HOW GOOGLE WAVE COULD SWAMP MICROSOFT by Scott Budman
Talk about your throwback scenes.
I’m inside Google’s Mountain View skunkwork operations, tucked away from the company’s main headquarters, where about four dozen hand-picked developers are giving Google’s new “Wave” service its first run-through. This is pre-alpha — geekspeak for software that’s still in heavy development — and the focus group is being paid not in cash, but in sandwiches and soft drinks. I have to blink to remember that I’m not back at Netscape headquarters circa 1998. The absence of Skittles tips me off.
What’s Wave? According to project leader Lars Rasmussen, it’s email “if it were invented today.” It’s also a new way to communicate with others over the Internet, that at first blush seems to allow you to leave your browser behind.
Wait a minute: new email means no need for the much-maligned Outlook. No browser? Well, so long Internet Explorer. Could Wave, being pitched by Google as a way to bring people and companies together in a utopian future, actually be its secret weapon to make Microsoft obsolete?
Think about it. Look down at the bottom of your screen, and you’re probably seeing (as I am) at least three browsers opened to different operations: Twitter, Gmail, finance, a blog. Add in Outlook, and you’ve got a lot of mouse-moving and clicking ahead of you every time your computer so much as beeps. What if all that goes away, and you can find everything stacked up neatly in one place. If you’re a heavy Twitterhead, think “Tweetdeck” with a little more personalization.
The example Rasmussen shows me is the blog you just commented on. Instead of having to click back to see who else has commented, the Wave gives you a steady stream of information about the blog. Same with email, and any other chatting you’re doing. It’s admittedly a Grand Central Station of information that at first makes my head spin (imagine this much stuff condensed onto the screen of your smart phone!), but I have to admit: it is all in one place.
Microsoft has coasted for so many years on its Outlook, and IE broswer, it’s almost impossible to imagine a world without them. But while Google is not listing “obliterate Microsoft” in its goals for Wave, imagine if it really succeeds. For that to happen, lots of other companies, and lots of users, have to get onboard. A wave is only powerful if it can rise, and then keep going.
If Google’s Wave rises, and gets enough momentum, look out. Microsoft may get very wet.
[For more Scott Budman blogs and videos, visit www.nbcbayarea.com]
Digg This
del.icio.us
PJM Home
Pajamas Media appreciates your comments that abide by the following guidelines:
1. Avoid profanities or foul language unless it is contained in a necessary quote or is relevant to the comment.
2. Stay on topic.
3. Disagree, but avoid ad hominem attacks.
4. Threats are treated seriously and reported to law enforcement.
5. Spam and advertising are not permitted in the comments area.
The clause regarding "hate speech" has been deleted because readers criticized it as being too loosely defined. We agreed.
These guidelines are very general and cannot cover every possible situation. Please don't assume that Pajamas Media management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment. We reserve the right to filter or delete comments or to deny posting privileges entirely at our discretion. If you feel your comment was filtered inappropriately, please email us at story@pajamasmedia.com.
14 Comments
1. Pajamas Media ยป How Google ‘Wave’ Could Swamp Microsoft:[...] Read the rest of the story here. [...]
Jun 1, 2009 - 11:04 am 2. jerryofva:Google makes many great products but its business model has an inherent weakness. It’s a free rider on the backbone paid for and maintained by others. If it’s free services drive out the companies that maintain web architecture then someone, probably Google will be forced to keep the infrastructure running. Then Google products will stop being free.
Jun 1, 2009 - 11:12 am 3. Self-hating Boomer:That really wasn’t much of an explanation of why I or anyone else should go through the pain of a new product. It sounds like the gimmick is real time streaming instead of periodic automatic refreshes (which could have been done 10 years ago). It’s probably a bit smoother to use, but is it worth it?
It seems to me that if email were going to be reinvented, the biggest issue – by a huge margin – is encryption. If someone can make that seamless, that’s a real, substantial improvement. Everything else is just gimmicks.
And FWIW, not everyone is stuck with Outlook/IE. Firefox and Thunderbird work just fine for me. But these are general internet clients, and not a proprietary system. I can’t tell for sure from your article, but it seems to imply that Wave is a proprietary system. That should always set off alarm bells, if true.
Jun 1, 2009 - 12:12 pm 4. zelrik:My take is that Wave will not only take off, it will be a revolution. If you dont understand what I am talking about, think about what happened to the phone when the cellphones appeared? What happened to the 56k networks when the DSL came up? Anything that enhance communication is all set to win. Google Wave seems to just do that.
Also think about what happened when Google Maps appeared? Just the fact that Google Wave was developed by the same guy should ring a bell.
Jun 1, 2009 - 12:37 pm 5. Lee Brink:I’m looking very forward to Wave, but the key to Wave isn’t Google but other developers.
Wave will need the buy-in of various web sites (Eg: Facebook, Twitter, Blog software, any number of web sites) to be able to integrate all the conversation snippits into coherent “waves”. They get that, and Microsoft will really be put behind the 8-ball.
Jun 1, 2009 - 1:38 pm 6. dean collins:Wave ‘could’ be bigger than smtp, xmpp, .doc and visicalc but only ‘IF’ federation is truly open.
Somehow i think Google will screw it up, but if MS decided to Wave enable office then yes this truly could be life changing.
Cheers,
Jun 1, 2009 - 3:22 pm 7. jvon:Dean Collins
http://www.WaveAppReview.com
All I can tell from what we’ve been shown so far is that Google is really hoping that “Wave” will be big. So far, it is all hype.
Google attempted to develop a social networking site ala facebook in 2003-2004. It was called Orkut, and still exists. What, you never heard of it? How strange.
So far Google has developed a very good search engine and some neat mapping software (the best example of which I think is Google Earth, not Google Maps, which aren’t all that much better than Yahoo Maps — and Google Earth is more of a toy than anything).
Jun 1, 2009 - 4:58 pm 8. Sk8 Punk:3 Browser windows open?! Come on man. Everyones using tabs these days. Google has a million take over the planet ideas. The Cloud is a better one than this- an entirely web based OS and apps. Google as the Matrix. The Wave doesnt seem all that practical for advanced users. From what I’ve read its more of a Windows Vista thing: built for those with little to almost no tech skill. And like Vista i dont see it working- at least not until they learn to make it more versatile and flexible. But those features are inherently contradictory right now with its basic architecture.
Jun 1, 2009 - 7:44 pm 9. naman:I’m with Sk8 Punk; why aren’t you using tabs?!? I have ONE browser up right now (Firefox) with 4 tabs running, one streaming music.
I’m not so sure about replacing Outlook. Granted I have 4 or more online email accounts, but I still like some email that I can save permanently onto my hard drive so that’s why I keep Outlook.
Jun 1, 2009 - 8:03 pm 10. JFM:I confess I have only seen the beginning of the video but the only half exciting feature I noticed was that your partner saw real time what you typed so he could react instantly. Problem is that means that your machine is sending a packet (1500 bytes on ethernet) for every keystroke: it will be real internet clogger. A proxy on your local network or at your ISP could mitigate it a bit but only a bit.
Other than that I wondered when people cheered beause they cheered over UI features who were nice and convenient but provided nothing new in terms of functionality. And those UI features were new only when considering it was being dione with web broswer.
Jun 1, 2009 - 11:09 pm 11. Delia:I’m a w8 and see type person. I used to jump on the newest, latest, greatest ‘whatever’ crap but I’ve grown weary of being a beta tester. ;p
Jun 2, 2009 - 6:09 am 12. Falconsword:It’s official, I’m starting to become my father. The guy who grudgingly allowed my sister and I to install an answering machine in his house, but then refused to push the ‘message’ button when he got one. Instead we had to drive over so her could listen to our message telling him we were coming over. I’m not a luddite, but I am 45 and who else out there my age is beginning to get a little dizzy with all this stuff? To make matters worse, I’m a sci-fi writer. ugh.
Jun 2, 2009 - 8:00 am 13. scott:Falconsword;
Jun 2, 2009 - 9:19 am 14. Self-hating Boomer:I hear you. No harm in taking a step back from all of this occasionally (unless you report on it every day…) and just checking once in a while to see what’s worth your while.
I do appreciate hearing from a sci-fi writer, though. You are part of the reason I got into this in the first place.
-sb
12, that’s not the issue. The issue is the sizzle/steak ratio, which seems to be going through the roof. These appliances do everything that we need, and there’s not much more functionality that can be added. All they can do now is hype. Apple has perfected the art of hype without substance and sizzle without steak.
This is an interesting take on the cultural history of the automobile; someone could be writing this same thing in a few years about the demise of the some great “tech” player (maybe Microsoft):
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203771904574173401767415892.html
Face it, silicon is mature. There’s nowhere to go from here but sideways.
Jun 3, 2009 - 1:05 pm