What is Digg?Sponsored by AT&T Synaptic Storage
If You're Paying For Storage You Don't Use, Read This view!
synaptic.att.com - AT&T's virtualized on-demand storehouse instantly scales up and down to any size you need.
40 Comments
- Super6, on 05/31/2009, -2/+50Gmail confuses the staff of pcworld? Maybe they should pick a new career.
Wave looks great, I watched all 1 hour and 20 minutes of the demo and it looks very compelling, I can see a lot integration between it and ubiquity happening. - dominic2, on 05/31/2009, -0/+27I don't think the author of this actually watched the Wave presentation... e.g. complaining about Wave not being planned on mobile devices? They actually demoed it on both Android and the iPhone. And agree with post above - conversations in gmail confuse them?! They are precisely linear - new replies are just kept with their previous messages in a conversation and always appear at the top of your inbox. In Wave newly edited waves will appear at the top of your inbox with edits highlighted and this new 'playback feature' so you can see the edits happen in order and who did them
- amfort, on 05/31/2009, -0/+11The author was definitely searching for areas to criticize. His concern that Bing would be the demise of locally owned businesses is ridiculous. Are locally owned businesses the first items that pop up on Google right now? No. So the fact that a search for Home Depot shows Wal-Mart and Lowes on the side of the screen isn't going to be the nail in the coffin of our local stores.
- wastern, on 05/31/2009, -0/+10agreed. Sure new stuff is at the bottom, but it collapses everything that has already been read. Seems painfully easy to me. I wish desktop email apps would thread convos the same way Gmail does.
Wave looks amazing, maybe they though if there were the only people on the net to trash it they could get traffic (looks like it worked).
PC World seems to like things the way they are and hate change apparently. I'm sorry, but if we are still using the same ***** we have now in 50 years we've failed. A culture change has to happen sometime in regard to email, it might as well be now. The question will be will other companies check their ego at the door and start their own Wave services vs trying to make some proprietary Wave-like service. I'd like to see Facebook drop Connect and build in Wave, that would really help it take off. - kylean1, on 05/31/2009, -0/+8dunno about Bing, seriously doubt anyone can beat Google in search by now, but Google Wave looks awesome
- GameEngineer, on 05/31/2009, -0/+8Yep, the idiotic author either intentionally created a strawman to rail against or just is plain dumb and the entire Wave demonstration went over his head.
- sickthoughts, on 05/31/2009, -2/+9Bing - bing ain't no google
- billjimbob, on 05/31/2009, -0/+7What the ***** is up with all these sites using tinyurl-type of links for everything they link too? I can understand it for twitter, but sometimes I just want to mouse over the link to see where it goes - and I don't want to see bit.ly/HF5HR. I didn't realize there was a character limit for pcworld.com.
- vsujohn2, on 05/31/2009, -1/+6Bing reminds me of this...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=arCITMfxvEc - TheMachine1, on 05/31/2009, -0/+4Why do new search engines go public before they are even available? Then when they go on line they have only a fraction of the hyped capability?
- inactive, on 05/31/2009, -0/+3the author's only valid concern is that bing will control what information you will see in the results (which is valid). But that's true of any website out here. Google could do the same thing, and it does in China, and we wouldn't know.
- diggn_it, on 05/31/2009, -0/+3Ok, let me get something off my chest here. This is why mainstream tech journalism ***** sucks. There is this need to write articles, even if there is nothing to say. That may have been the most vapid piece of link-bait ***** I've ever read. Not only does it say nothing at all (and author even admits this in the last paragraph), but the writer is just lying through his teeth. You don't understand gmail? Really? You think the fact that microsoft will recommend mainstream medical sources is a bad thing? Really? You honestly think that this new search engine, which merely gives the user an option to see some recommendations will not "be good for society"?
That's crap, and I pity the idiot who actually had to convince himself that these things made slightest bit of sense. As someone already mentioned, google demoed Wave ON MOBILE DEVICES! How could this guy possibly be so stupid as to complain that the transition to these very same devices would difficult. I'd expect this kind of thing out of some blogspot account, but in theory actual new organizations should be spending more than 10 minutes writing an article. In theory. - BaulZaak, on 05/31/2009, -0/+3After several rambling paragraphs about how awful Bing and Wave are (based solely on watching probably 5 minutes of each demo), he ends with "Let's all reserve judgment about these two exciting new technologies until we can see for ourselves what effect they'll have on what's really important". Perhaps take your own advice.
- Georgy, on 05/31/2009, -0/+2You never know, one of these things just might click or tip according to malcolm gladwell
- cosgriffc, on 05/31/2009, -0/+2Terrible article... Gmail confusing? If he is having trouble with Gmail he shouldn't work for pcworld. Sounds like an attempt to bash services that aren't out yet for lack of something better to write about.
- inactive, on 05/31/2009, -1/+3who even reads pc world? shouldn't they be sticking to talking about windows 3.11 power user tips?
- DougP1, on 05/31/2009, -0/+2That was a pretty interesting insight; both announcements share a move away from simplicity. It's interesting to see Google move in that direction, seeing how (in the past) simplicity helped Google, while MS saw diminishing returns from adding more and more features to products such as Office.
- wastern, on 05/31/2009, -0/+2I think Bing is trying to differentiate itself from basic search, to do a direct compare on search results doesn't make a lot of sense. You'd need to compare areas of Bing to some more specialized sites. Like the airline area to something like kayak.
Its the same as the people that were comparing Wolfram|Alpha to Google. You can't, and shouldn't do it.
Bing doesn't look live yet. I'll wait until I can actually use it to cast judgement. I hate MS and all, but I like to use things for myself before I talk ***** about them - philodygmn, on 05/31/2009, -0/+1The way to solve that isn't with imposed, but adaptive linearity. Maybe GMail shouldn't handle things internally just by discreet messages, but by analyzing which parts have been changed, doing a "code diff" like in programming between two different versions of a file. We need smarter adaptive context to dynamically display relevant info instead of a hard-and-fast UI. There's zillions of better ways to solve this than saying, "non-linearity is bad"! Ambiguity, sure, but it's the combination of non-linearity and custom-tailored realtime feedback, processing, and display which present a whole new palette of relevance, efficiency, yadda yadda. Buried for old-guard crabbing.
- ADVIZR, on 06/01/2009, -0/+1Exactly.
The people who think Wave is just some little Google app are wildly mistaken. Almost everyone with some foresight and who's watched the whole vid knows otherwise.
The Wave protocol /will/ change the way people manage socializing/discussion online. - benologist, on 05/31/2009, -0/+1I don't see how PCWorld could possibly be confused by gmail given they make a play for digg's frontpage with an article about it every week.
- rpgmakr, on 05/31/2009, -0/+1Agreed. Wave look awesome. Specially in latin america where MSN has a stronghold in IM.
- frygar, on 05/31/2009, -0/+1Bing, eh, not so much. Wave rocks, though. And seriously, how is Gmail confusing?
- Myztry, on 05/31/2009, -0/+1In addition to the Wave live interaction, I think search could really advance by inviting bots into the wave conversation.
Instead of getting lumps of mostly irrelevant information - you just invite a specialist search bot that will only return queries in it's field.
If the conversation is about health, you invite DocBot. For purchasing, ShopperBot. For travel, maybe CruiseBot, or FlyBot. For NewEgg, their own NewEggBot.
In short you pick who contributes answers your queries instead of having a fixed search provider. You could chose GoogleBot AND/OR BingBot if you want, but otherwise go specialist. - Durrok, on 05/31/2009, -0/+1Seriously, I don't know how you can gripe about wave. Then again if gmail confuses you.... uhg.
- cheesehound, on 05/31/2009, -0/+1"Bing brings "the best match to the top," not the most popular. In other words, Microsoft is overriding the democratic approach for an elitist, we-know-best approach."
Yeah, since PageRank's so very transparent. I'm fairly certain any search engine will just give people popularity + (a mostly algorithmic) judgement call for a standard search query, and I'm not worried about missing out on potential Chinese herbal remedies during my next "omg I have teh flu, shud I drink fluids????" search. I think I'm okay with getting what the majority of people want when I search for something on the Internet, and that'll be what any given search provider attempts to provide me with (le gasp!).
Oh, and asserting that neither of these new technologies is planned to be functional for mobile devices merely because it hasn't been publicly demoed is pretty dumb. - rcollamore, on 05/31/2009, -0/+1wolfram......wait for it....FTW!! It PWNS everything...it probably runs Crysis too, and adapting to anything new is a big FAIL, like waiting for the next lame Digg saying like:
1. Bing
2. Wave
3. ???
4. Profit
Did i miss anything? - elvinu, on 05/31/2009, -0/+1WTF? who can tell people what is the future? if u dont like weave, switch to classic mode and u are fine...google will stop developing!
If u dont like bing use google or live or whatever makes u horny==> u will be fine. STUPID article. more articles like this and i`ll never want to hear about pcworld. com - BassHead, on 05/31/2009, -0/+1My money Is Not on the strawman.
- homercles337, on 05/31/2009, -0/+1This author is an idiot. It has been known for quite some time that MS uses various forms of Bayesian approaches for their decision making. There is no "see[ing] the Internet through Microsoft's corporate values." There is only the max likelihood posterior probability.
- damack, on 05/31/2009, -0/+1Wave does look interesting.
Not sure how it will play out but I've signed up for notification of when it becomes available for public download. - Nosyn, on 05/31/2009, -1/+1And then Google will truly be able to take over the world, sure some think they already have, but not quit yet!
- rcollamore, on 05/31/2009, -1/+1people use bit.ly because of the tracking/analytics capability
- ARTLUKM, on 05/31/2009, -1/+1you do NOT need to use bit.ly to track clicks.
- Stevious, on 05/31/2009, -1/+1bada bing, bada boom
- slapmaxwell, on 05/31/2009, -1/+0"Bing, Wave, and Other Painful Attempts to Change Culture" -- BS. Culture, by definition, must change and adapt to survive. Anything that helps that, even failures, are important.
Personally, Google search really ain't all that. I'm looking forward to Bing and new symantic search options to appear. Maybe then search will finally move into the 21st century instead of being grounded in mid-90's tech like Google. - kublerross, on 05/31/2009, -2/+1I picture some old blue hair shaking his fist.
- thewonster, on 05/30/2009, -7/+5DING DONG CHING CHONG LAO PING MING BING
what? - B1665r, on 05/31/2009, -3/+0Oh I know... I am looking at Bing right now, and they don't even give me the option to do basic simple text searches.
At the same time, should Bing use the live search engine for video and image searches, I will switch to bing for those searches for certain. - inactive, on 05/30/2009, -22/+4Bing = LOL!!!
Bing Means Disease In Chinese - http://www.brandinfection.com/2009/05/29/bing-mean ...
