Slashdot Mirror


Initial Reviews of Google Wave; Neat, But Noisy

bonch writes "Reviews of Google Wave are out, and opinions are that it has potential as a development platform but is noisy to use for real-time communication. Robert Scoble calls it overhyped, claiming it's useful for little more than personal IM or small-scale project collaboration. He complains about the noisiness of tracking dozens of people chatting him at once in real-time and calls trying to use it a 'productivity killer' compared to simpler mediums like email and Twitter."

40 of 336 comments (clear)

  1. A bigger waste of time than twitter? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ...now trat's really saying something

    1. Re:A bigger waste of time than twitter? by ajs · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Twitter and Wave are communication tools. In the hands of someone who has something meaningful to say, they're powerful. In the hands of someone who has nothing to say, they're no more or less a waste of time than any other communications tool.

    2. Re:A bigger waste of time than twitter? by martas · · Score: 3, Funny

      who's trat?

      [in panicked tone]: who's trere?! HELLO??

    3. Re:A bigger waste of time than twitter? by ObsessiveMathsFreak · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I would argue that Twitter and Wave have the exact opposite effect. In the hands of an lucid and incisive orator, they are next to useless as a medium for the dissemination of ideas. On the other hand, for vapid, shrill and fallacious authors they are a godsend, enabling them to broadcast their general message of stupidity and ignorance to a wider field than ever before.

      In a way, they are a microcosm of the Internet itself!

      --
      May the Maths Be with you!
    4. Re:A bigger waste of time than twitter? by aj50 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I guess that holds true, but only if you use wave like twitter (which is to miss its main attractions).

      Where wave really shines is for collaboration, communicating ideas between people working together towards a solution rather than disseminating information to a large audience.

      --
      I wish to remain anomalous
  2. Echos thoughts of others after the demo by PhantomHarlock · · Score: 4, Insightful

    After watching the demo, a lot of people were commenting that the major problem is that it runs counter to how the brain operates...we aren't designed to heavily multitask. Email provides a linear conversation at least. Still, it's interesting and I think that it does have uses. Perhaps the user feedback will cause it to evolve into something more manageable for a regular brain. I think the potential to assist with remote project collaboration is great.

    A lot will depending on how people use it, not what it is. There will need to be settings to help people set limits on the barrage of information.

    1. Re:Echos thoughts of others after the demo by MichaelSmith · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yeah I work with an air traffic control system. The UI has to take a lot of complex information and present it to the user in the most pertinent way possible. It has to understand what is important (an aircraft which is off course for example) and give just enough emphasis to that object without taking too much of the users attention away from other tasks. It is a fine balance, particularly if you expect your UI to be used for hours at a time in a stressful environment.

    2. Re:Echos thoughts of others after the demo by Zerth · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Email provides a linear conversation at least.

      Clearly you interact with people who know that top-posting is evil and have no urge to reply to each email before reading the following responses that have been sitting in their inbox for 3 days.

      I envy you.

    3. Re:Echos thoughts of others after the demo by smallfries · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It seems that a lot of the early reviews are complaining that when they use like a real-time forum, it gets too busy. When a reviewer claims that he's chatting to 12 people at once and it's too much of a time sink - what is he comparing it to? Chatting to 12 people in a normal IM client is a huge time sink because there is always somebody talking.

      I'd like to read a review by somebody that knows what that they're talking about. Sure, it's a tool that tries to integrate blogs / forums / chat / email into a single product. But that doesn't magically mean that it can turn forum style interaction between hundreds of people into a linear two-person conversion like email.

      If anything, the combination is going to create different conventions for hybrid forms of communication.

      --
      Slashdot: where don knuth is an idiot because he cant grasp the awesome power of php
    4. Re:Echos thoughts of others after the demo by drinkypoo · · Score: 4, Informative

      Gmail threads top-post emails into a coherent conversation just fine.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    5. Re:Echos thoughts of others after the demo by PhantomHarlock · · Score: 3, Interesting

      It could be seen as an intermediate point in that process, yes. Only time will tell if the neurological structure can build itself to accommodate that or not, or if there are some fundamental limitations in the structure that would require a few thousand years of evolutionary development to fix.

      I am reminded of Stranger in a Strange Land, who's protagonist was raised by aliens to learn quite a different set of abilities, and to think very differently from humans, with the same brain. Could be possible.

    6. Re:Echos thoughts of others after the demo by RabidMoose · · Score: 5, Informative

      Ars Technica did a pretty good writeup on it.

    7. Re:Echos thoughts of others after the demo by mattack2 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Top posting is not evil. It's a natural response to the fact that email dialogues begin at the top of the message. Just because you'd like the actual new content of the message to be all the way at the bottom doesn't mean everyone else does.

      No, not "all the way at the bottom," at least if they're responding to more than one specific point in a message.

      If one is responding to specific points, then they should always obviously delete any bits you aren't responding to AND respond below. Why respond below? Because we read from top down, and when bottom-posting the reader can read it normally -- read the bit of quoted material for context THEN read the response directly beneath.

      In the *rare* times that top-posters *do* respond to specific points, then the reader has to constantly "tennis-match" move their eyes up and down to read quoted material/new material.

      Note some many people consider "top-posting" while forwarding is hypocrisy of top-posting haters. I disagree, because when forwarding, one rarely makes specific/detailed responses to various different pieces in an email. (If so, then they should reply, and possibly add new CCed people, mentioning that new CCs were added.) Generally, at least the way I use it, forwarding is more of "Hey, take a look at this:", so putting that comment at the top makes sense.

    8. Re:Echos thoughts of others after the demo by mctk · · Score: 5, Funny

      Most Dearest Friend ObsessiveMathsFreak,

      I actually appreciate the salutations and valedictions. Sometimes they even help me identify Nigerian spam.

      Sincerely,
      Your friend,
      mctk

      PS I just thought of something to say, but unfortunately I've already typed out the message, so I'll just have to write it out here at the end.

      --
      Paul Grosfield - the quicker picker upper.
    9. Re:Echos thoughts of others after the demo by alienunknown · · Score: 4, Funny

      I agree, top posting is awful.

      Email provides a linear conversation at least.

      Clearly you interact with people who know that top-posting is evil and have no urge to reply to each email before reading the following responses that have been sitting in their inbox for 3 days.

      I envy you.

    10. Re:Echos thoughts of others after the demo by Samgilljoy · · Score: 3, Informative

      It's the way the information is structured. It's linguistic convention, and it has a point; it's not a matter of "social niceties." Information is transmitted in the way language is structured as well, and structure facilitates its reception.

      More importantly you clearly have difficulty imagining any form of written communication other than the few you regularly come across. A single-page business letter that is magically attached to it's envelope for all time is one possibility. It's a rudimentary example.

    11. Re:Echos thoughts of others after the demo by Philip_the_physicist · · Score: 4, Informative

      This is

      What's top posting?

      I agree, top posting is awful.

      Email provides a linear conversation at least.

      Clearly you interact with people who know that top-posting is evil and have no urge to reply to each email before reading the following responses that have been sitting in their inbox for 3 days.

      I envy you.

  3. People will like it by Lord+Grey · · Score: 4, Funny

    Those that simply have to stay connected to others at all times in order to feel validated and important will love Google Wave. Right there in front of you is evidence that people are connected to you! In real time! Better than texting! It's so amazingly interactive! It's like... like... a telephone!

    --
    // Beyond Here Lie Dragons
    1. Re:People will like it by Ethanol-fueled · · Score: 3, Funny

      Not when only 34 of them are actually communicating with you, not on a personal level or even in real time.

      HAPPY HUMP DAY LOLZ!!!!!!!
      * Obnoxious glittery .gif *

    2. Re:People will like it by arunkv · · Score: 4, Funny

      Leonard: We need to widen our circle.
      Sheldon: I have a very wide circle. I have 212 friends on myspace.
      Leonard: Yes, and you've never met one of them.
      Sheldon: That's the beauty of it.

  4. Sounds like he needs to set pingable to off by Zerth · · Score: 4, Informative

    You can set your status to "not available to chat" and treat it just like email.

    Don't look at the blinking and it can't bother you.

    1. Re:Sounds like he needs to set pingable to off by SoupGuru · · Score: 4, Insightful

      This reminds me a lot of what people were saying a few years ago when they pondered whether they should get a cellphone.

      "But it's always with you! People will call at all times!"

      The obvious solution is to turn it off or don't answer it and people will get the idea and communicate on your terms. You have the control of how or when to respond.

      --
      What doesn't kill you only delays the inevitable
    2. Re:Sounds like he needs to set pingable to off by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      The fear is that once your friends know you carry a cell, they expect you to answer. If you fail to answer, they'll assume you're screening the call and will leave you out of the loop on the next social engagement as a punishment for breaking the social contract (screening your friend's call is a slap in the face).

      If they don't know you have a cell phone, they'll treat you the same old way through the old/slow communication channels. I got away with that for a week until they realized I had a phone.

      p.s. I almost completely missed out on the "texting" fad amongst my friends. They kept giving me shit about not having a cell phone because they wanted to be able to text me instead of call or email. I refused to get a phone for years, and then within the first month after I bought a disposable cell phone they all dumped their old texting phones and got smartphones. Now they refuse to use text and only want to use email. Well now I can just throw away the cell and continue using email the same old way. Wheee... (one has to wonder if my decision to get a phone is what prompted them to get smartphones -- maybe they felt compelled to maintain the same differential in social status).

    3. Re:Sounds like he needs to set pingable to off by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      If you fail to answer, they'll assume you're screening the call and will leave you out of the loop on the next social engagement as a punishment for breaking the social contract (screening your friend's call is a slap in the face).

      Only to the terminally insecure. All of my friends know that if I don't answer the phone it's because I'm busy, left the damned thing in the car again or driving and don't have my headset with me. They know I'll call them back to find out what they wanted when I'm available.

    4. Re:Sounds like he needs to set pingable to off by cowscows · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I guess my friends aren't as big a bunch of dicks as yours. Anybody that'd I'd consider a decent friend knows enough about my personality to not take it personally if I don't bother to answer. If they don't know me well enough to understand, then chances are I don't care what they think anyways so whatever.

      --

      One time I threw a brick at a duck.

  5. Missing the point by PeterBrett · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Robert Scoble calls it overhyped, claiming it's useful for little more than personal IM or small-scale project collaboration. He complains about the noisiness of tracking dozens of people chatting him at once in real-time and calls trying to use it a 'productivity killer' compared to simpler mediums like email and Twitter.

    I think he's missing the point. You don't need to use Google Wave in "real time": you can treat it just like e-mail or twitter if you want. Open the wave, ignore anyone else who's editing it, make the changes or reply you want to, and leave it to come back to it later.

    You can use Wave for anything from any level of communication synchronicity from e-mail, through IRC, to teleconference, on a completely continuous sliding scale. No other Internet communications medium we've seen before has that kind of flexibility.

    I also think that a lot of the negative reactions are because it's a paradigm-shifting technology. People don't like change; they don't like adapting to new and unfamiliar ways of working. When e-mail first started becoming widespread, many people found it impossible to understand and deal with; now it's an intrinsic and familiar part of every working environment.

    1. Re:Missing the point by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Exactly.
      He is acting as if you NEED to be in there 24/7 so you don't miss things.
      Wave is literally a Wiki-IM hybrid.
      You can be instant or as relaxed as you want, it is persistent on the server-end.
      Just because all this information is there, doesn't mean you need to pay attention to it all at the same time.
      Wave won't make superhumans out of us.

      After playing around with it a little, the only potential problem i can see is people interacting with gadgets at the same time, causing collides.
      I've had it happen when a few of us were using a Google Maps gadget.

      This is the truest and best example of Multiplayer Notepad ever. IRC, eat it.

  6. Can't say I'm surprised... by GooberToo · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ...because trying to actively collaborate with 100 people, even face to face, is noisy and futile. The fact this is his resulting opinion, in my opinion, doesn't validate his view in the least. No one has ever claimed using Wave will make humans suddenly super human; able to do things no other humans could previously do.

    Lets be realistic about the types of things people collaborate on and how its currently done today. Try doing that with 100 people or even face to face and its pretty message. And with mediums such as IM or email, its far more likely many will walk away with differing understandings of the effort. Even worse, after the fact, people will be challenged to recall why certain conclusions were reached or decisions were made. None of those are nearly as likely to be problems with waves.

    Also, what people are currently testing and using is simply a proof of concept of a series of robots and applications. These, in of themselves, are not Wave proper. In other words, as people gain more experience, the types of activities, applications, and robots which contribute and provide increased value will only grow over time. The applications which people perceived as "Wave" today is absolutely not the "Wave" people will see tomorrow.

    So the real summary is, he fails to understand what is being used. Likewise, a lack of imagination is obvious, as is realistic expectation. I'm sorry but I can't seriously consider his review on any level. He only comes off as small minded and unrealistic.

    Coming full circle back to expectations, only a handful of people are able to focus on more than single thread of conversation and predominantly they are women. Like any significantly new technology, it takes time to fully absorb and leverage all that the new technology has to offer. In this case, its very likely people will be forced to retrain their brains to better follow multiple, concurrent conversations to fully benefit from the technology. Everyone can do it, but it doesn't come natural to most; especially if you're not female.

    Simply put, Google has provided an absolutely awesome, sky is the limit, technology. If multiple killer applications are not in place which leverage Wave within a year or two, I'd declare this a failure of developers and imagination rather than a failure of Google and/or Wave.

    In this case, I'd say the reviewer has failed everyone.

    1. Re:Can't say I'm surprised... by Colonel+Korn · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Simply put, Google has provided an absolutely awesome, sky is the limit, technology. If multiple killer applications are not in place which leverage Wave within a year or two, I'd declare this a failure of developers and imagination rather than a failure of Google and/or Wave.

      In this case, I'd say the reviewer has failed everyone.

      So to summarize your post: the reviewer doesn't make any solid arguments to support his position that Google Wave is not very exciting, and you heartily assert that it's the best thing ever.

      --
      "I zero-index my hamsters" - Willtor (147206)
  7. Useful if in moderation by xirusmom · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I think it is going to be very useful for collaboration projects and some specific conversations. Of course, some people will stay staring at the screen the entire day, but that already happens with facebook, twitter, etc. The point is.. you don't HAVE to. I like the way you can track the conversation even if you got there at a later time. My guess there will be a first moment of wow-ness and them it will fall back to be used normally, like everything that is new.

  8. You're Doing it Wrong by MBoffin · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Keep in mind that these complaints are from the same guy who followed tens of thousands of people on Twitter and complained when Facebook wasn't allowing him to add more than 5,000 friends on Facebook. If he joined an e-mail mailing list with 35,000 subscribers, he would probably complain that mailing lists as a whole are too noisy and write them off as useless. Now that he's dealing with something that requires more attention to actual individual people, he finds it harder to deal with. Well, duh.

    Sure it's noisy on the public waves, but they're public. Everyone is using it all at once... hundreds of people at a time. That's not going to be the main way people use Google Wave. Right now more people are using the public waves because they want to interact with other Wave users, and all their friends aren't on Wave yet.

  9. The revolutionary potential of Wave! by David+Gerard · · Score: 4, Funny

    The "tech world" is awash with excitement for today's scheduled release of a hundred thousand invitations to preview Wave, Google's innovative new website, communication protocol, interactive environment, multiplayer online role-playing game, bulletin board, wiki, dessert wax and floor topping. Experts, all heavily consulted by the media while Parliament is in recess, say it will revolutionise how we do business, organise parties, manage projects, make friends, waste our employer's time at work, pick up girls we swear we didn't realise were under sixteen and cheat on our homework.

    I've been testing the Google Wave Developer Preview. The implications for journalists alone are stunning:

    • Collaborative reporting: Using the Google Wave interface, two reporters can take turns at the keyboard of an Internet terminal and "type" both their names at the top of an article. Then they can both write material for the article below the double byline! Incredible!
    • Record and archive interviews: We can write down the words actually spoken by an interviewee. The words can then be "saved" for use later. Amazing!
    • Timelines: The Google Wave Timeline can be used to show a timeline of events — just type a clock time and then note what happened around that time! Punctual!
    • Discuss what you read: People who read stories can write "comments" on them, by writing them in their Google Wave interface, then "e-mailing" then in to the editors for due consideration and possible publication on the "site"! Interactive!
    • Smarter story updates: Instead of adding "Updated" to the end of an updated story, we can use the Google Wave Cursor and the Google Wave Arrow Keys and edit the story text in the middle! Make those commenters look as silly in their supposed "corrections" as you know they should do!

    In conclusion, Google Wave is clearly an absolute boon to the noble institution of the Fourth Estate in its mission to protect the public good, further the dynamism of social discourse and watch the watchmen. And this is why we at News International consider Google a threat and menace to the news media and the institution of journalism that must be reined in by government edict without delay. God bless you all, and please PayPal us 20p for having read this article, you parasitical pixel-stained technopeasant. And now, Tories and tits.

    --
    http://rocknerd.co.uk
  10. Re:Scoble? Calling hype? Wat? by iamapizza · · Score: 4, Funny

    Dude, he just associated 'twitter' with being productive.

    --
    Always proofread carefully to see if you any words out.
  11. Re:Try IRC. by TeXMaster · · Score: 4, Insightful

    IRC in itself is pretty good, but it misses a couple of features, like offline backlogging and some kind of more direct integration with pastebins, source code repository and such. I haven't been invited to Google Wave yet, but I had the impression the whole point was to have something like that: an IRC integrated with all the corollary tools that can be used to coordinate development.

    --
    "I'm never quite so stupid as when I'm being smart" (Linus van Pelt)
  12. Underlying infrastructure? by dave562 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    There was an article here a day or two ago with one of the lead developers of Wave. He mentioned the subject of "robots" that monitor the conversation stream. I'll admit to failing to RTFA in both cases, but it seems like Wave is intended as a low level foundation to build upon. The analogy that comes to mind is the data bus in the computer. If you try to use a computer by monitoring the 0s and 1s flying between the CPU and the RAM or the disk subsystem you won't get anywhere fast. On the other hand, if you leave that low level hardware interaction to the drivers and use a software application, the computer becomes useful.

    It seems to me, and again I didn't RTFA, that Wave will only be useful when people start writing decent robots and applications to sit on top of it. I imagine it working something like SNMP. The application only traps what is relevant for what it is monitoring, even though there are a lot of conversations going on. Likewise, in terms of collaboration or project management, there might be applications that tag certain types of communication and only pay attention to similar types of communication. Status updates would be monitored by the calendaring robot and only displayed by the calendar application. IM like communication streams might be aggregated into an Inbox like feature so that people can "mute" the conversation stream and go back to it later. I'd imagine that there will be a great demand for threading and search capabilities on those sorts of streams.

    Right now it seems like people are looking at Wave from the perspective of an individual user. Does one user need to talk to twelve different people at once? Hell no. On the other hand, your average organization has dozens if not more conversation streams taking place between departments and individuals at any given point during the work day. Different departments might not know what each other are up to in a timely enough manner to be relevant. With something like Wave tying together the various information streams (email, calendaring, wiki, etc), connections can be made between individuals that might otherwise be missed.

    Then again, I didn't read either article and for all I know Wave might just be a Twitter clone with a worthless API that can't be leveraged for anything other than talking about Britney Spears.

  13. Re:I was thinking the same thing by sopssa · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Am I the only only one who doesn't like that everyone all the time know what I am doing, if i'm online or if i'm available for a chat? Or whatever other people are doing. I abandoned MSN messenger for that sole purpose a few years ago, and facebook too.

    There's a lot of socializing time already even without having all these apps on your computer too. I do have instant messaging for my work, but those people *know* when it's the right time to msg me and they're doing so for a good reason - not just to ask "whats up dude?"

    It's nice to have some peace sometimes, and computer is a really nice way for that. I dont want all the contacts and people bothering me when I just want to spend some time and feel relaxed.

  14. Re:Try IRC. by bigpresh · · Score: 4, Informative

    IRC in itself is pretty good, but it misses a couple of features, like offline backlogging and some kind of more direct integration with pastebins, source code repository and such.

    If you want offline backlogging, an IRC bouncer like ZNC can take care of that for you. As for pastebins, pasting the URL to a post is dead easy; there's plenty of IRC bots out there which can automatically post a "$user has made a new pastebin post at $url" message to a channel as soon as someone posts.

    At work, we use IRC to communicate, we have a copy of the codebase from pastebin.com with a small modification to report pastebin posts to our development channel, and a script run from a Subversion post-commit hook which reports commts to the channel with a link to view the diff.

    Works pretty well for us!

  15. Small OSS Projects by Idiomatick · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I could see this becoming popular for small OSS projects. These can often have an IRC channel or 5, A website, Possibly a google group, a forum, a bug tracker, a gitorious site, a wiki, email, IM, and i'm sure other things.

    If this Google Wave thing gets good robots and cuts the crap in half it will be incredibly useful to small OSS projects. Not only will it be less of a pain but it will make the project more efficient and better in general. I've seen plenty of situations where half of the info sources are out of date.

    Some good tools would be importing data in a nice manner from a variety of sites. If it can just import a wiki then we will see people change much faster. Other things would be tools for programmers generally, ability to post code in a nice way, with the dif highlighted. Or perhaps something to make a todo list.

    That said it is all in the implementation. If they make it easy to add toys I can see it being used quick. It also needs to be open, private wikis spread since people can make their own. It doesn't matter if it still goes through google so long as users have a way to implement it in their OWN way on their own site, so it has to be customizable. Making an OSS client for this would help, they are replacing types of communication that can be accessed from lots of places. I also think integrating feeds of different types would help, maybe be able to email into the wave or read through email. Access through a phone ap. Basically for it to go well they need to integrate and eat all the forms of communication they are competing with. They'll be hard pressed to make this work unless the are competitive individually with each type of communication.

    There are a lot of little things that need to go right and I doubt it will happen first try. But I believe this type of integrated, combined interaction is the future of small group communication. And I haven't tried it myself.

  16. Who needs wave? by citylivin · · Score: 3, Funny

    "I can read notes online when people [are] writing [them] and fix [them in a few moments]"

    See, who needs google wave! I use slashdot to take my grammar nazism and pedantry to the next level!

    --
    As a potential lottery winner, I totally support tax cuts for the wealthy
  17. Re:I was thinking the same thing by Zen+Hash · · Score: 3, Funny

    I haven't personally found a use for Twitter, since I generally agree I don't feel like relaying how many bowel movements I've had today or giving every single detail out to the public. I guess I could see a use if you like following celebrities or some special groups that have started using it, like the LA Fire Department, but otherwise it's not my thing.

    Personally, I have no issue letting everyone know when I'm pooping. I've called and SMSed people from the can on multiple occasions simply to tell them that I was pooping. That would probably be the only thing I would use twitter for, if I were to use it at all.

    --
    Here I sit, all broken hearted.
    Came to poop, but only farted.