[ Date Index ] [ Thread Index ] [ <= Previous by date / thread ] [ Next by date / thread => ]
On 05/08/10 19:20, Grant Sewell wrote:
The problem with this kind of problem solving is the problem space is too big. You cant herd cats. You can train them not to be cats but that involves teaching them formal methods of design etc that would mean they wouldn't want or need to try and use something like Wave. Every new paradigm goes through the same phases and in the end you cant get a signal when theres too much noise. You have to educate/train the users but, "computing is easy" so no-one will bother to learn the lessons of yesteryear and in a few years we'll have another glistering app that will gradually descent into chaos...On Thu, 05 Aug 2010 18:55:05 +0100 Adrian Midgley (Gmail) wrote:On Thu, 2010-08-05 at 11:16 +0100, tom wrote:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-10877768 Tom te tom te tomI couldn't work out what to use it for. Clever, but wide of mark I think.Wide of which mark? They touted themselves as being the next gen email, the next gen instant messaging service and the next gen in collaboration stuff... but IMO you can't do "collaboratively editing someone else's work" and also be the next gen email too. It was indeed a pretty funky tool, but a tool without a function (yet). I also think they went about it the wrong way. I would have thought that getting the protocol sorted and available for all to use and then developing a means to use said protocol would have been a better route to take.
Tom te tom tom -- The Mailing List for the Devon & Cornwall LUG http://mailman.dclug.org.uk/listinfo/list FAQ: http://www.dcglug.org.uk/listfaq