Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Retiring Wave

git-wip-us.apache.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–98 of 98 posts

Re: Retiring Wave

#91

Post by jamesgeck0 »

edo wrote: post #85
Analemma_ wrote: post #42

I've said this before, but while I know for a lot of people Reader is the axed Google product they miss most, for me it will always be Wave. I know a lot of people didn't get it, and I can't blame them, but I was part of a six-person software team using Wave for a brief project and, despite its faults, it was the greatest communication tool any of us had ever used, and remains so to this day. Slack/Discord/Teams/Trel…

What made Google wave so great to you? (Even better than slack/Discord/Trello)?

Some people hated real-time typing, but it made interactions feel even more immediate than Slack.

I also like that comments were a first-class citizen; part of the document. You could have an in-line conversation about a paragraph, then distill the results into the text and delete the conversation. Comments weren't another "mode" like they are in Google Docs; they were just document bubbles nested in a parent document bubble.

I've apparently flip-flopped on this; looking at a post I wrote at the time, I thought it felt wrong to delete comments.

Re: Retiring Wave

#92

Post by Analemma_ »

edo wrote: post #85
Analemma_ wrote: post #42

I've said this before, but while I know for a lot of people Reader is the axed Google product they miss most, for me it will always be Wave. I know a lot of people didn't get it, and I can't blame them, but I was part of a six-person software team using Wave for a brief project and, despite its faults, it was the greatest communication tool any of us had ever used, and remains so to this day. Slack/Discord/Teams/Trel…

What made Google wave so great to you? (Even better than slack/Discord/Trello)?

It was the complete package, encompassing all of:

- That communication could be both synchronous (like chat) and asynchronous (like email) and you could use whichever worked best for you at the time. You could even switch in the middle of a thread- maybe it stared out asynchronous, but then both people were online and decided to have a conversation.

- Threads were a better way of breaking up topics than channels

- The ability to post a document and then have people comment on it let you basically incorporate Google Docs-style document revision into your chat application, but like the other comment says, the comments were a first-class citizen of the interface, rather than bubbles that are totally out of context

- I like real-time chats, where you could see the individual characters the other person was typing. This, admittedly, is an aesthetic preference I know not everyone shares.

Re: Retiring Wave

#94

Post by taeric »

TheSmiddy wrote: post #40
taeric wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not just internally. I remember the massive hype around this being the "next email." I excitedly got as many of my friends onto there as I could. I can't really pinpoint any one thing. There really was a mass of mistakes that all lead to this imploding heavily. I seem to recall that the fate of GWT was intertwined heavily with it. Very heavyweight widgets to support the general idea of massive collaboration in real t…

Pretty sure the biggest mistake was the same as Google Plus': the invite system that artificially hampers growth. Since these platforms need to capture an entire network of people at the same time if there is something preventing someone from bringing all their friends/collegues in at the same time then it is doomed to fail.

More than just the invite, I think they really soured a larger portion of their market than they thought.

The impression seemed to be that they would kill buzz/reader/wave, and the folks would just naturally turn to what they then offered. The reality seemed as much that many of us were unwilling to try anything else from them until it was clear it was good and going to stick around.

Re: Retiring Wave

#95

Post by dreamfactored »

Cyberdog wrote: post #33
tux3 wrote: post #9

While the Apache Foundation hosts a lot of great projects, it also looks to me like a place where big projects go to die. I'm thinking of the whole Apache Open-Office fiasco, among other things. Looking at their list of projects sorted by number of committers[0], event at the top I don't get the idea that most of those have a lot of momentum. Do I just have a completely wrong impression? I'm curious if there's someth…

Did Wave ever really live, though? I know it had its vocal fans for whatever reason, but most people never understood what it was, even if they had heard of it and tried to use it (like myself).

The interesting bit of Wave wasn't the product but the underlying framework components they created for it e.g. salmon protocol and the pubsub system.

They made many of the components needed to create an open source federated social networking system where separate implementations could interact with each other. So for example your user on your company's twitter/fb hybrid could have threaded conversations with other users across other organisation's fb clones (obviously with access control).

This could have been exactly the killer functionality to topple centralised proprietary Twitter and Facebook. Google should have thrown everything into it, could have turned out as impactful as hypertext.

Re: Retiring Wave

#96

Post by tedmiston »

liveoneggs wrote: post #86
tedmiston wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's definitely a good question, and one that I don't think is clearly addressed in the docs (so I might take the opportunity to turn this into a little blog post later). tl;dr - Airflow can support running multiple Python versions. Here's a three-pronged answer: 1. PythonOperator - Assuming you're running Airflow on 3.6, you can run your 3.6 functions with the normal PythonOperator. 2. PythonVirtualenvOperator - T…

I will check out the docker operator. I didn't want to drop down into the bash executor to run docker containers because it felt a little dirty. My dev team is excited to use airflow but, in my estimation, keeping them all in lockstep with a single requirements.txt seems a little far fetched. ;)

It definitely feels weird at first but it's also worked well for us running millions of dockerized tasks. :)

Yeah, I can see where you're coming from there. Some people will run multiple separate Airflow instances as another alternative solution.

Re: Retiring Wave

#97

Post by lsiebert »

waldir wrote: post #31
deefour wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> tool that was, for a while, built into gmail Do you have a source for this? I don't remember it ever being part of Gmail.

They're probably mixing it up with Google Buzz.

I totally was! In my defense it was rather a while ago and I did use both.

Re: Retiring Wave

#98

Post by rjurney »

pbhjpbhj wrote: post #78
rjurney wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What you are seeing as "dying" is actually "widespread adoption and maturity", only you've moved on because you're "latest and greatest." Nothing wrong with that, but doesn't mean anything has died. Only your interest has.

So Wave, say, is now a mature and widely adopted product?

It is not a global statement :)
Post reply on HN