I recently returned from the Google I/O conference in San Francisco and one of the reoccurring thoughts that I would have is, "With the help of Google soon everyone will be able to develop." All the products that they were coming out with from easier APIs to code that all you had to do was fill out a spreadsheet and copy and paste code. I will admit, at first this bugged me. I have always taken a thrill in possessing this skill to create something wonderful out of "random" lines of code and now here was Google coming along and allowing for any average schmo to do the same thing without knowing anything. How could Google do this to all their developers? This is how they show their thanks is by making developers useless? I then took a look around me at the men and women I was rubbing shoulders with. People from all across the globe, people who have written some great software and made huge changes and contributions to the industry. I spent a night listening to a developer of Skype run a talk where a developer from the Facebook team was in the audience. I sat at the feet of the whole Android team (literally). The developers of Wave and every other Google product were all right there. A man asking a question during one of the talks I later found out was part of the team that adapted Android for the Nook. These weren't just your mediocre programmers. I was humbled. When humbled I believe we learn best as I did there in that room. These developers weren't offended by Google "taking their job away." They were singing Google's praises, but why? It then occurred to me what Google really was replacing. They weren't taking away all the programmers work, just the low-level grunt work connecting the pipes if you will. Whereas it was some of this low-level work that I could do and what brought me joy this was not the same for these men and women actually in the industry. They actually had customers that counted on them to improve their products and to keep pushing the envelope. It was this low-level work that was slowing them down. Google was allowing for them to spend more of their time writing the code that matters to the consumer, the parts that are industry changing. Even after I/O Google continues to make development easier with the release of App Inventor for Android. This application can either be seen as replacing the programmer skill or allowing for a lower barrier to entry for Android that allows for normal people to transfer to full-out Android development. Although I was skeptical in the beginning I am now a believer and applaud Google in their efforts to assist developers in their job. I will continue to wait anxiously for what Google does in the future.
Sunday, July 18, 2010
Wednesday, June 2, 2010
Why I Trust Google Over Facebook
The other day while reading about some of the newest Facebook privacy changes the thought occurred to me that this was all too much. I have always been for being open and actually wasn't against allowing all the information that they were making public to be public, it was the way they went about privacy that got me worried. They had opted me in to all of these new "features" (read money-making endeavors) without ever asking for my consent. Along with this thought I was thinking about how Facebook had too much information about me and I really shouldn't be trusting it with all this information. About then I received a text on my Google Voice number, I went and checked on my private Google Docs, went to Google Wave, updated a contact in Google contacts, emailed a friend on Gmail, played a game on my Android phone, uploaded some family videos to YouTube, and why not throw in this blog on Blogger. Google has my life in it's hands so why do I trust them?
In the next few paragraphs I would just like to quickly go over why I do trust Google more than Facebook:
This may seem like a useless reason but I trust Google more because of their philosophy of "Don't be Evil." Sure any company could have this as their philosophy but Google has stood by this philosophy in all that I have seen of them. They are a huge company yet with some of their major products they freely release the code (Android, Wave, Chrome, Chrome OS), can you ever see Microsoft or one of those companies doing that? Facebook on the other hand seems to take the opposite view of the consumer. I believe that when Mark Zuckerberg sees a user all he sees is a dollar sign. This evil person is also visible in watching them say they are going to do one thing while do another. They put on the face of a privacy advocate while releasing all this information to outside sources. One sad but funny example of this was the recent bug with viewing other people's profiles and seeing their chats and friend requests. This bug was just that, a bug, but nevertheless it just shows how a device to help privacy, being able to view your profile as someone else, can actually be used to destroy privacy.
Google is transparent. Google will come out and say that they make money off of having people's information. Facebook just takes your information and makes money off of it. This transparency is also apparent in how you release information about yourself in these two services. Facebook seems to be all for a "opt-out" approach which greatly hurts the uninformed and Google sides with a "opt-in" approach. The blaring exception to this was Google Buzz. Buzz came out and opted you in to a lot of followers as a service and I truly believe that Google did not see a problem with this because through all their user testing internally that had worked out great. As we saw that did not go over well and you may say that this shows that Google isn't so great. All it shows is that they can make mistakes which everyone can but it was their response to this public outcry that is the impressive part. They greatly improved management of your followers, showed you all that was being shared and had you ok it, and made it much easier to completely disable Buzz.
The controls that these two companies give their users is also an example of the difference in mindsets of these two companies. Facebook, although it technically does give you a lot of controls, does just that, give you a lot of controls instead of a lot of controls. No matter how many checkboxes you may have if the consumer does not know what is happening then your controls have failed. Google with their dashboard I think has done a much better job with a much harder problem. Google has all these different services yet somehow they can make them all easier to manage collectively than Facebook is alone.
There is some of my main points with the difference between Facebook and Google. Will after all this I stop using Facebook? Sadly no, that's where my friends are so that's where I must be. Nevertheless, I will always feel more comfortable when I am in the Google world.
Do you agree? Disagree? Have counter examples? Have yourself heard in the comments.
In the next few paragraphs I would just like to quickly go over why I do trust Google more than Facebook:
This may seem like a useless reason but I trust Google more because of their philosophy of "Don't be Evil." Sure any company could have this as their philosophy but Google has stood by this philosophy in all that I have seen of them. They are a huge company yet with some of their major products they freely release the code (Android, Wave, Chrome, Chrome OS), can you ever see Microsoft or one of those companies doing that? Facebook on the other hand seems to take the opposite view of the consumer. I believe that when Mark Zuckerberg sees a user all he sees is a dollar sign. This evil person is also visible in watching them say they are going to do one thing while do another. They put on the face of a privacy advocate while releasing all this information to outside sources. One sad but funny example of this was the recent bug with viewing other people's profiles and seeing their chats and friend requests. This bug was just that, a bug, but nevertheless it just shows how a device to help privacy, being able to view your profile as someone else, can actually be used to destroy privacy.
Google is transparent. Google will come out and say that they make money off of having people's information. Facebook just takes your information and makes money off of it. This transparency is also apparent in how you release information about yourself in these two services. Facebook seems to be all for a "opt-out" approach which greatly hurts the uninformed and Google sides with a "opt-in" approach. The blaring exception to this was Google Buzz. Buzz came out and opted you in to a lot of followers as a service and I truly believe that Google did not see a problem with this because through all their user testing internally that had worked out great. As we saw that did not go over well and you may say that this shows that Google isn't so great. All it shows is that they can make mistakes which everyone can but it was their response to this public outcry that is the impressive part. They greatly improved management of your followers, showed you all that was being shared and had you ok it, and made it much easier to completely disable Buzz.
The controls that these two companies give their users is also an example of the difference in mindsets of these two companies. Facebook, although it technically does give you a lot of controls, does just that, give you a lot of controls instead of a lot of controls. No matter how many checkboxes you may have if the consumer does not know what is happening then your controls have failed. Google with their dashboard I think has done a much better job with a much harder problem. Google has all these different services yet somehow they can make them all easier to manage collectively than Facebook is alone.
There is some of my main points with the difference between Facebook and Google. Will after all this I stop using Facebook? Sadly no, that's where my friends are so that's where I must be. Nevertheless, I will always feel more comfortable when I am in the Google world.
Do you agree? Disagree? Have counter examples? Have yourself heard in the comments.
Tuesday, March 16, 2010
Technology (Or Lack Thereof) That My Kids Won't Understand
I decided to take a step outside of my regular review-like posts of differing products for a much more laid-back, fun topic. One night at work it occurred to me that in only 17 years the technology industry has completely changed, so much so that my kids won't understand any of it even if they were born now. I have compiled a list of some of the things that I think they will never quite understand, if you have more ideas post them in the comments below:
1. The Sound of a Dial-Up Modem
I can still remember the first day that I got onto the internet, it was a warm summer's day and I decided for some unknown reason to boot up the old modem and get online, only problem was my dad was on the phone and I kicked him off the call, whoops. The scream of a modem was, for a long time, the sound of the internet for me. The 56Kbps was perfectly fast and I didn't understand why you would want anything more. Oh how far we have come. (Which reminds me, grandma we really need to get you off that dial-up)
2. The VHS Tape
These wonderful devices still take up a whole bookshelf in my house (who needs books when you have movies?). The ease of use was awesome and the fact that I had to put the tape in a "rewinder" (I can't wait to explain a rewinder to my kids) to get it back to the beginning seemed like a perfectly reasonable thing to have to do. To tell the truth the DVD will be long gone by the time I have kids but I still remember the first DVD I watched. The quality didn't seem anything special but when I saw the menu I was in utter awe. How was that possible? I could look at these chapter things and pick one? Special features!? Shrek will always hold a place in my heart as the first DVD I saw.
3. Windows ME
Although many of these other items listed will always have a little nostalgic value for me, Windows ME is one thing I will be happy my children will not have to experience. At the time I actually used ME I was oblivious to the horribleness I was being subjected too but now in my enlightened state I have been able to block the memories of my run-ins with the OS from my memory.
4. Internet Only When You are at Home or Work
My kids will never appreciate the fact that the internet wasn't always right at your finger-tips, but that you actually had to go find a computer to get it. Now days from the moment I walk out my door I still stay connected through the internet on my phone and Wi-Fi hotspots dotting the town. Continuing advances will only improve the speeds and effectiveness of this wide data network.
5. Cell Phones that Only Make Calls
Yes I realize it may be hard to believe but there is actually a phone in that electronic device that you carry around all the time to surf the internet and manage your data. There are times with my own phone that I have so much running that my phone is no longer effective as a phone. I use a grand total of like 10 minutes of calling every month and I don't see that growing any time soon.
6. Cassete Tapes
This item follows fairly closely with the VHS tape item. For quite some time after the CD came out I even still used tapes extensibly because of their ability to easily create mixes of your favorite songs. My kids will never understand the sadness that comes when you go to pull out your tape to see that the tape has gotten stuck and you ripped it or the requirement to turn around a tape to continuing listening.
7. Having to Have a Lot of Money to Make Videos that Large Audiences will View
I worry that my children will never quite understand what it used to be like to only see videos from high profile companies such as film studios and news agencies. We can thank YouTube and other video sharing websites for this low barrier to entry into the video market.
8. When You Missed a Show on TV You had to Wait for the Reruns.
Not that I consistently watched many shows when I was a child but if I forgot to watch a show I was just out of luck. Now, thanks to the beauty of the DVR, I never have to miss another show. There is something extremely nice in being able to boot up the TV and see a list of new tv shows to watch. This also makes watching tv much more efficient because I can fast forward through commercials and I only watch the TV shows I want and don't just channel surf.
9. Wires Needed to Connect Things
This one isn't quite complete but eventually it will be. Sometimes I even forget that I can plug in an ethernet cord to get online. Wireless is the wave of the future and hopefully my kids won't even have to worry about plugging in their electronics for power thanks to wireless electricity.
10. Blowing on Game Cartridges to Make them Load
There will always be a place in my heart for the lowly Sega game cartridge where it was very common to have to blow in both the console and the game to get it actually to load. Sadly my children will probably never understand this needed CPR for game consoles. I might just have to keep the Sega around long enough to show them.
1. The Sound of a Dial-Up Modem
I can still remember the first day that I got onto the internet, it was a warm summer's day and I decided for some unknown reason to boot up the old modem and get online, only problem was my dad was on the phone and I kicked him off the call, whoops. The scream of a modem was, for a long time, the sound of the internet for me. The 56Kbps was perfectly fast and I didn't understand why you would want anything more. Oh how far we have come. (Which reminds me, grandma we really need to get you off that dial-up)
2. The VHS Tape
These wonderful devices still take up a whole bookshelf in my house (who needs books when you have movies?). The ease of use was awesome and the fact that I had to put the tape in a "rewinder" (I can't wait to explain a rewinder to my kids) to get it back to the beginning seemed like a perfectly reasonable thing to have to do. To tell the truth the DVD will be long gone by the time I have kids but I still remember the first DVD I watched. The quality didn't seem anything special but when I saw the menu I was in utter awe. How was that possible? I could look at these chapter things and pick one? Special features!? Shrek will always hold a place in my heart as the first DVD I saw.
3. Windows ME
Although many of these other items listed will always have a little nostalgic value for me, Windows ME is one thing I will be happy my children will not have to experience. At the time I actually used ME I was oblivious to the horribleness I was being subjected too but now in my enlightened state I have been able to block the memories of my run-ins with the OS from my memory.
4. Internet Only When You are at Home or Work
My kids will never appreciate the fact that the internet wasn't always right at your finger-tips, but that you actually had to go find a computer to get it. Now days from the moment I walk out my door I still stay connected through the internet on my phone and Wi-Fi hotspots dotting the town. Continuing advances will only improve the speeds and effectiveness of this wide data network.
5. Cell Phones that Only Make Calls
Yes I realize it may be hard to believe but there is actually a phone in that electronic device that you carry around all the time to surf the internet and manage your data. There are times with my own phone that I have so much running that my phone is no longer effective as a phone. I use a grand total of like 10 minutes of calling every month and I don't see that growing any time soon.
6. Cassete Tapes
This item follows fairly closely with the VHS tape item. For quite some time after the CD came out I even still used tapes extensibly because of their ability to easily create mixes of your favorite songs. My kids will never understand the sadness that comes when you go to pull out your tape to see that the tape has gotten stuck and you ripped it or the requirement to turn around a tape to continuing listening.
7. Having to Have a Lot of Money to Make Videos that Large Audiences will View
I worry that my children will never quite understand what it used to be like to only see videos from high profile companies such as film studios and news agencies. We can thank YouTube and other video sharing websites for this low barrier to entry into the video market.
8. When You Missed a Show on TV You had to Wait for the Reruns.
Not that I consistently watched many shows when I was a child but if I forgot to watch a show I was just out of luck. Now, thanks to the beauty of the DVR, I never have to miss another show. There is something extremely nice in being able to boot up the TV and see a list of new tv shows to watch. This also makes watching tv much more efficient because I can fast forward through commercials and I only watch the TV shows I want and don't just channel surf.
9. Wires Needed to Connect Things
This one isn't quite complete but eventually it will be. Sometimes I even forget that I can plug in an ethernet cord to get online. Wireless is the wave of the future and hopefully my kids won't even have to worry about plugging in their electronics for power thanks to wireless electricity.
10. Blowing on Game Cartridges to Make them Load
There will always be a place in my heart for the lowly Sega game cartridge where it was very common to have to blow in both the console and the game to get it actually to load. Sadly my children will probably never understand this needed CPR for game consoles. I might just have to keep the Sega around long enough to show them.
Monday, February 22, 2010
Apple iPad
Apple is a company that when it enters an industry that industry is forever changed. We saw this with the iPod in 2001 and in 2007 when Apple released the iPhone. Both of these products left their respective industries forever changed. So what will be Apple's new game changing product? Some would say the new Apple iPad.
On January 27 Steve Jobs took the stage to announce the highly speculated iPad, Apple's "tablet" computer. As with most Apple announcements the speculation made it seem like it would be the all encompassing, powerful, do-anything device, therefore, many people were disappointed. I would like to comment on just a few of the complaints that people have with the iPad: "it is just a big iPod Touch," no flash, it is locked down, and what is it good for.
People claim that is is just a "large iPod Touch," to which I say, what is wrong with that? The iPod Touch is a very beautiful device that is widely successful. This statement also assumes that the size of the screen equals a linear progression in quality which is not necessarily true especially in technology where products are known to improve exponentially. This bigger screen size will allow for application developers to greatly improve the quality of their applications with the ability to spread out the interface in a more logical interface and allow for interfaces that would not have been possible before. As a self proclaimed application developer I can see a great benefit in have more room to work with when developing.
A complaint that many people have with the iPad (the iPhone and iPod Touch also) is that there is no Flash support. Some people even point to Apple's comment that you have the "internet in your pocket" as a lie because the iPhone OS (which the iPad and iPod Touch run) does not have Flash support. My comment to that is this: if Flash is the internet, than I feel very sorry for us all. Currently there are very few mobile handsets that have Flash support so therefore I find a website that requires Flash to view as a failure on the developers behalf. The internet's usage is rapidly moving toward the mobile realm and therefore if a website wants complete exposure it can't use Flash for it's technology. That being said, Flash is primarily not used for to build out of websites but more commonly used for the display of video. For this there is a perfectly good standard in HTML 5's video tag. Apple's iPhone OS and Android have support for HTML 5 built into their browsers allowing for content that simply wasn't possible before on mobile phones. Desktop browsers are also quickly joining the HTML 5 party as well (although with a few differences). For complete support web developers can even support both. Simply put, the "problem" with the lack of Flash on the iPad is not a problem with the iPad but is a problem with the laziness of web developers. I applaud Apple for not bending on this and pushing for the adoption of HTML 5.
The next complaint is one that comes with almost every Apple product, it is too locked down. People that say this must not really know Apple that well because this is how they are with all of their devices. The unique difference to the iPad that may cause for the extra heat toward it is that Steve Jobs likened the iPad to a netbook. With this comparison the iPad really does look locked down but I really don't relate an iPad with a netbook, they are entirely different devices. The iPad is an appliance (more on this later) for content consumption and a netbook is made for creation and consumption. One might think from this connection that I just mean that the iPad is just more limited and you would be correct but also so wrong. The fact that it is limited makes it work so much more beautifully and correctly. From demos and first hand experiences I have heard one word common to all reviews that word is "speed." This is a word I have never heard related to a netbook. The locked down nature of the iPad is what makes it so appealing to people, not the technical, Linux-using people that are so prevalent in the tech community, but for the soccer mom who wants something she can pick up that works how she would expect and that she doesn't need a Ph.D to use.
Finally many people are having troubles figuring out what the iPad will be good for or used for. This is where I think Apple's new game changing move is. They haven't created a computer device like you would think, they have created an appliance. Just like you have a fridge or microwave you could now have a iPad. This is the kind of device you have laying on your coffee table to pick up and use to look something up, or the device you take with the teenager to do gaming, watch movie, and stay connected. I find this device to be a paradigm shift that many people haven't been able to completely grasp. As a computer the iPad really isn't that great in its current position, but as an appliance the iPad has a whole lot more appeal.
There are many aspects of the iPad that I have not had time or space to cover but I think what I have written gives a brief explanation against the vocal nay-sayers of the iPad. Even though I find this to be a great device that doesn't mean I think it will be successful. If the market begins to understand what the use case is for the iPad I believe it will be a huge success; however, if the market does not grasp this concept I have a feeling we may have another Newton on our hands.
Wednesday, February 3, 2010
Welcome to the Blog -- Google Wave
Welcome to my blog! It seems that a lot of the technology blogs out there today are written by older members of the community, although I have no problem with this I think it would be good to have a younger person's view that has grown up with all the technology in our world today, hence I started this blog. Two of my favorite technology companies are Apple and Google so there will probably be a lot of posts on the activities of these two parties. I will try to post a new topic probably about every month. Enjoy!
Speaking of Google that brings me to my first topic:
Google Wave:
Wave has received a lot of press in the last year since it's epic introduction at the 2009 Google I/O Conference. Why did this introduction receive so much press? Was it because of the real-time collaboration? The multi-media integration? Or was it the possibilities presented by the architecture to build extensions and bots to participate and enrich the waves? Maybe it was one of these but I don't find that to be the reason it received so much attention. The reason this announcement received all the attention it did was because of one very simple, but extremely bold, thought that the Google developers told the audience. Google was attempting to replace email. The infrastructure that connects modern businesses together was suppose to be replaced by this system that failed numerous times in an hour and a half demo? Surely Google was nuts, right?
Really going to replace email?
So is Wave really going to replace email? I say nay, at least for many years. This is the power of Google though, they have the funds to build up a system just to throw it out in the wild to see if it actually works. This thought process can also be seen in Google's 20% time policy. Although Wave did not originate as a 20% project (that I am aware of) other great Google products did(Gmail, Google News, Adsense, etc), this shows what can happen when you don't think of the business model when developing. However, I digress. So if Wave isn't going to replace our email what is it good for? The answer is this: document collaboration. This is where the beauty and the power of Wave comes in.
So what makes Wave different than other document collaboration products?
It is true that there are already some great real-time document collaboration products out on the web today such was EtherPad (which Google has acquired to contribute to Wave). Although on the surface there are many differences what makes it such a paradigm switch is two things. 1. Google has the muscle to push real-time collaboration to the general public like has never been really accomplished. 2. More importantly, Wave is an open system just like email is. Just as any email server can communicate to any other email server all Wave servers will be able to communicate with each other through the Federation protocol. This is where Google's dream of replacing email has it roots. Google realizes that companies and the public will not want Google to host all of their content because of privacy concerns therefore this allows corporations to run their own Wave servers behind their firewalls and the public the freedom to choose which Wave provider they will use just as they have the freedom to choose their email provider: Gmail, Yahoo, MSN, ISP, etc. However, I don't want to belittle the surface level differences that Wave has from other document collaboration systems either. For instance I am not aware of another system that has such extensive multi-media integration, the extensions, or the bots that Wave employs. These will only grow in power as Wave has more and more work put into it.
My defense of Wave.
I would like to finish just by defending Wave for a moment because it seems in the recent months that Wave has come under more and more scrutiny and skepticism which I believe it does not deserve. I find that these complaints stem from the thoughts of people as they use Wave with the mindset that this will replace email. That is the wrong outlook. Wave is a paradigm switch and in so being it requires a change of how people think of completing tasks and communicating with each other. I have heard comments on Wave such as: That's too hard, It's just really fast instant messaging, etc. These shallow views of Wave need to be overcome before a person can see the magic.
Here is how I have used Wave:
For one of my projects in my college I created a wave for all the members of my team to post our schedule, go over ideas, and include all of the necessary files. Part of our planning even included having a VOIP call(originated through a Wave extension) going on between all parties as we edited the wave. This created a environment of working which I have never seen. It was extremely productive and instant.
Planning of a vacation: Some friends and I have been planing a senior trip and in so doing we have had all of our travel accommodations planned out in a wave. This has allowed us to have one central place to look for all of the necessary information including embedded screenshots of flight information, links to different transportations systems, maps of where we will be staying and points of interest, etc. This has made it extremely simple to keep everything in line.
School Notes: This has been the most magical experience of my Wave career. For four of my college classes I have created a wave to serve as a note-taking platform with the number of participants ranging from 2-6. This has allowed us to be able to write notes and if one of us misses something in the lecture there is always someone to back us up and write what we missed. It is also extremely nice to be able to embed the slides in individual blips (Wave terminology is a bit strange) allowing for the group to comment on each individual slide. The inclusion of bots has made it extremely easy to also pull in external data. For example, I always include the bot Wikify allowing, with a few keystrokes, to automatically pull in Wikipedia articles for unfamiliar data or the bot KaSyntaxy to automatically do syntax hilighting for my CS classes.
Wave is something that you need to have in your hands to truly understand. As my father tells me, I can't complain about something new until I have had to live with it for at least two weeks. I challenge any of you that have access to Wave to give it another try and for those of you who would like to try Wave I still have some invites.
Speaking of Google that brings me to my first topic:
Google Wave:
Wave has received a lot of press in the last year since it's epic introduction at the 2009 Google I/O Conference. Why did this introduction receive so much press? Was it because of the real-time collaboration? The multi-media integration? Or was it the possibilities presented by the architecture to build extensions and bots to participate and enrich the waves? Maybe it was one of these but I don't find that to be the reason it received so much attention. The reason this announcement received all the attention it did was because of one very simple, but extremely bold, thought that the Google developers told the audience. Google was attempting to replace email. The infrastructure that connects modern businesses together was suppose to be replaced by this system that failed numerous times in an hour and a half demo? Surely Google was nuts, right?
Really going to replace email?
So is Wave really going to replace email? I say nay, at least for many years. This is the power of Google though, they have the funds to build up a system just to throw it out in the wild to see if it actually works. This thought process can also be seen in Google's 20% time policy. Although Wave did not originate as a 20% project (that I am aware of) other great Google products did(Gmail, Google News, Adsense, etc), this shows what can happen when you don't think of the business model when developing. However, I digress. So if Wave isn't going to replace our email what is it good for? The answer is this: document collaboration. This is where the beauty and the power of Wave comes in.
So what makes Wave different than other document collaboration products?
It is true that there are already some great real-time document collaboration products out on the web today such was EtherPad (which Google has acquired to contribute to Wave). Although on the surface there are many differences what makes it such a paradigm switch is two things. 1. Google has the muscle to push real-time collaboration to the general public like has never been really accomplished. 2. More importantly, Wave is an open system just like email is. Just as any email server can communicate to any other email server all Wave servers will be able to communicate with each other through the Federation protocol. This is where Google's dream of replacing email has it roots. Google realizes that companies and the public will not want Google to host all of their content because of privacy concerns therefore this allows corporations to run their own Wave servers behind their firewalls and the public the freedom to choose which Wave provider they will use just as they have the freedom to choose their email provider: Gmail, Yahoo, MSN, ISP, etc. However, I don't want to belittle the surface level differences that Wave has from other document collaboration systems either. For instance I am not aware of another system that has such extensive multi-media integration, the extensions, or the bots that Wave employs. These will only grow in power as Wave has more and more work put into it.
My defense of Wave.
I would like to finish just by defending Wave for a moment because it seems in the recent months that Wave has come under more and more scrutiny and skepticism which I believe it does not deserve. I find that these complaints stem from the thoughts of people as they use Wave with the mindset that this will replace email. That is the wrong outlook. Wave is a paradigm switch and in so being it requires a change of how people think of completing tasks and communicating with each other. I have heard comments on Wave such as: That's too hard, It's just really fast instant messaging, etc. These shallow views of Wave need to be overcome before a person can see the magic.
Here is how I have used Wave:
For one of my projects in my college I created a wave for all the members of my team to post our schedule, go over ideas, and include all of the necessary files. Part of our planning even included having a VOIP call(originated through a Wave extension) going on between all parties as we edited the wave. This created a environment of working which I have never seen. It was extremely productive and instant.
Planning of a vacation: Some friends and I have been planing a senior trip and in so doing we have had all of our travel accommodations planned out in a wave. This has allowed us to have one central place to look for all of the necessary information including embedded screenshots of flight information, links to different transportations systems, maps of where we will be staying and points of interest, etc. This has made it extremely simple to keep everything in line.
School Notes: This has been the most magical experience of my Wave career. For four of my college classes I have created a wave to serve as a note-taking platform with the number of participants ranging from 2-6. This has allowed us to be able to write notes and if one of us misses something in the lecture there is always someone to back us up and write what we missed. It is also extremely nice to be able to embed the slides in individual blips (Wave terminology is a bit strange) allowing for the group to comment on each individual slide. The inclusion of bots has made it extremely easy to also pull in external data. For example, I always include the bot Wikify allowing, with a few keystrokes, to automatically pull in Wikipedia articles for unfamiliar data or the bot KaSyntaxy to automatically do syntax hilighting for my CS classes.
Wave is something that you need to have in your hands to truly understand. As my father tells me, I can't complain about something new until I have had to live with it for at least two weeks. I challenge any of you that have access to Wave to give it another try and for those of you who would like to try Wave I still have some invites.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)