[Web4lib] Google Wave bye-bye

Thu Aug 5 20:32:35 EDT 2010

I think there is a difference between naming something that already exists as a familiar concept, e.g. branding a  new search engine "Google",  and naming of a new application type that people don't already grok.

If someone asked me when Google was new what it was, I could have answered, "it's a new search engine with better results and really bare-bones design that gets out of the way of looking at the results."

When asked about Google Wave, I rambled on about it being a combination of a number of things (email, chat rooms, document sharing) in a collaborative real-time conversation. I have yet to have a response to that "story" where the person went "ah, cool, I get it, that sounds awesome."  Nor have I heard anyone else be able to describe the service succinctly and in a way that inspires people to give it a try.

A unifying metaphor can help tell a compelling story to explain your application and inspire interest.  Obviously it isn't the only way to do it.

Cheers,
Walter

On Aug 6, 2010, at 11:30 AM, Alan Cockerill wrote:

> I don't buy it Walter, the name has nothing to do with it (otherwise who
> would ever have used Google).  I think, and their blog says as much, that it
> was tool that was useful to too small a section of the web audience to
> justify it's continued development in that form.
> 
> Yet another example of Google's (simultaneously frustrating and admirable)
> ability to drop web applications regardless of what investment has been made
> in them if the payoff isn't deemed high enough.
> 
> Cheers, Alan.
> 
> Alan Cockerill
> Library Technologies Coordinator
> James Cook University 
> 
> PO Box 6811
> CAIRNS QLD 4870
> Phone:+61 7 4042 1737
> Fax: +61 7 4042 1516
> Email: Alan.Cockerill at jcu.edu.au
> Skype: alan.cockerill.jcu
> Web: http://cms.jcu.edu.au/libcomp/assist/contacts/JCUPRD_017401
> Blog: http://jculibrarytechnology.blogspot.com/
> Tweet: http://twitter.com/cockerilla
> 
> CRICOS Provider Code: 00117J (QLD)
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: web4lib-bounces at webjunction.org
> [mailto:web4lib-bounces at webjunction.org] On Behalf Of Walter McGinnis
> Sent: Friday, 6 August 2010 9:21 AM
> To: web4lib at webjunction.org
> Subject: Re: [Web4lib] Google Wave bye-bye
> 
> It's pretty simple why it failed. It never had a compelling story to explain
> what it was.
> 
> The reason it never had a compelling story? They chose a vague name that
> didn't give any real insight into its nature over an enlightening unifying
> metaphor.  Personally, I thought it was closest to a chat room model, but
> where there were products of the conversations.
> 
> People are pretty familiar with the virtual "room" concept for conversing.
> The idea is to tie in output of the conversations, maybe something that
> riffed off "the writers' room".
> 
> Cheers,
> Walter
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> Walter McGinnis
> Kete Project Lead (http://kete.net.nz)
> Katipo Communications, Ltd. (http://katipo.co.nz)
> http://twitter.com/wtem
> walter at katipo.co.nz
> +64211241794
> 
> 
> 
> On Aug 6, 2010, at 3:03 AM, Michael Schofield wrote:
> 
>> That is really a shame - but I think we'll see other incarnations of the 
>> same pop-up as the virtual office gains traction. For a semester long 
>> project, my team and I organized into a mock web development firm with 
>> digital library friendly services, and we kicked clunky Elluminate to the 
>> curb--and because Citrix GoToMeeting wasn't an option due to cost--used 
>> Google Wave for all of our business planning. After we established some 
>> ground rules about tagging waves, surfing through the dozens and dozens of
> 
>> documents we produced (and collaborated on in real time) was a breeze.
> Once 
>> they integrated video chat into the mix and Google Voice, we didn't even 
>> need to use the Elluminate room our professor set aside for us.
>> 
>> The Geek in Me: It was also ideal for text-based RPGs for those of us who 
>> grew-up on MUDs and MUSHs - you could even do dice rolls.
>> 
>> What a bummer.
>> 
>> 
>> Michael @ BCPL 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Leo Robert Klein <leo at leoklein.com>
>> To: web4lib at webjunction.org
>> Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2010 09:11:05 -0500
>> Subject: Re: [Web4lib] Google Wave bye-bye
>> 
>> It bit the dust yesterday:
>> http://searchengineland.com/google-wave-crashes-48086
>> 
>> Wicked Thought of the Day: Do a search on 'Google Wave' and 'disruptive' 
>> and count the chickens.
>> 
>> That said, I actually think the analyses of why it went bust may be more 
>> interesting and useful than the original product itself.
>> 
>> LEO
>> 
>> -- -------------------
>> www.leoklein.com (site)
>> www.ChicagoLibrarian.com (blog)
>> 
>> aim/msn/yhoo/goog: 'leorobertklein'
>> -- -------------------------------
>> 
>> 
>> On 8/5/2010 8:44 AM, Thomas Bennett wrote:
>>> I haven't really kept up with Wave but it has been available on our
> Google
>>> Apps site for sometime now.  But I haven't heard anything about it being 
>> a,
>>> for lack of a better word, dropped project.  Did I miss something?
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Web4lib mailing list
>> Web4lib at webjunction.org
>> http://lists.webjunction.org/web4lib/
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Web4lib mailing list
>> Web4lib at webjunction.org
>> http://lists.webjunction.org/web4lib/
>> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Web4lib mailing list
> Web4lib at webjunction.org
> http://lists.webjunction.org/web4lib/
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Web4lib mailing list
> Web4lib at webjunction.org
> http://lists.webjunction.org/web4lib/
> 