Below are various segments of the video which I believe may be of particular importance or interest; I've included some annotative descriptions. The clips trim 30 minutes off of the original viewing time (as compared to the 80 minute original), and they at least make it possible to view the video in shorter clips.
Imagine, if I were able already to have Wave embedded in this blog, we could discuss each segment in this space immediately below each clip. Can't wait!
--- The Clips ---
1. 6:01 to 7:34. Differentiating the philosophical approach of Google Wave from existing communication models. The key phrase is "tight implementation" of the original model to create a single tool that enables a number of ways to communicate and collaborate.
2. 10:15 to 11:38. With email type communication already demonstrated, Lars and Stephanie show how Wave enables IM type communication within the same tool. Notice the synchronous appearance of individual characters within the Wave; for me, I believe this has a significant perceptual impact on the IM experience: as Lars states, "You literally spend 100% of your time reading or writing."
3. 13:00 to 13:42. Playback. Jan was recently added to the Wave. The playback feature allows him to observe how the current document and conversation has evolved and developed from its inception.
4. 14:34 to 15:17. Private messaging feature is integrated within the "group discussion." Any subset of the Wave can have permissions restricted to a smaller group of users. This isn't a revelation on its own; the way Wave handles and stores these private replies, however, is; that's next.
5. 65:17 to 70:14. To understand why the private messaging is actually a big deal, jump forward to Lars' explanation of the Open Protocol approach of the Google Wave product. This segment's for IT folks. Google Wave has been designed to be an open protocol; anyone can build an organizational, federated Google Wave server - even their own user interface. Importantly, the protocol supports inter-system communication while maintaining organizational privacy; only the servers involved in each instance of communication maintain a record of the communication; this is granular down within Waves. For example, if a Wave includes four people working across three organizations and two participants that work for Organization B exchange a private message within that Wave, the private message is not shared to all three server within the Wave; it never leaves Organiation B's Wave server.
6. 15:25 to 18:10 Drag and drop, real-time sharing of photos enable a group photo album; all shared photos within the Wave can be viewed within a single slideshow. The process of "uploading" a picture is eliminated. Also, Waves or parts of Waves can be shared to others; the ability to share any single part or product of a Wave is important.
7-8. 19:00 to 19:57 & 20:40 to 22:12. Embedding API. Waves can be embedded into other web pages; they specifically demonstrate embedding a Wave into a blog site using the Bloggi widget. Key feature is that responses/comments can be recorded directly on the Wave as it's shown on the blog. It updates, in real time, within the Wave client as well.
9. 25:28 to 26:45. Mobile Wave communication. Although they experience some problems with teh wireless network in the presentation center, Lars shows Waves on an Android and an iPhone.
10. 26:45 to 37:14. Collaborative, Real-time, Concurrent Editing. With it embedded around the web, there's only one actual copy of the Wave; that's not new of course; we've seen that with other collaborative documents. However, this all occurs within a single tool, and all communication occurs inline. Discussion about segments of the document can occur immediately next to that segment rather than via a separate discussion forum or listserv. With playback available as it is, you can review the evolution of the document and the conversation around it. The conversations can be hidden, to allow reading of just the document, but the current version of the document - the product - can be extracted to a new Wave. It then will be possible to merge new changes in the original Wave into the final document Wave. A string of work Wave's may all point to a final product Wave. Spreadsheets, Presentations and other document types will be added.
11. 40:15 to 43:00 Wave Links & Search Feature. To help organize Waves, it's possible to drag and drop waves into other waves; the drag and drop automatically generates a link to the wave. The search feature is real-time, character-by-character.
12-13. 44:00 to 48:10 & 54:02 to 54:46
Extensions. Spelli is impressive; damn thing uses context clues to determine the appropriate word to insert. Linki recognizes loosely formatted web addresses as links; makes inserting links relatively easy as you are typing them; but, Searchi extension makes it even easier to search for links or images or video and insert them quickly within the Wave. I believe this radically streamlines the act of composition via the web.
14. 50:30 to 53:48 Yes/No/Maybe Gadget, Collaborative Games, Maps Gadgets. This is a general example of a gadget. The backstory is that their workgroup was trying to decide what movie to go see and who was going. They created the Yes/No/Maybe gadget to better facilitate response gathering. Again, Playback adds another element to the entire process.
15. 54:55 to 57:20 Polly the Pollster. Forms and real-time audience response within Waves.
16. 57:30 to 61:28 Integrating Twitter. They use Twitter as an example of how existing communication tools can be integrated into Wave. I think it highlights how Google Wave can be used to aggregate personal communications across the Web into a single application/location.
17. 72:30 to 73:54 Real-time Translator - Rosi - is just as impressive as Spelli, Linki & Searchi.
4 comments:
I like a lot of their ideas here. I just wonder if they may have missed the boat on a few things, or maybe made this do too much. For example - I really hate the idea that what I type in the IM-like function automatically appears on the screen. What makes IM so effect is that there is that delay - it allows people to filter their thoughts. People need filtration :)
It just seems that things that mimic stuff from real life, like email, IM, and Twitter have always been successful. But get too far away from reality? You start losing people (like in virtual worlds).
I'll probably really like it - I just wonder if enough people out there will buy into to keep it going? Time will tell.
@Matt,
You can turn the character-by-character feature of IM and have it give you time to formulate thoughts before sending.
I think this IS a step in the direction of Twitter and things that mimic real life. The conversation and collaboration process is more natural, I think.
Even the character-by-character of IM, to me, is perceptually closer to f2f conversation; you can formulate your words as you speak to someone, but once they're out they're.. well they're out there. And, as you speak with someone f2f, you have the opportunity to consider what they're thinking... makes the conversation move more naturally.
The collaboration tools are far more like how we'd work f2f. If sitting at a conference table, we'd be working on and discussing a document in the same space, at the same time. This tool allows that to happen.
Those ideas are before you begin approaching how this benefits certain learning activities specifically.
And, at the very least, the process of composing online - inserting videos, links, images from your desktop or the web etc - occurs much more efficiently.
That is good that you can turn that off. I forgot to say that I haven't had time to watch the whole video, or even most of the clips you have put up (yet).
I think I like the fact that IM is a little bit removed from being just like f2f communication. When I type stuff into IM, I read it and then think "that is not what I was saying in my mind" and then change it. I just have problems transferring thoughts into text. Having that buffer with IM helps me explain my thoughts better. I can seem to talk better than I can type words.
I am pretty sure I will like this, but will enough people get into to make it a viable communication method? By all accounts, video phones should be huge now - because they are more like f2f conversations that regular phones. But it turns out, people like the privacy of being able to talk as they are, and not get "presentable" for video phone call. Those that don't care about that are in to Skype. So video phones are going no where.
So, will this be the next Skype, or the next video phone? Both are great ideas, but one found a niche and the other found out that people just weren't interested in their great idea.
I hope it does catch on, because it sounds like it could be what whiteboards and Wimba have tried to do, but never quite got it right.
At the very lest, Wave will be an enhanced replacement for those that use a variety of tools; the functionality of Wave overlaps with email, IM, discussion groups, collaborative writing, photosharing, blogging, commenting, and feed aggregation among others. I think many that use those tools will switch to Wave, which integrates everything in a single location.
At the very most, it will bring new users to those functions listed above which aren't currently engaged by so many. Wave juxtaposes all of those functions; you can slide from email into a discussion group into sharing photos into reading news/friend feeds - all without leaving the single interface. I think Wave may potentially bring more Users 2.0.
From an educational perspective, I think it is absolutely a better incarnation of a Personal Learning Environment than what is currently available.
Post a Comment