| ActiveMac | Anonymous | Create a User | Reviews | News | Forums | Advertise |
|
|
|
User Controls |
|
New User |
|
Login |
|
Edit/View My Profile |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ActiveMac |
|
Articles |
|
Forums |
|
Links |
|
News |
|
News Search |
|
Reviews |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
News Centers |
|
Windows/Microsoft |
|
DVD |
|
ActiveHardware |
|
Xbox |
|
MaINTosh |
|
News Search |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ANet Chats |
|
The Lobby |
|
Special Events Room |
|
Developer's Lounge |
|
XBox Chat |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ's |
|
Windows 98/98 SE |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Windows Me |
|
Windows "Whistler" XP |
|
Windows CE |
|
Internet Explorer 6 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Xbox |
|
DirectX |
|
DVD's |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TopTechTips |
|
Registry Tips |
|
Windows 95/98 |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Internet Explorer 4 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Windows NT Tips |
|
Program Tips |
|
Easter Eggs |
|
Hardware |
|
DVD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Latest Reviews |
|
Applications |
|
Microsoft Windows XP Professional |
|
Norton SystemWorks 2002 |
|
|
|
Hardware |
|
Intel Personal Audio Player 3000 |
|
Microsoft Wireless IntelliMouse Explorer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Site News/Info |
|
About This Site |
|
Affiliates |
|
ANet Forums |
|
Contact Us |
|
Default Home Page |
|
Link To Us |
|
Links |
|
Member Pages |
|
Site Search |
|
Awards |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credits |
 |
Google kicks offline Web apps into gear | |
|
||
| Time: 19:35 EST/00:35 GMT | News Source: News.com | Posted By: Jonathan Tigner | ||
|
Google engineers have enabled what Internet surfers for years have yearned for--Web applications that work offline. The search giant on Wednesday launched Google Gears, a browser plug-in that will let people run Web applications when they're connected to the Internet or not. The goal of Google Gears is to create a single, standardized way to add offline capabilities to Web applications, said Linus Upson, engineering director at Google. The initial code is aimed at JavaScript developers who write Ajax-style Web applications. It runs on Internet Explorer on Windows; Firefox on Windows, Mac OS and Linux; and on the Safari Mac OS browser. Google expects to have a consumer-ready release of Google Gears, which will be under 1 megabyte in size, "within months." It also expects to submit the code to a standards body so that it will eventually be built into all standards-compliant browsers, Upson said. | ||
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 319 Last | Next |
The time now is
3:48:25 PM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
| #1 By 20505 (216.102.144.11) at 5/30/2007 8:14:28 PM |
| Oooooh. Now this is interesting. Does this mean web apps that run on the desktop? Say a word possessing program, spread sheet, presentation software and possibly an email and organization/calendaring tool? |
| #2 By 12071 (203.185.215.144) at 5/30/2007 11:33:08 PM |
| #1 That can then automatically synchronize your data/changes/etc as soon as you're back online. Very cool! |
| #3 By 23275 (24.179.4.158) at 5/31/2007 1:22:12 AM |
| #2, You mean like Outlook 2003/2007 has done from cached mode and an Exchange, securely and reliably, since August 2003, when RPC over HTTP(S) became possible - it is transparent and dynamic, or do you mean when OL2K could do it opposite forced encryption over TCP when an Exchange was published via ISA Server 2000? Or... do you mean like Office has been able to do opposite its first HTTP Post Request supported web dav access under SharePoint Team Services [STS-1], that was first featured in Office XP/2002? - where one could/can open an Office document, continue working on it from a remote client, boot the server, drive all over town, keep working and then save it right back to the server when it was back online, or the connection to it available again... stuff like that? Yes, I agree, very cool. This is not new. The difference is in how rich, complete and supported the client is; how well that client is distributed and how accessible the infrastructure is where it matters - KB, or knowledge management, compliance, retention, version control, rights management, and business continuity - all that is as important to businesses and not just big enterprises, but every small professional firm we work for. They don't trust Google - they don't trust Microsoft about some things, but they sure do trust their own server(s). When Google makes it possible for people to do all I have mentioned above and they add the ability to own it inside their own equipment rooms and offices, they and only then, will they have a product that people will buy. |
| #4 By 12071 (203.214.150.37) at 5/31/2007 8:03:37 AM |
|
#3 Did I say it was new? Did Google say it was new? So what is eating at you so much? Don't worry, you don't actually have to answer those questions, it's painfully obvious to anyone who has read more than 5 of your essays.
That's wonderful that Microsoft allowed you to use some subsets of this for some subsets of their applications. Google have come out and allowed it to work with ANY web application. Why did they do it? Well given that a major concern to a lot of people, especially those on the move, was "web applications are fun and dandy... but close to completely useless when you're off-line", they've come out and offer a solution. A solution that is simple, easy to integrate and from what I've played with it so far... works well. Give it a go, you can even utilize it with your own web site rather than requiring specific Microsoft versions and tools. "they and only then, will they have a product that people will buy." See this is what you proprietary-only people just don't seem to be able to get through your thick skulls. They're not SELLING it, you don't need to PAY for it. This isn't Microsoft! It's open source and they want to make it an open standard. And that's the real reason you're opposed to this type of product. Because eventually you can see that it'll hit Microsoft in one way or the other if web applications succeed. I thought you wanted more competition... right? Oh ... and no-one cares that you don't trust Google and you trust Microsoft ... mmmkay. |
| #5 By 23275 (24.179.4.158) at 5/31/2007 11:08:20 AM |
|
#4, Right... Google is now a 501(c)(3) certified charity and they no longer are in business to make money... I forgot that part.
My skull may be thick, but I am wise enough to listen to my customers. Typically these are people who have risked a lot to open and run the businesses they own - so in case you don't work directly with such people, let me share what they tell me: "We don't like or trust the ad supported models any more than we like ad supported television and just as we pay for premium channels so we don't have to watch commercials, we're willing to pay for software in order to avoid advertising. Beyond that, we can't use ad supported software in our company any more than we can use Office Live. We have compliance and discovery requirements that, as you know, we have to be mindful of." Culturally, they are business "owners" and they know that nothing in business is free - there has to be a price, because they themselves cannot afford to provide free services and products. They understand advertising - they buy advertising - so they understand it costs money. They do not live in caves, despite whatever thickness their skulls might have, and they do use the web and they have seen how just about every site on the web has become a mess of flashing, blinking, crap. They don't like either ad, or tax supported services and look at them as being almost equally bad. One customer stated: "It is getting so bad that you can't even move your mouse around. It's distracting and I'm no longer sure of where I'm going to go on a page, because half the time, embedded links pop up mini ads that are now animated and it's getting worse. Is there any way to stop all of this?" We talk to our customers a lot - about our kids, investments, the news and it all starts with technology and ends with it, but it reflects the relationship that I am certain any person in sales, or service can tell you, is central to success. At least from what I see and hear, business people do not want an ad supported idiocracy any more than they want a socialist system crushing the life out of them with taxes - they see the two in the same light - referring to ads as commercialized propaganda. The only exceptions are the I'm a Mac ads and specialty ads that entertain - as at our Super Bowl. These types of ads truly do entertain many people. They saw static advertising as something they could deal with, but the FLASH based animated ads and embedded ads were very distracting. Ref no one caring what I think, well... you're wrong. My customers do and they ask and pay for what I think. Just as they pay to benefit from what their accountant, or lawyer thinks. It's naive to think otherwise. |
| #6 By 37047 (216.191.227.68) at 5/31/2007 11:25:25 AM |
|
#5: Why are your customers seeing popups and ads all the time? AdBlock Pro will solve that problem.
http://www.download.com/Adblock-Plus-for-IE/3000-12770_4-10690444.html?tag=lst-0-1 It's perfect for them, because it runs in IE, and it is not free. I presume $20 USD is enough of a price for them to consider it worth using? If not, I am sure the fine folks who develop and sell it will be willing to accept a higher price for its use. I am presuming that they use IE7, because it is not free, as the price of it is included in the price of Windows. |
| #7 By 15406 (216.191.227.68) at 5/31/2007 11:47:25 AM |
| #5: You should be trying to gently bring your old school dinosaur customers into the new age. Just because they don't understand or trust the new business models the Internet enables does not mean those models are invalid. And what does any of this have to do with Kabuki's reply? This looks more like a Ketchum Tangent(tm). You totally ignore 99.9% of what he wrote and then type up a big post about how your customers don't like ads. Classic Ketchum. |
| #8 By 32132 (142.32.208.234) at 5/31/2007 12:01:36 PM |
|
A new take on ActiveX controls from Google!!!!
All the power plus less security with the added bonus of collecting as much of your private information as they can get away with!!! |
| #9 By 23275 (24.179.4.158) at 5/31/2007 12:24:29 PM |
|
#6, Blocking ads alone does not block the aggregation of data collected and analyzed - that is one issue - and some of our customers do use commercial content blocking, others are considering adding that capability to their networks and Internet browsing - and that too, is a Spy -v Spy kind of game - as ad blockers block, new types of ads are, well... added.
#7, One of my clients might toss a 4" x 7" 8K memory module, easily as heavy as a brick, in your lap - as he told you that not much of what you advocate is new in any way. My reply has everything to do with what Kabuki wrote - it explains why customers prefer a rich client experience that leverages both a strong client system, locally controlled network and the public networks at the same time. A less evolved, ad supported smart client, for the reasons I have listed, are not suitable for them. The newer models are valid - for some, but not all and they will evolve - and likely end up looking much more like one another than we can appreciate. I do assess that Microsoft is further along, and in a much better position to pursue its interpretation of how things will play out. I also think that as Google's competitors catch up in the ad and search space, that competitor progress will exceed Google's progress in expanding out of its core business - so both will flatten out and as they do, once again, Microsoft will come out on top. I assess they have a better plan - which includes a feedback mechanism that we have emulated and also use. Back to relevance - understanding "WHY" customers assess things as they do is vital - that is the context from which my earlier post was offered. Characterize it as narrowly as you wish, it does not change the fact that we ask our customers what they think, want and why and it does not change the fact that we respond to those requirements and requests. |
| #10 By 23275 (24.179.4.158) at 5/31/2007 12:36:14 PM |
| #7, Curious? Why is it that because you disagree with me, that it is okay to insult my age? Being old is a rather natural and benign characteristic, which I hope you will one day experience [wishing you a long and productive life, as it were]. Where is your sense of social justice, for the aged? Where is the social outrage? Why is it so selective? Many of my customers are in their 70's and 80's - dear friends of mine. Just curious about the old-school remark - especially opposite our practice of hiring very young people and turning them loose to do their best as we insulate them from the challenges we once faced - I have shared that philosophy many times - so why the personal attacks all the time - are you concerned that your posts are too weak to stand otherwise? And what eats me most about Google? Any left-wing leaning entity that "uses" hard won liberties while it works to take them away from others, gets to me - any entity that advocates any form of socialism eats at me. The word "hate" is not strong enough, because such orgranizations do not respect individual liberty and without it, life is simply not worth it. Clear enough for you? |
| #11 By 15406 (216.191.227.68) at 5/31/2007 1:28:43 PM |
| #10: What *are* you going on about? Where did I insult your age? |
| #12 By 23275 (24.179.4.158) at 5/31/2007 1:39:49 PM |
| #11, My questions and their context as at my #10 above, are clear enough. |
| #13 By 15406 (216.191.227.68) at 5/31/2007 1:42:53 PM |
|
#12: Nice try, but you aren't going to wriggle out of this one. I called a subset of your customers old-school dinosaurs, the ones that are distrustful of the ad model. I suspect your eyes just scanned what I wrote, you assumed something that turned out to be incorrect and now you're trying to back out. Backpedal, as it were.
|
| #14 By 23275 (24.179.4.158) at 5/31/2007 2:03:19 PM |
|
Unprotected Google directory spills database data - see, http://blogs.zdnet.com/security/?p=251
Google has hurriedly fixed a gaping hole in its Web page removal request tool after outsiders discovered they could traverse up the directory root, browse folders and find weak database passwords. This is the sort of thing that my customers [and I don't know about any others and can't speak in that larger context], worry about. This is obviously, not intended, but it is as troubling as that which is intended - e.g., the harvesting of data. My customers assess, and I reason properly, that Google may not be as prepared to address all of the concerns businesses have. That does not make them dinasaurs, or less aware of emerging technologies, or their eventual potential - it is to say that they thoughtfully reason that Google is not well enough along in this area to be considered a viable alternative. I add to that and assess that by the time they are, the matter will be irrelevant. |
| #15 By 15406 (216.191.227.68) at 5/31/2007 3:37:59 PM |
| #14: Fearing a data leak, which is reasonable, is a far cry from thinking that web businesses that give away a product while making money on ads & support are dodgy. Those same people probably keep their money in their mattress. |
| #16 By 12071 (203.185.215.144) at 5/31/2007 9:44:15 PM |
|
#5 Who said they were a charity? Stop putting words in people's mouths! Or is that how you structure all your arguments... via strawmen?
Google Gears is open source and free... deal with it. As for your customers... since they listen to you so much, go educate them... getting rid of ads has been done for quite some time now. If you're still using a useless browser that doesn't give you the ability to block ads then follow Mystic's advice... pay for it, which, as he says, should be perfect for both you and your customers. It's a good thing that Microsoft hasn't had any gaping holes..... ooooh I get it now... you're pissed off that a) they give this stuff away for free rather than charging their customers/developers an arm and a leg and b) that they actually FIX the vulnerabilities/bugs in their systems when they come up. This is a bit like the constant anti-Apple and anti-Firefox thing... man it must piss you off to know all those companies out there are fixing bugs! They should hold off fixing as many as they can for as long as they can... and then they should set an arbitrary date, let's say once a month, when they will release the fixes that they've had the most pressure on to release. |
| #17 By 32132 (66.183.202.89) at 5/31/2007 10:14:22 PM |
| #16 Going through life filled with hate is not healthy. |
| #18 By 23275 (24.179.4.158) at 6/1/2007 3:28:24 PM |
|
We touch it with a needle...
Beware of that man between you and your Google Desktop - ZDNET http://blogs.zdnet.com/security/?p=253 |
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 319 Last | Next |
The time now is
3:48:25 PM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
