<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Why We Are Cautious About Google’s Wave</title>
	<atom:link href="http://gigaom.com/2009/05/29/why-we-are-cautious-about-google%E2%80%99s-wave/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://gigaom.com/2009/05/29/why-we-are-cautious-about-google%e2%80%99s-wave/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 22 May 2013 15:08:33 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Google Pulls the Plug on Google Wave</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2009/05/29/why-we-are-cautious-about-google%e2%80%99s-wave/#comment-212500</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Google Pulls the Plug on Google Wave]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 04 Aug 2010 22:36:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigaom.com/?p=52204#comment-212500</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&lt;p&gt;[...] a message &#8212; and even allowed them to see others typing responses in real time &#8212; users did not take to the new service, perhaps in part because it was confusing. Was it for chat? For working on documents? For sharing [...]&lt;/p&gt;]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] a message &#8212; and even allowed them to see others typing responses in real time &#8212; users did not take to the new service, perhaps in part because it was confusing. Was it for chat? For working on documents? For sharing [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Google Tries to Get Some Buzz for Wave With &#8216;Wave This&#8217; Feature &#171; AccessTech News</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2009/05/29/why-we-are-cautious-about-google%e2%80%99s-wave/#comment-212499</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Google Tries to Get Some Buzz for Wave With &#8216;Wave This&#8217; Feature &#171; AccessTech News]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 08 Jun 2010 14:19:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigaom.com/?p=52204#comment-212499</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&lt;p&gt;[...] the hot new social networking feature from the world’s largest search company. It launched with much fanfare at Google’s I/O conference last May, but has since failed to get much traction, in part because [...]&lt;/p&gt;]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] the hot new social networking feature from the world’s largest search company. It launched with much fanfare at Google’s I/O conference last May, but has since failed to get much traction, in part because [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Google Tries to Get Some Buzz for Wave With &#8216;Wave This&#8217; Feature &#171; The BAT Channel</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2009/05/29/why-we-are-cautious-about-google%e2%80%99s-wave/#comment-212498</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Google Tries to Get Some Buzz for Wave With &#8216;Wave This&#8217; Feature &#171; The BAT Channel]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 08 Jun 2010 14:17:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigaom.com/?p=52204#comment-212498</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&lt;p&gt;[...] the hot new social networking feature from the world’s largest search company. It launched with much fanfare at Google’s I/O conference last May, but has since failed to get much traction, in part because [...]&lt;/p&gt;]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] the hot new social networking feature from the world’s largest search company. It launched with much fanfare at Google’s I/O conference last May, but has since failed to get much traction, in part because [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Google Tries to Get Some Buzz for Wave With &#8216;Wave This&#8217; Feature</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2009/05/29/why-we-are-cautious-about-google%e2%80%99s-wave/#comment-212497</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Google Tries to Get Some Buzz for Wave With &#8216;Wave This&#8217; Feature]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 08 Jun 2010 13:46:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigaom.com/?p=52204#comment-212497</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&lt;p&gt;[...] hot new social networking feature from the world&#8217;s largest search company. It launched with much fanfare at Google&#8217;s I/O conference last May, but has since failed to get much traction, in part [...]&lt;/p&gt;]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] hot new social networking feature from the world&#8217;s largest search company. It launched with much fanfare at Google&#8217;s I/O conference last May, but has since failed to get much traction, in part [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Craig Doriot</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2009/05/29/why-we-are-cautious-about-google%e2%80%99s-wave/#comment-212496</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Craig Doriot]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 14 Nov 2009 17:39:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigaom.com/?p=52204#comment-212496</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I think this blog misses some of the bigger picture.

On monetization, you may be correct in that it fails to displace Sharepoint.  I&#039;m not sure if that is their aim, though maybe it should be.  Meanwhile if I was Microsoft, I&#039;d be focused on trying to implement Wave, since its open source, and then to use its software development capabilities to expand on it and make the MS suite more powerful.  I think its more likely the two platforms become complementary long-term.  Someone else devising the email protocols didn&#039;t keep Microsoft from producing Outlook.

There are so many practical, simple ways to expand the functionality to help my software company overcome basic problems that my head is spinning.  Internally, we are using chat clients, email, CRMs, and collaberation tools.. this can greatly enhance all of that significantly.

I consider myself a Google skeptic for some of the same reasons others have.  They have failed for the most part beyond search to make any money.. getting too caught up with the latest, cool stuff instead of really understanding how to make money or even make other killer apps of true significance.

In my field, Google has been trying to enter our space as a partner, but we&#039;ve been completely unimpressed with their solution and team and they seemed to have missed the key elements that we&#039;ve told them were necessary to be successful, so we&#039;ve largely held off and there solution hasn&#039;t gone anywhere yet.

But Wave can truly increase the productivity of my team significantly.  Maybe not the existing Wave client as it stands, but another product that will build off of it.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think this blog misses some of the bigger picture.</p>
<p>On monetization, you may be correct in that it fails to displace Sharepoint.  I&#8217;m not sure if that is their aim, though maybe it should be.  Meanwhile if I was Microsoft, I&#8217;d be focused on trying to implement Wave, since its open source, and then to use its software development capabilities to expand on it and make the MS suite more powerful.  I think its more likely the two platforms become complementary long-term.  Someone else devising the email protocols didn&#8217;t keep Microsoft from producing Outlook.</p>
<p>There are so many practical, simple ways to expand the functionality to help my software company overcome basic problems that my head is spinning.  Internally, we are using chat clients, email, CRMs, and collaberation tools.. this can greatly enhance all of that significantly.</p>
<p>I consider myself a Google skeptic for some of the same reasons others have.  They have failed for the most part beyond search to make any money.. getting too caught up with the latest, cool stuff instead of really understanding how to make money or even make other killer apps of true significance.</p>
<p>In my field, Google has been trying to enter our space as a partner, but we&#8217;ve been completely unimpressed with their solution and team and they seemed to have missed the key elements that we&#8217;ve told them were necessary to be successful, so we&#8217;ve largely held off and there solution hasn&#8217;t gone anywhere yet.</p>
<p>But Wave can truly increase the productivity of my team significantly.  Maybe not the existing Wave client as it stands, but another product that will build off of it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: DaveMT</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2009/05/29/why-we-are-cautious-about-google%e2%80%99s-wave/#comment-212495</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[DaveMT]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 12 Nov 2009 22:38:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigaom.com/?p=52204#comment-212495</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I agree that Google hasn&#039;t taken the initiative the make Wave viral. Ive rarely heard of it and most of my peers never have. But I&#039;m not Id want Google selling my info, Yea theyd offer &quot;great&quot; free stuff based on my likes and interests but how targeted will these ads/offers actually be? Will the money Google receives ultimately over ride the users and their satisfaction? Im almost to fast to say yes. I take AdSense and Adwords as an example. Adwords has seen numerous face lifts and releases while Adsense on the other hand has seen slim to none and still has a few major reported bugs when it comes to distributing funds. Think about it...]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I agree that Google hasn&#8217;t taken the initiative the make Wave viral. Ive rarely heard of it and most of my peers never have. But I&#8217;m not Id want Google selling my info, Yea theyd offer &#8220;great&#8221; free stuff based on my likes and interests but how targeted will these ads/offers actually be? Will the money Google receives ultimately over ride the users and their satisfaction? Im almost to fast to say yes. I take AdSense and Adwords as an example. Adwords has seen numerous face lifts and releases while Adsense on the other hand has seen slim to none and still has a few major reported bugs when it comes to distributing funds. Think about it&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: mark.</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2009/05/29/why-we-are-cautious-about-google%e2%80%99s-wave/#comment-212494</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[mark.]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 12 Nov 2009 06:47:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigaom.com/?p=52204#comment-212494</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Okay, listen. The moment I started to learn about Wave (the hour and 20 or so minute video) I thought that this was something that will change as we communicate. Keep in mind, the immediate advantages are not for the end-user. They are for the developer, no doubt about it. This is some really powerful website/web architecture building materials? Who cares if Google has their name stamped on it if thats what they want? You think they don&#039;t make enough money in AD revenues? They don&#039;t strike me as a particularly greedy company (in today&#039;s capitalism though that isn&#039;t saying much) This development model has potential that I think not even the creators have realized at this point.
So they original point. This is for developers. Did you not see how much Rasmussen was looking to the audience&#039;s reaction? Sure he was confident, this is a hell of a piece of software, but at the same time he was nervous to an extent. They NEED the developers. This isn&#039;t something that will end with Google creating an amazing service for customers to use. Someone is going to create something game-changing FROM what they have created. Sure it is awesome and will make things much different, but I see it as more of a grand stepping stone. That said I think that such as AJAX has driven dynamic and SUCCESSFULL (key word) websites because of inter-connectivity, responsiveness and fluidity, how could something that takes all of those to the next level not succeed? and furthermore, how successful of a website do you think can be with this kind of creation method?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Okay, listen. The moment I started to learn about Wave (the hour and 20 or so minute video) I thought that this was something that will change as we communicate. Keep in mind, the immediate advantages are not for the end-user. They are for the developer, no doubt about it. This is some really powerful website/web architecture building materials? Who cares if Google has their name stamped on it if thats what they want? You think they don&#8217;t make enough money in AD revenues? They don&#8217;t strike me as a particularly greedy company (in today&#8217;s capitalism though that isn&#8217;t saying much) This development model has potential that I think not even the creators have realized at this point.<br />
So they original point. This is for developers. Did you not see how much Rasmussen was looking to the audience&#8217;s reaction? Sure he was confident, this is a hell of a piece of software, but at the same time he was nervous to an extent. They NEED the developers. This isn&#8217;t something that will end with Google creating an amazing service for customers to use. Someone is going to create something game-changing FROM what they have created. Sure it is awesome and will make things much different, but I see it as more of a grand stepping stone. That said I think that such as AJAX has driven dynamic and SUCCESSFULL (key word) websites because of inter-connectivity, responsiveness and fluidity, how could something that takes all of those to the next level not succeed? and furthermore, how successful of a website do you think can be with this kind of creation method?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: deadpool</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2009/05/29/why-we-are-cautious-about-google%e2%80%99s-wave/#comment-212493</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[deadpool]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 11 Nov 2009 07:57:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigaom.com/?p=52204#comment-212493</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[So why would I be mad at googl for making money off of my data?  I would sign away my privacy for awesome free stuff anyday.  They use it to sell to advertisers so that they can try to sell me stuff I want to buy  I hardly look at ads on google or in gmail anyway, but sometimes I do and I come across a gem that I may not have been offered if not for the folks at google.  Those ads could easily just be random crap sold to the highest bidder, but no, in exchange for giving me android, gmail, google voice, maps, docs, calender, and now wave for free, all I have to do is allow them to use my data to make the ad space they have to sell to make money actually relevant to my life? Yeah, again, sign me up! Btw, great post!]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>So why would I be mad at googl for making money off of my data?  I would sign away my privacy for awesome free stuff anyday.  They use it to sell to advertisers so that they can try to sell me stuff I want to buy  I hardly look at ads on google or in gmail anyway, but sometimes I do and I come across a gem that I may not have been offered if not for the folks at google.  Those ads could easily just be random crap sold to the highest bidder, but no, in exchange for giving me android, gmail, google voice, maps, docs, calender, and now wave for free, all I have to do is allow them to use my data to make the ad space they have to sell to make money actually relevant to my life? Yeah, again, sign me up! Btw, great post!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: The Gloo &#187; Digital Dump 05/10/2009</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2009/05/29/why-we-are-cautious-about-google%e2%80%99s-wave/#comment-212492</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[The Gloo &#187; Digital Dump 05/10/2009]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 04 Oct 2009 22:57:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigaom.com/?p=52204#comment-212492</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] is it&#8217;s goal &#8211; replacing email. To do this (the problem&#8217;s explained in detail here) it will have to generate a huge, organic shift in the behaviour of everyone who uses email. No [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] is it&#8217;s goal &#8211; replacing email. To do this (the problem&#8217;s explained in detail here) it will have to generate a huge, organic shift in the behaviour of everyone who uses email. No [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Emille</title>
		<link>http://gigaom.com/2009/05/29/why-we-are-cautious-about-google%e2%80%99s-wave/#comment-212491</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Emille]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 03 Oct 2009 16:02:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gigaom.com/?p=52204#comment-212491</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.upgadgets.com/google-wave-new-features/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Google Wave&lt;/a&gt; seems promising a new digital interactivity and created high expectations among surfers. I like some features such as ability to reproduce the talks (playback), Translate in real time when we communicate with someone speaking another language, and it&#039;s integration with Twitter and other social networks. Google Wave really can turn into a revolution in social conversation!]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.upgadgets.com/google-wave-new-features/" rel="nofollow">Google Wave</a> seems promising a new digital interactivity and created high expectations among surfers. I like some features such as ability to reproduce the talks (playback), Translate in real time when we communicate with someone speaking another language, and it&#8217;s integration with Twitter and other social networks. Google Wave really can turn into a revolution in social conversation!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
