You are here: Home > Blog > Google - give us a wave!

Google - give us a wave!

by Richard Watson — last modified Jun 02, 2009 09:40 AM

Can Google's new masterpiece really take the world by storm?

It's a rare moment at Openia when we stop what we're doing to watch the same video on Youtube, and an 80 minute long one at that. Google's Wave presentation has such an air of occasion about it, that it would seem churlish not to take the time to watch. But is there any substance behind the understated-but-we-know-we're-good Google glitz? There are some pretty powerful applications out there, including many excellent web-based ones, so what exactly is it that makes Google Wave the "killer app" that so many claim it is?

First, it's important to recognise what Wave isn't - it's not one single new idea, it's a bunch of very small, but important, changes to a lot of other ideas which have been brought together. So the first thing we realise is that Wave owes a lot to other technologies. In so doing it stands on the shoulders of giants such as email, blogs, forums, social networking and instant messaging. (Even some of the "new" ideas, such as the ability to watch your correspondent as they are typing the individual letters and words of their message are not that original - "Phone" on VAX/VMS had such a feature back in the 1980s.)

Secondly, although it's a great piece of work, expertly delivered (from what we can tell from the video) it is in many ways completely inevitable. It was only a matter of time before blogs and email and messaging were integrated in some way - it is a technology waiting to happen. That it has happened in one big jump makes it more exciting, but you can rest assured that we would have got there eventually. That said it is reassuring to have Google at the helm at moments like this, rather than some of the alternatives.

But the part which makes this the app which will replace email, IM and many other messaging tools in all our lives is the fact that it is released as a protocol, and an open one at that. So anyone can write their own Google Wave compatible applications and talk to anyone else's. This is what makes Email the current primary choice for messaging - there is no need for everyone to use the same provider. Provider choice is key for planning communications, and Google are big enough to know that they can't be the only provider in the world without poisoning the well for all of us. One has to wonder whether if this technology had been constructed by Microsoft or Apple (for example) that it would have been used as a tool to try to secure market share, rather than making the world a better place for us all.

As a microblog, Wave might only be an incremental change from Twitter, and as a Forum/Social Network it's only a few thought processes removed from Multiply or Facebook, and as an Instant Messenger it might be practically the same as Jabber, MSN or Yahoo; it's the combination of these facets and, more importantly, the openness and ubiquity of them that makes Wave unique, as will be evident when the makers of Twitter, Facebook and others present their offerings in a Wave-like way.

And if this all works out as it should, Wave will become the "glue" of the web.

 

Wow

Posted by Anonymous User at Jun 02, 2009 12:19 PM
That sounds terrific!

An email killer?

Posted by Anonymous User at Jun 17, 2009 12:29 PM
But is it going to replace email ? Think how long it has been for companies to ditch their fax machines, in fact many still have them (we do), although rarely used.

I for one, am looking forward to Google Wave but another question I ponder, is that if you replace email with what is an instant messaging tool does it mean that customers will want 'instant answers' too ? This may be a step too far for most companies ..

An email killer?

Posted by Richard Watson at Jun 24, 2009 09:14 AM
I think you have a valid point - people's expectations do vary with the technology used. Most of the Google demos revolve around people who know each other and are subscribed to each others presence - more general communications would have to convey less information about availability of the recipient (I certainly don't want a spammer to know that I'm reading their email).

On the other hand, what is more reassuring to your customers than to see someone typing a response to their support request?

dtljhiel

Posted by Anonymous User at Sep 15, 2009 09:06 AM
 ajegzjye http://uztinzdz.com xwnflxzb cmzsxrsv <a href="http://bzomkltj.com">prjnuctc</a> [URL=http://fajunxxb.com]msncqtdh[/URL]