9,275 karma · joined February 26, 2010
http://googlesystem.blogspot.com/2013/05/new-interface-for-g...
They were obviously the last ones doing so, and this new approach is mainly about modernising their infrastructure.
Is there anyone else of any consequence out there who is building these sorts of messaging apps on top of XMPP?
Google was the last one standing, and it just didn't work out.
And why cherry pick “standards”? how about web standard? Chromium is a very big commitment to them.
Edit: I should be more specific as I meant a federated implementation of XMPP.
I think the Chrome app is an excellent cross platform solution (written once, easily maintainable). As for the protocol I don't think it is practical or even possible to built this sort of all encompassing communications platform on top of XMPP (see the competition).
I do hope there will be a Hangouts API.
"... which users may choose to use instead of Google Talk."
Edit: resolved http://www.google.com/appsstatus#hl=en&v=issue&ts=13...
It’s certainly your prerogative to use whatever you like but the incorrect assertions bother me, especially the prevalent one: “It's because I think that Google is now working against the potential of the open web”.
Here’s a rebuttal in the form of a partial list of links to Google initiatives that exist primarily to advance the “open web”:
And their various web speed efforts:
https://developers.google.com/speed/spdy
https://developers.google.com/speed/pagespeed
And of course:
I don't think the closure of Google Reader was any indication to the contrary, and all of these are certainly much more important to the web than yet another centralized RSS reader.
Other errors in that post: Chrome never ‘dropped decent RSS support’ as it never supported it to begin with, it was actually Firefox that dropped their support. Also there is no evidence that Reader was closed to “drive users to Google+”, there is no proof nor common sense explanation to support that assertion.
No new features in the latest update but the .apk teardown suggests future functionality: http://www.androidpolice.com/2013/04/15/apk-teardown-google-...
You can also have this sort of stuff triggerd by desktop searches if you join this "field trial": https://www.google.com/experimental/gmailfieldtrial/
Everyone else has a "walled garden" why must Google be different? and why should they - arguably the least “walled” of said gardens - suffer the "openness" brunt?
The fact that they are not investing in RSS tools doesn't mean they're against them, it's just not in their interest anymore, and so I come to the conclusion that this is yet another Google Reader lament, and I thought we've already had our fill of these on the HN front page.
It’s the same discussion all over again, If you've not found a Reader replacement by now, or at least had your eyes on a couple of replacement candidates then you're just being stubborn.
Google lets you export your feeds and that is why they are not "evil", not because they refuse to indefinitely maintain a service that isn't of interest to them.
Also the crux or that post is an opt in feature that you have to install as a browser extension, if you don't like it then avoid the extension, but then how is it any different than Facebook's 'like' buttons or any of the other social widgets that are cluttering the web?!
Who are these low karma users who keep submitting these Google bashing/feigned indignation posts?!
And one assumes that much of Google's lobbying is to counteract Microsoft's.
Also Google's competitors are teaming with Microsoft to destroy Google, their agenda has nothing to do with consumer welfare. Case in point: now they're lobbying against open source software.
(Edit: not sure why this was down voted)
How is that not engineering based?