep an eye on this, or you will regret it.

Re:OK, now what does it do?

[Starayo]

I wish I could use my mod points to mod you a lazy bastard. I mean COME ON, it's a google product. GOOGLE. JUST FUCKING GOOGLE IT!

Re:I hope this doesn't catch on.

[Anonymous Coward]

Waves are exactly as local as email is. WFP sits atop XMPP (the protocol that runs Jabber). Waves do not reside "out there"; they reside on your XMPP server. I would expect any organization using Waves to maintain its own XMPP server or 3 (but I have seen stranger things).

WFP isn't perfect, but if you're going to complain about it not residing on your local machine, you'd better be prepared to make exactly the same complaints about email. Personally I think email has proven itself to be a plausible communication medium, even occasionally for mission critical work. WFP has the same potential in a few years time when it's stabilized.

My feelings on Wave

[recoiledsnake]

Wave is surely an interesting concept and application, but if there's any web app that just makes you want to scream for a native implementation, it's Wave. There's no way even the fastest web browser running on a Quad core or Octo core with 8 gigs of RAM will leave you satisfied with the experience. Just as I typed that, my browser froze in Slashdot.2.0 for like five seconds.

Why is Google spoiling good concepts by tying them to the browser exclusively? They just need to develop for the three major platforms, Windows, Linux and OS X. And open source it so that the enthusiasts of other OSes can port them. And they can still have a web implementation for people on other platforms or those who do not want to install a native app.

Re:My feelings on Wave

[xororand]

I definitely agree with you. A rich client, maybe implemented with C++ and Qt4, would be very useful. The demo video actually shows a native command-line client for Wave. If that's possible, you should be able to develop any kind of interface. If Google doesn't release a thick client, maybe that's a business opportunity right at your doorstep.

Re:My feelings on Wave

[dragonworks2050]

But isn't that what Chrome OS is for? Ultimately, Google wants the browser and the OS to be identical.

Re:My feelings on Wave

[jesset77]

Why develop for three platforms and let geeks port that to many when you can develop as open source for one platform (DHTML) and actively encourage the geeks to port that to 3, and then to many?

Hell, if I worked at Google the last thing I would want would be to get involved in GNOME/KDE turf wars, piss off apple fanbois if it doesn't look precisely like a macintosh app or really develop anything for the Windows desktop. Like, ever. So instead, Google puts it on the Web where everyone can get at it from any modern platform (even/especially smartphones, and if you want a native copy then you or some hobbiests are free to write one (and thereafter support it :P)

Seriously, do you recall their last attempt at a Jabber desktop application, Gtalk? It even worked well, but then they dropped it like a bad habit in favor of the web-based version.

Additionally, one of their main design goals was to make Wave conversations embeddable into web pages. They would like this to be used for CMS, to replace forums, to replace blog comments, essentially they wish people to mash up Wave content with their own web pages. If they focused their deployment first to the desktop, they would miss out on that opportunity.

Re:My feelings on Wave

[DragonWriter]

Wave is surely an interesting concept and application, but if there's any web app that just makes you want to scream for a native implementation, it's Wave. [...] Why is Google spoiling good concepts by tying them to the browser exclusively?

Its a published protocol built on top of XMPP, with a defined data model; nothing is stopping people from building native apps that produce and/or consume wave updates. Certainly, Google is doing nothing to prevent this.

They just need to develop for the three major platforms, Windows, Linux and OS X. And open source it so that the enthusiasts of other OSes can port them.

Or, you know, they could just publish the specs and leave implementation of native applications, which are far less relevant to Google's business than web applications using the protocol, to people who have an interest in and use for native applications.

sure you can

[Briden]

but what good would that do you, if it's an ever changing document, like a conversation between multiple people?

Re:I hope this doesn't catch on.

[Ephemeriis]

I think the whole idea of wave is AWESOME. My one question is ... how is Google going to make money off of it???

I doubt if Google will make much money off of the wave protocol or message format... Much like SMTP, it'll just kind of be out there for other people to implement.

I'm sure they'll offer a free (ad supported) Wave service however, much like they've got Gmail now... And they'll probably offer a paid subscription to business users, like with Google Apps right now...

Of course, they're spearheading the whole thing... So they could probably get an actual wave server (hardware/software/whatever) to market long before anyone else can. They could sell that, but it doesn't really sound like Google's way of doing things...

Re:I hope this doesn't catch on.

[pwfffff]

It's not currently a service, so you're point still isn't valid. Yes, they have ONE server up. It's a BETA. An INVITE ONLY beta. Where did you get the idea that someone is putting mission critical things there? Now that this reference implementation is out you can even have your own server running NOW, before Google's even hinted at running their own service.

Troll harder please.

Re:MS response?

[mjwx]

I wonder how Microsoft will call it's clone of Wave... Bang? aLive? Sharepoint?

Nah, Microsoft would have several separately licensed and managed components. They'd call them something like Exchange, Live Communications Server and Sharepoint.