real-time

1. google just added uploading videos directly from android to youtube. this should soon be available to other phones via google mobile (can live streaming be far behind?) they can index the audio content of the video and have access to a huge amount of real-time data that way.

2. jaiku engine can be deployed to app engine in 5 minutes. they are currently working on supporting the open microblogging spec and adding xmpp as soon as app engine supports it. (http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=592145) PubSubHub looks interesting and may tie into this as well.

3. twitter is still simultaneously being taken over by spam and focusing on becoming a broadcast platform for famous people. other services are going to become more appealing as twitter begins to jump the shark. it would probably be trivial to add “tell the world/you friends what you are doing” at many points across their service spectrum. no reason they couldn’t be optionally piped out to twitter..

4. if google added a “tell the world what’s on your mind” button to their google search front page, and the results were aggregated at, say “current.google.com”, but integrated into google search results similarly to youtube, would that not be a huge incentive to post updates there?

6. RSS is not dead it is ubiquitous.

those were just off the top of my head, i’d love to go to google i/o

Sure they have a strategy. ‘Be a mammoth money-making machine that could easily just purchase the winner of the “real-time wars.”‘

Does Google have a real-time strategy and if so, how is it going to compete against Twitter and Facebook in the real-time wars given the recent

Few pointers to think about:

(1) Google could use it’s massive advertising customer relationships to seek advertising contracts from Twitter/Facebook.

(2) Apart from twitter and facebook, blogsphere is an open world. Google could invest in developing a search engine for the other part of real-time web

(3) Google could deliver an analytics and advertising tool to be put above the Twitter/ Facebook real time data. Real time data would require massive parallel computers for search and it’s use also would be limited to only certain types of searches.

Money doesn’t bring happiness but it can buy everything else

First of all, I wouldn’t be able to go to the event.

Just wanted to point out that real time search results are not always the most relevant ones. For example, searching for a celebrity’s name in hopes of finding a biography is instead going to return a horde of articles of that celebrity’s latest breakup.

My suggestion? Allow for either – integration in this case could be VERY sticky and probably not for the best.

This is the “I will not be able to attend” thread .

I’d like to second Rachel’s point. Realtime is only so good today because of the sparse information that is covered. I don’t believe it is in Google’s interest to overwhelm the realtime information productions…

Information and irrelevant stuff should remain separated!!!

Google’s real-time strategy should be based around making real-time content (i.e. tweets, images, posts from Twitter, FB, etc.) searchable. There is a gold-mine (of data) for the system(s) which can understand the context of posted real-time content/data and return highly relevant search results. This should be Google’s strategy. It’s their core competency and a void that needs filling.

Google absolutely has a strategy. They are providing the resources and avenue to develop a world changing real time system. Google App Engine and the Android platform provide a zero cost opportunity for anyone to step up to the plate and provide better integration of thee mobile world with realtime updates.

Twitter is not being used as it was originally intended. It’s full of advertisement’s, spam, conversations. Most user’s wouldn’t be content receiving all this information in a single place as text messages on their cell phone, they shouldn’t be content lumping everything together on twitter. It’s great for it’s original use(What are you doing?) but inefficient for what’s going on now. Facebook has similar issues but on a much smaller scale.

Giving the world the resources to make something better is the best weapon they could possibly have against Twitter or Facebook.

First of all- Real time search is really important.

Think about this question for a second – how many people have homepage or webpage these days…not much except for some PhD students to market themselves.
The real time part of web is increasing at a very fast rate and it’s going through a major push…..

The question is: How can someone create value out of real time search ? No one would disagree that there is some fossil value there.

Abhi

Google’s ability to roll out features pervasive to the platform and their numerous web properties will give it an immediate placement and awareness advantage.

Imagine logging into Google.com or simply browsing to Google.com or an of an array of “powered by” sites that use Google.com search functions and being greeted with the following option:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/jcuthrell/3483856943/

Then compound this new search timeline option with a single sign on that can maintain a history of all your real time queries, mapping to your FOAF, mapping to a new popular metric, and distilling this down as an option Google Alert or new pre-labled entry in your Gmail inbox for later review.

Given the chance to unleash the realtime potential, Google will move into a new realm of applying their by the minute, by the hour, by the day approach to spiders/indexes/sitemap.xml.gz/pings strategy to encompass stream parsing in real time delivered as needed to those wishing to pulse the past but the near present.

“those wishing to pulse not only the past but the near present.”

FOR BUSINESS
Google already has the following real-time streams of data that would be interesting to business:

1. Which search results are clicked in a given SERP.
2. Which Adwords ads are clicked.

It’s arguable that businesses don’t care about individual Twitterers but for the aggregate consumer patterns. Google could provide enormous consumer data to business. For example, what business wouldn’t pay for this kind of data in their industry:

* In the last 3 minutes, 115 people searched for “bicycles”
* 50 clicked on trekbikes.com
* 20 clicked on schwinn.com

FOR INDIVIDUALS
Google could allow individuals to publish any/all actions taken on Google properties, such as reading an article on Google Reader, watching a video on YouTube, or performing a search. With the user’s permission, and no extra work from the user, Google could produce a feed like this:

* John read “Study: One in Five U.S. Homes Are Cellphone Only” on TechCrunch.com and starred it.
* John searched for “cell phones” and visited http://www.att.com.
* John watched “Love Story Meets Viva La Vida” on YouTube.
* John wrote 5 emails in Gmail.com.
* John search for “the economy” in Google News and visited an article on CNN.com.

Yes. Google in all likelihood is going to buy Twitter as part of their real-time search strategy. Twitter understands the value/potential of all this, so they won’t settle for anything less than outright acquisition at a lucrative valuation. For Google, it will be part of their universal search paradigm. Google now coupled with Twitter will be a potent player against Facebook. Unless Facebook starts having public profiles, Google+Twitter will emerge to be clear winners.

This is slightly off-topic, but why has TechCrunch recently begun placing obnoxious flashing advertisement boxes in their RSS feed? I don’t mind advertisements if necessary, or even a teaser and cut-off, but I these ads are truly awful, more on a level I would expect for a trashy website, not of the class I thought I could expect from techcrunch.

no they have a realtime social media strategy. they dont need one.
if they wanted to they could have bought a major realtime social engine. they dont want to be too dominate. imagine if they owned fb how many people would be up in arms. right now they are winning the digital media wars because of revenue. they are not interested in social real time – social network anything that dont make any money and raises more antitrust issues. with 70% search market time and monetization is on their side for at least 3-5 years. the strategy is to ride the one trick pony all the way to the bank.

StrategyLocator.com – prepare yourself

Google could just purchase Twitter or Facebook if it saw a great revenue stream.

But the bigger question is why would Goggle want these platforms unless the revenue stream increased theirs.

They have many other aps and platforms they are pursuing.

no

Google news and blog search are already real time

It can bring this feature to the main search pages

Also google lets you search real time using advanced search options.

In a quest for whats hot and happening ! we are becoming victims of spammers and meme sites.

Hope google can clear the cesspool and give me only whats important

Google’s mission is to organize the world’s information and fortunately for us this does not exclude the real time web. In the past we have seen Google leverage their advertising partnerships to advance this mission and I do not see any reason we cannot apply the same logic to what’s ahead.

With the implementation of Profiles, enhanced News, and Connect options, Google is slowly adding ways for people to contribute to the Real Time Web without most people noticing. All Google has to do is to take these entities and have a tighter fitting offering that brings Gmail/GTalk, Profiles, Reader, News, Search together in one place. Then we will be able to make friends, chat, share our latest offerings, and have content sent directly our way because of the massive leverage Google will have because of their audience. This I would call the Meta Network.

Just some thoughts I had, thanks for the consideration.

It is my humble opinion that when it comes to useful data to mine, comparing Twitter to Google Search is like comparing an ice cube to Hoth. That being said, and requisite dorky reference aside, I think that Google will try to get in on the real-time pie through an acquisition. I think Google will try to pick up FriendFeed or Twitter, and I think they will be after the users, not the data. I think they would like to import the people developing against the Twitter API, for example, into the Google ecosystem, and make it very easy for them to integrate other Google services into applications which previously only leveraged Twitter. I also think they would like to force users of whatever service they acquire to access said service with a Google login (probably in many cases newly created), as they have done recently with the Doubleclick tools. The overarching goal, of course, is to get more and more people using more and more Google products, with the hope of continuing to create novel advertising products.

Google has been real time since the day 1. But their way of doing it is much less visible compared to say Twitter or Facebook that actually manifest it in all the ways possible (that’s their business after all).
Google instead is focused on collecting all the info and storing it under the pillow for further consideration (things people search for, youtube videos they watch, articles they read etc). It is highly real time just for the chosen few (or rather the algorithms) that are exposed to that information afterwards.

GPS-aware googleearth on handsets, of course. They must already have an android port of the app. I do not see any reason why it could not scale to iPhones as well.

They could do worse than adding geo-located ‘tweet bubbles’ and chat into googleearth.

They’ll probably have a world-moving, mindblowing, extremolicious monsterquery which will tell them exactly what to do next at any given point in space-time.

If not:
I’m not sure I’ll still want to attend…

I always thought Google had this idea much earlier than twitter or facebook but couldn’t find a way around the whole “Big Brother” aspect. Users actively posting information in this status-sphere removes much of the controversy over the legality of aggregating their “personal data.” For example, posting full profile information to the public or other friends in this connection would violate the privacy of the user from a different level. I think people are more protective of what they search and what they do when that extra interface step is removed. If anyone uses Google chrome, you could already see your full history saved within the web browser.

I think it’s the momentum and surging popularity with the mainstream media that makes Twitter a great candidate. Google is probably just maintaining their bid and waiting for the users to accumulate until a plateau is reached with their statistics. Even if they don’t buy out the company, they can still leverage the searchable content with the specific account (i.e. login through an API) to more accurately fine-tune search engine results to the specific user.

Real time searches constitute a single or perhaps double digit percentage of searches. So Google obviously cares a lot about RTS.

To bolster it’s RTS and compete against Twitter and Facebook, Google could:

a) buy one of them
b) index and make their content searchable without buying them (maybe pay a licensing fee to do that)
c) buy a smaller, similar service (b.c. pragmatically speaking a service with 1/10 of Twitter’s volume could provide enough content to satisfy 99% of RTS)
d) create it’s own service. gchat currently has status messages which it could index.
e) publish and make searchable real time search queries, which might be similar to tweets (unlikely due to privacy challenge inherit witch searches—see AOL log fiasco)

my guess is that they will index FB and/or Twitter statuses in the interim until they build or acquire a significantly popular status message service.

In terms of raw numbers, Twitter’s growth was approximately equal to Blogger’s recently, and at the moment, they’re both pretty flat. Twitter is getting pretty spammy, and it’s not entirely clear how they intend to deal with that. Since the J has stopped curving, they might suddently decide that offer from Google was pretty good after all, which would be at least one way Google might end up “competing” with them

Apart from that, through the encouragement of open standards, interop, and “letting a million Jaiku’s bloom” Google are in a position to take ample advantage of whatever Facebook and Twitter end up doing, because they have:

Infrastructure
Geek power
Advertisers
Mindshare
Eyeballs
Money
+++

Yup, that’s right, *money* – the stuff even banks are having to beg for these days. Google’s got a heap of it. It’s worth remembering that neither Twitter nor Facebook has turned a profit yet – the “stream” might be a fantastic timesuck but it’s far from clear that it’s a hugely monetizable timesuck.

Google is probably perfectly happy that so much of the startup world is focused on these cool & hip companies that don’t make any money, while they reap the benefits of their ever increasing search dominance, the largest number of advertisers ever accumulated by any company in the history of the world, and a big fat cash cow called “Office” they are slowly tearing strips off and turning into bacon. Mmmmm, Bacon.

[nb: I didn't exactly fact check any of this, but I'd quite like to go to Google I/O - so much so that I'm willing to fly all the way from New Zealand to get there. Howza about a ticket, pretty please?]

+1 for the Star Wars reference. My 4 year old would be proud!

With their in-house experience Google could replicate Twitter from scratch in short order if they wanted to. So I’m confident they can bring something to the space in a short amount of time, or sooner if they are already working on it.

From the real-time perspective, they also have the know-how. Google maps was one of the first widely used AJAX-heavy applicatons, so they definitely have the knowledge in that space.

They have also been one of the most developer friendly providers, with their APIs being used widely on a range of sites.

Where I think they will lag behind is in aggregation. I still think there is spotty integration of Google’s own offerings (gmail, docs, calendar, etc) so I think they may have trouble differentiating themselves from the FriendFeeds of the world. If they can’t do that, then they relegate themselves to being just one of a hundred content providers, and I don’t think all the money in the world could catapult them in front of Facebook and Twitter.

Does Google have a real-time strategy and if so, how is it going to compete against Twitter and Facebook in the real-time wars given the recent death of RSS?

Answer: No

I’m looking forward to my ticket

Does Google have a real-time strategy and if so, how is it going to compete against Twitter and Facebook in the real-time wars given the recent death of RSS?

Google has many properties that can be utilized to compete with Facebook and Twitter, and they have the gmail user base to help them catch up in number of users (if they even need to catch up). Google Profile comes to mind as a valuable new property, luring users with the opportunity to get 1st page search results for there name. If Google could integrate all their services into a nice convenient social interface, that might provide good competition for Facebook.

As far as real-time I can’t think of anything off hand that Google to do to get an edge in real-time. Many of there services are great but they are scattered. Twitter and Friendfeed are more or less focused on one application that lends itself nicely to real-time.

Also, I disagree that RSS is dead. If it is dead then it was never alive. I don’t see RSS is the end user technology for the common user and it never was. RSS will remain as a key “under the hood” technology powering the internet for a long time to come.
It’s often said that RSS is only used by 1% (or some incredibly small percent) of internet users (this is talking about users, not websites that offer RSS). I see that as being an opportunity that Twitter (and Friendfeed) has managed to capitalize on. The opportunity is in providing users the benefit of RSS, without the users knowing that they are even using RSS.
An example how this is being achieved on Twitter is the Twitterfeed.com service. News publishers can setup there Twitter account with there publications RSS feed, Twitter users follow the Twitter account and get the latest posts from that publication. In this case RSS has been hidden but it’s still in use.
This is why I disagree that RSS is dead.

Google should invest in Twitter and come up with some sort of revenue sharing deal. This will allow Google to have a real-time news feed that can show up alongside or embedded in search results and it will allow Twitter to have some income.

http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/live_folders_bring_the_real-time_web_to_android.php

No, Google does not have a “real time search” strategy, because:

1. “real time” is code for “Twitter”

2. Tweets aren’t indexed by Google

and if that wasn’t enough:

3. Google Blog search showed how googling was the wrong way to interact with RSS, thus implying the same for tweets.

Google’s strength is in consuming, indexing, and providing search for, other peoples data. It will fail if it attempts to become a FB, Twitter, etc.

Google’s strategy should be to keep Twitter from gaining critical mass, and acheiving prominance in search. IMO, Google is in position to do this. It must promote “openness”, as with open social, and help other up-starts compete for market share. This will minimize the power of Twitter, and its search prospects. The key to Google maintaining a dominant position in search (including real time) is to be sure no one party owns all (most) of the data in any prominent category.

Google doesn’t have any real-time strategy particularly against twitter and facebook. As your Rest in Peace, RSS says the race for realtime is already won. But we have yet to see if twitter can provide search results answering the question of “what exactly is everybody doing?” other than providing hot trending topics. I think that’s where Google can leverage its search strategy (technology) and carve out useful information from all the noise. So Google will eventually acquire twitter and provide most relevant and useful search results via its integrated apps in android and chrome.

RALLY THE ECOSYSTEM

OpenSocial Activities Stream – OpenSocial API allows retrieval of activity stream. Currently, an OpenSocial app retrieves activities from one single source, but OpenSocial Specification can be expanded to include multiple sources. With such standardization efforts, streams from multiple sources can be aggregated and mashed-up in new ways; thus marking proprietary stream format such as Facebook’s format a walled garden. After all, there are over 30 containers implementing OpenSocial Standard, including MySpace, Hi5, and Yahoo.

SYNERGY OF MULTIPLE ASSETS

Google owns a number of valuable social assets, such as YouTube, Blogger, Picasa, Gmail, Google Talk, and Profile. Your activities (such as commenting on a photo, or a blog post) can be shown on your friends’ feeds in real-time. Your friends’ activities streams (as well as alerts, notifications, and IM messages) can show in Gmail, Google Talk, or Orkut. With so many different assets, Google can aggregate these user behavior and context information to provide the most relevant activities stream from their friends. For example, with Latitude, Google can present most relevant activity feed of your friends based on location-context.

I don’t see any point in Google trying to compete directly against Twitter or Facebook as far as the core Twitter-like service is concerned. Twitter already has approximately 51761717365153573 users twitting away on its service, and Google would have a real hard time drawing them away and/or attracting new users to the exact same service. If Google wanted to, they could have a few developers bust out a Twitter clone in like two weeks, but there’s not really a point to. What Google does best is find stuff. The data is already there, publicly available on Twitter and Facebook and everywhere else; it’s just hard to make sense of it collectively. Twitter and Facebook have the data and users to generate that data, and Google has the know-how to make it useful. The only thing that really makes sense is some kind of data access/indexing deal or an acquisition.

1) The least viable option : To attack Twitter head on, Google could add, “Whats on your mind ?” text box on Igoogle. (then do option 3)

2) Twitter is extremely popular already. So, Strategy could be “Innovation through acquisition” ie Google acquires Twitter

3)The whole idea of acquisition is to monetize the hype around Twitter. But, If acquistion isnt viable, understand what twitter’s philosophy is. Twitter is about people expressing themselves and google is about search.
Google should notice that its current search page has “Web, Images, Maps, News etc”. ie Information. What it lacks is “People”. Google could add a new section to their search named “People”

Google could search in Twitter, or blogs or various other places which publicly relate to People and their activities.
And If a user is logged in and does a search, the results could be ranked based on User’s public social graph using Google social graph api (XFN, FOAF standards) and combined with any openID/Google connect supported social network.
It could even make the output fancy by showing the results combined with google maps + latitude too and yes of course there are always sponsored results..

It appears I’m late to the party on this one.

still plenty of time to answer the question

yes.

http://www.jaiku.com/

checkout the copyright at the very bottom.

easy does it.

“Does Google have a real-time strategy and if so, how is it going to compete against Twitter and Facebook in the real-time wars given the recent death of RSS?”

No Google doesn’t have a matching strategy similar to Twitter and Facebook. I didn’t use “real-time” because it is not the best presentation of the strategy that Twitter has evolved and transformed.

Google doesn’t seems to have a PM and a dedicated product team that does nothing but to work in the direction of Twitter. Unless Google

1) approves and sign-off budget,
2) recruit talent,
3) find a champion leader in both PM and Engineer,
4) build strong team,
5) give priority,
6) make it part of Google grand’s vision and plan, 7) succeed in proving revenue model for long term and ROI,
8) receive support from internal product groups
9) offer resources from developer platform,

Google is not able to compete with Twitter. To achieve Twitter level of branding, product, usage, platform success requires a lot more resources due to Google’s size, operation and infrastructure.

It would be wise for Google to partner rather than building its own. It is cheaper. In addition, if Twitter doesn’t come up with a solid business model for revenue in long run, Twitter will become another YouTube that burn cash. Twitter has to prove it can live longer than hype.

I believe Google has a real-time strategy and we will see some of it being talked about tomorrow at the Searchology. The Twitter VCs (Bijan Sabet and Fred Wilson) seem to be in town Wednesday – so something is brewing in terms of a partnership between Twitter and Google. It could be an investment or a search deal or an advertising deal.

Additionally Google is probably keeping tabs on FriendFeed. FriendFeed Search is far superior to Twitter. It aggregates Twitter, Flickr and tons of other services. Given that FriendFeed has almost instant updation of tweets twittered by Twitter users, Google can acquire FriendFeed to be cornerstone of its Real time search (if it hasn’t already worked on something that it will show tomorrow). Facebook TOS does not allow realtime search outside of its walled garden so Google is not bothered about it. Google’s strategy will probably revolve around a partnership with Twitter with an acquisition of FriendFeed downstream.

Google does not like that one site owns the realtime web. It wants instead to push many twitter-like sites, and then use its powerful real-time indexing technology (blogs and news are indexed every few minutes) to index them all and serve them up. So its strategy is to push web standards for the real-time web. It served it well in the past.

Addendum:

Google strategy for realtime will be much like the appearance of their traditional search product for Web appearing in Gmail.

In this example, everyone on the outside assumed or could go so far as to -know- Google could do it. The key was when not if Google would do it.

The path of prior M&A would indicate that Google can learn a lot and/or destroy the device under test to the outside view. Internally, the size and depth of where engineering talent can be reshaped and/or refocused at near (sheer) will speeds is a likely consideration to place in the plausible column.

In essence, realtime is the other endpoint of the curve that places the ever trailing desire to curate, index, and make ready for search of the world’s data. In this rapidly splitting edge case (moving rapidly to core) where each contributor is a new member to an exploding node set collection far in excess of anything resembling the “blog” explosion, we see a challenge that must excite and breath life into Google engineering talent.

So, I expect finding a passionate team within Google to tackle the realtime “problem” (opportunity) is not a long shot.

Risks: the sailors that want to ride up the river are the best and are lost, turn on their fleet, or join another navy (wild speculation on who would gain from control over the realtime)

Rewards: those sailors chart the course for the armada to find comfortable berth and the blueprint for building a new nimble class of vessel to pilot and carry the mercantile desires up those realtime streams

“And If a user is logged in and does a search, the results could be ranked based on User’s public social graph using Google social graph api (XFN, FOAF standards) and combined with any openID/Google connect supported social network.”

That is a good idea.

Hi, I’d love to Google I/O It is an interesting question, here is what I think:

One could first think that Google will be the first to filter tweets and deliver noise-free results sets. After all, Twitter is a publisher and Google’s spiders suck the whole web. Twitter, being well aware of its incredible value, of course does not allow search bots (see: http://twitter.com/robots.txt )

I do think Google has a real-time strategy, yet no specific plans. We all know that copycats are poorly performing in the Internet industry; there is no way Google will build its own twitter. As a matter of fact, Jaiku started as an early twitter competitor became an open-source project for micro-publishing services.

I don’t believe Google will acquire twitter. At least not in the next 6 months. The complementarities are obvious: you definitely need real time if you are serious about organizing the world’s information; and a social dashboard “gmail+twitter” is a viable and much less evil alternative to facebook. But Drummond during a recent press event hinted about increased antitrust scrutinity. Another reason is an independent twitter would probably be a better competitor to facebook. Divide and conquer anyone? That’s why “just” an advertising deal is less risky. Unless another big shot acquires twitter but that’s another story (A la Oracle buying Sun before IBM)

Google will most likely experiments real time on each of its product. Marissa Mayer talked about adding microblogging to search. Another cool thing Google can do: real-time microblogging with priority based on Latitude’s position. I would love updates only from people actually in the stadium while searching for “superbowl”, people actually in Paris’ streets while searching for “France demonstration” etc.

Forget real-time stuff, I want Chrome extensions..

Google with create a meshup(noun yet to be discovered) of its profile, latitude, gtalk, youtube, maps, news etc.

Location based tweeting of messages, video, images, news etc is what Google will be going forward to. All of these features will be closely integrated to their kick-ass search algorithm (I hope somebody must have tried how soon the profiles are getting indexed on Google).

Although Google will never try another facebook or tweeter but it will certainly launch a product which will certainly leverage its existing products and compete with FB and Twitter.

1) Goog’s obvious strat is to buy FB/Twitter to own realtime.

2) Barring that, they can dominate in the proprietary value creation of those third-party apps. In that context, Android is the key. Mobile is where real-time will be published and consumed.

Goog simply makes Android “the phone OS for the rest of us” and creates a centralized device with fantastic apps. Easy to say and hard to do on the consumer side. But Google can cut much more attractive deals w/ carriers than Apple will, and eventually having an iPhone will be like having a Prius. Cool, sure but so what. And Apple’s R&D, marketing and pricing will come under withering fire from way too many fronts: carriers, handset mfrs, even Google.

Given the choice between an awesome product from Apple (who’s earlier to the market) and a somewhat less awesome but also less expensive (and more open) product from someone else, people will go with someone else. Money talks. Just look at the PC market share figures for the last 30 years. Same story. Smartphone market evolution will be like PC market evolution in fast motion. And Android will gain Google an IE-size market share of real-time.

[As an aside re RSS: Twitter may have conquered RSS, but to me that says that twitter is more like RSS in the way the masses will ultimately use it.

Within 2 years, twitter will largely be a data conduit with ad-hoc protocols emerging from third parties in service of applications from third parties. 80% of twitter bits will be data servicing those apps rather than traditional tweets. ]

Like Matthieu A thinking. Searching for the Super bowel and get results from people near by. I buy that.

Twitter in its current form has the ironic condition that the more involved you get in twitter (the more followers you have, the more you write), the more cluttered and useless your “real-time” feed becomes. It becomes a “real-time” nuisance. And unless this problem is solved, the long term retention of Twitter users (which is currently horrible), will not be solved. Google will help here, not simply by “searching” in real-time, but by creating a “personalized” real-time experience possibly by offering a real-time search engine (more below).

Personalization, a concept that has already been in the Google conversation through their ambitious personalized search area, is absolutely essential in making real-time data digestable. The wealth of user data Google holds in their databases, and their advertisement personalization knowledge, will be invaluable in organizing and monetizing the knowledge from real-time sources.

One strategy discussed by many is simply purshasing Twitter. Alternately, they could unveil their own twitter and integrate it into their own products like Gmail (what is your gtalk status after all than a Twitter status?). A major step for google would be to build a real-time search engine that not only sucks in all relationships and real-time changes on Twitter, but also on every blog and other information stream known (maybe by buying FriendFeed).

Though the web has grown on the back of the asynchronous flow of information, the “instant” real-time web is rising. As we spend more and more time on the net and have the net available everywhere through our handhelds, real-time will become more relevant in the future. Google, a company who’s dream is to organize the world’s information, will not ignore this medium and hopefully will use it to become even more useful.

We all noticed the amazing source of information in Twitter when something serious happens.
So I believe Google real-time strategy could be to create a true journalism platform that replaces newspapers:
- Any person with a Google profile could be “followed”, with a simple “Follow” button on people’s Google profile
- Any people you are following would appear in Google News
- That would “friendfeedize” Google News: Enable real-time journalism with a twitter-like service
- That could join the gap between journalists, bloggers and users for real-time conversation: Comments on blogs today are like conversations in a small room. The blogger is the one setting the ambiance, jazzy or whatever. Twitter and Google News are public conversations, in earth space.
- It’s all about replacing newspapers with a journalism platform, and remunerate journalists on their audience
- Use their mobile knowledge – Google apps are available for any mobile phone platform” to enable real-time conversation from any mobile phone

Does Google have a real-time strategy and if so, how is it going to compete against Twitter and Facebook in the real-time wars given the recent death of RSS?

+Does Google has a real-time strategy?

If you consider Gmail and Google talk technologies as a real time strategy, well then yes. Google has a real time strategy. if not, i thought that connecting users through their own searches will be a nice idea. Allowing users to see the profiles of other users who are searching for the same item. also add an option to turn this feature off. The idea is to connect people through their search and increase the users involvement with current google technology like google profile,etc.

+how is it going to compete against Twitter and Facebook in the real-time wars given the recent death of RSS?

I thought it will still take a while for RSS to be completely obsolete. Twitter/facebook provides an opportunity to socialise and update their “tribe” with short text message update. But these short update is limited to the content size. while RSS has an advantage here since the content is fetched directly and aggregated into one location. Hence, Google reader is still relevant. More interesting, notification services like notify.me and notifixio.us are changing the way people receive information.

Hence, if there is a common platform for users to check who else within/or outside their social circle is also using the same platform( Google service) , then there is a chance of socialising through this common platform. While there is a common worry about privacy, therefore there should be an option to turn the feature off.

Another suggestion is to collaborate instead of competing. This can be achieve by building a bridge between all social network and Google.

Last but not least, I WANT to go for Google I/O developer event.

Thank yoU!

[...] po­st­: Te­n­ Fr­e­e­ Tick­e­ts­ to Google­ I/O De­v­… Share and [...]

Hi, sorry for the delayed comment, first let us look at Google Vs Twitter later Google Vs Facebook
1. Google will buy Twitter through its venture fund.
2. Or if not pay someone else to build it for them. That would be a lot more cost-effective in the long run than paying heavy premium for Twitter.
3.Buying other twitter competitor applications at good reasonable price, which it already owns a significant share would end up costing it less. and promotes it through google services to eat Twitters share.
4.Coming face book, Google already started Open Social platfrom and gathering the crowd to hit the gaint.

Does Google have a real-time strategy and if so, how is it going to compete against Twitter and Facebook in the real-time wars given the recent death of RSS?

There is no real-time strategy, there is plan and that plan is that while Twitter and Facebook keeps growing and developing ways to attract more and more customers, Google’s take should be that instead of re-inventing the wheel with a newer service which might take a while for customers to learn and understand they could just build a platform around those already established successful services.

I think they will be creating a new platform where services like Twitter and Facebook Connect can co-exist within the Google brand. That will be key, that will allow them to bring users from Twitter, Facebook, and any other apps to interact from within a Google branded product.

So, what’s up with all these candypies anyway, I suppose if they did, they event would be in “REAL-TIME”! Is’t that a no brainer? Demonstrate through example! CaChing- mobile isn’t even out of its diapers comparatively, perhaps all the mambojambo about the FCC’s aproval of “WIFI SUPERDUPER 4.2 USA” will provide some solutions to the “R-E-A-L” issue, har-harty-har,ha,ha!
If I win a ticket I would like to donate it to a deserving TechCrunch employee, perhaps someone sometimes underappreciated for his/her contribution to advancing technology and making the world a smaller and better place.

Warmest wishes,
Mark

Yes, Google has a real-time strategy.

The first part of that strategy, which is already underway, is to link identity across multiple activities on the net. From mail to chat to mapping to cellphones.

Once they have a whole swathe of activities identifiably ‘done’ by a given user, they can then expose or bolt-on commenting to those activities to generate a much richer stream.

Rather than having a single service (a la Twitter) which users must continually publish information into, they will leverage their existing interactions with you.

Before rushing into this question I think it’s important to consider what is meant by ‘real-time systems’ and ‘real-time strategy’.

Any provider of web-services is interested in delivering their service as quickly and as correctly as possible. Accordingly – any latency that occurs between one user adding content and another retreiving this content could be seen as being detrimental to the ‘correctness’ of the service. In the cases of Google, Twitter, and Facebook – this latency is both acceptable and inevitable. These so called ‘soft real-time systems’ generally lack hard performance requirements, provide more-or-less non-critical services, and are trying to add ‘real-time features’ more for their aesthetic, user experience benefits than for any real additional capabilities.

Somehow for a system to be considered ‘real-time’ today, it means that the user must not have to make any effort to retrieve this data other than sit idly and stare at the screen. Facebook will present a user with a ‘show 4 new posts’-type message if they’re patient enough to not refresh their news-feed every 10 minutes (which the user must then click on(!) to get this real-time data). Twitter – when accessed through their website – requires a ‘refresh’ to update (same with Google Search)! How Web 1.0!

Google certainly appears to have a real-time strategy – which seems to be – provide this so called ‘real-time’ functionality when it makes sense to! pretty simple huh. Take Google Search for instance. You hit google.com, type in your search term – then check out a couple results until you find what you’re looking for. It does exactly what the user expects it to do….simply and quickly. Sure we could imagine what ‘real-time search results’ would look like – you hit search, then sit and watch as your initial result set changes to slowly reflect the changing state of the interweb (as you point at the screen, clap your hands, and cheer?) – but would this serve any real purpose? Not for me at least. Web searching is a task of necessity – it’s not a spectator sport.

But now consider Google Finance. Every 5 to 10 seconds – stock values and calculations refresh themselves automatically – which can be pretty crucial for users/investors. In this context, ‘real-time’ results are actually quite essential for the service – and this is clearly something Google recognized and acted on (though i guess they had a lot of other examples to look to in this space). As previous commenters have mentioned – gChat, gTalk, and gMail are other great examples of Google using ‘real-time’ features when they’re appropriate.

When it comes down it, the only “real-time strategy” that makes sense – and the one that Google seems to employ – is to provide real-time services when they’re appropriate to the product and serve a real user need. I think the notion of “real-time wars” between Google, Twitter, and Facebook is a joke. All successful web services aim to be fast, current, and easy to use. And i don’t think all successful web services are at war with each other.

Thanks for listening – would love to check out Google I/O if I’m not too late!

The short answer is that Google does not HAVE a real-time search strategy. But I don’t give in to wishful thinking easily, so I wouldn’t say this is the beginning of the end for Google.

I think it sucks that Google takes months before it even notices you exist on the web. This strategy is largely responsible for most of the traffic today going to a select set of sites like the wikipedia.

The death of RSS is beyond doubt, but I think RSS was more of a bookmarking service than a search service in any case. If Google is to compete with Twitter and Facebook (Facebook is too cluttered, so I feel Twitter is the real threat) it will need to drastically change its web crawling policies and technologies, and offer people real-time searches. They don’t need to buy Twitter or even launch a similar service, but–without giving up the old-school searching–also start offering people options in terms of how current their search results should be, rather than just how ‘reliable.’

What they did with ‘news timeline’ features is actually a good beginning, but there needs to be a lot more flexibility in terms of the sources they take into account, as well as how quickly they update the results.

I think there is a battle about to be fought, but it’s not about “real-time”.

Google already has real-time information.

Google’s realtime data feed is users’ search queries. The data from these are updated hourly in the Hot Trends reports (http://www.google.com/trends). The reports shown there come from data that has been aggregated across large geographic areas, which reduce the value to users. Often the “hot” queries reflect behavior driven by mass media. For instance, right now “carrie prejean underwear” is the #1 term. So while these reports could be made more specific to the viewer of hot trends (by looking at queries from smaller regions, similar people, or use other context), they are very timely.

Google already has a few near-realtime data feeds, eg. web crawling, news feeds, stock prices, etc. They have been increasing the frequency of crawling, and I’ve noticed that new pages on the web can show up within a few hours.

So if “real-time” means “a few hours old” then Google is already done. If your definition of “real-time” goes a step further to “a few seconds old” then I’d first ask for some examples where Google’s search results aren’t adequate. One often-cited example is earthquake queries. As a SF bay area resident, I’ve used Google to search for this in the past and been pleased with the experience. The first result was the web site for the USGS, and after going to that site it was easy to find their real-time “Did you feel it” map showing earthquake information with only a few minutes delay. So while Google didn’t have the information on the results page, it took only one or two easy clicks to get there. Good enough for me. (and since then, they’ve included earthquake information on the results pages, so no clicking would be necessary now)

A more important issue is if Google will be allowed to access information held by other parties.

If the information (real-time or not) is stored on Twitter’s/Facebook’s closed system then Google would not be aware of it, and would not be able to show it in search results. One example suggesting openness is Ebay, which receives a large portion of its visitors from Google’s regular search results (as well as from paid ads on Google). Ebay gets visitors (and therefore money) from having its data appear in Google results. As long as Google remains the primary entry-point for many people, then those who want more visitors should continue to make their data available for inclusion in Google’s results.

In other words, Google should expect to get real-time data from sites like Facebook and Twitter because all parties benefit. In the case of Facebook and Twitter, it’s clear that they want more users (even if it’s not clear how money happens). Google is a provider of resources. But if Facebook/Twitter are able to become the primary web site for a large number of users, then Google has less to offer and more reason to worry about getting cut off from real-time information.

This is the core of the “real-time” debate: Will a social application replace a search application as the primary starting point for the web? For me, the answer is no – because I use the web for applications like research, email, and viewing published content. But for others who use social networks much more than I do, the answer will be yes. The browser home page will be where this contest will be decided (like others before).

To get a view on that question: Does anyone know how many people have Facebook/Twitter as their browser home page or keep it open in a browser or widget all day?

Dan

and RSS isn’t dead. it’s similar to Twitter but different. There is room for both, just like there is room for magazines as well as postcards in my post office box.

PROMPT: Does Google have a real-time strategy and if so, how is it going to compete against Twitter and Facebook in the real-time wars given the recent death of RSS?

A. RESPONSE:

In my response I will branch on three different themes: RSS is not quite dead, yet; Google already has real-time information; and some bad satire regarding Google’s upcoming real-time strategy (RTS).

I. RSS IS NOT DEAD YET

Steve, I know you (and Mike, and others) famously believe that RSS is dead. The truth of the matter is that it isn’t. Twitter has not yet emerged as a solution, because it doesn’t solve my problem: I want to read a specific set of blogs, and sometimes, all I want to do is sit down and read all the information. The best way for me to do this right now is with Bloglines, where my OPML file contains ~20 blog RSS feeds. Now, some information is more important to me than others, and some news I’d rather get real-time.

Twitter, with its real-time feed, could eventually solve this for me. It would require some implementation of “preferred tweets” – that is, Tweets from sources that I’ve marked as important, or that have been re-broadcast X# of times.

Preferred tweets should be bookmarked, so I can read them whenever and they do not get lost in the feed. I do not like sifting through scores of irrelevant tweets.

Now, Twitter needs to hire some experts with finite state markov models to solve this problem, because it’s really hard and non-intuitive to determine the true weight of a node, because its value is determined in relation to other nodes, whose weights are constantly changing in a very elastic graph. It’s a problem I don’t fully understand, and can’t articulate very well, but I recognize there is a problem. I will draw this analogy:

I have 10 followers. The # of my followers isn’t most important per se, but the relative weight of all of THEIR followers. But some of them follow me, too. So the problem is tricky.

This follower-importance function also needs to only solve “importance” with respect to specific tweeted topics, so it must be a very efficient solution.

(There is also the problem of building up a good network of people to follow – the opposite of marketing gambits for attracting a good set of followers.)

II. GOOGLE – ORGANIZING THE WORLD’S INFORMATION

Google already has a lot of real-time data. The most important asset that Twitter brings to the table, in my opinion, is geolocation information attached to tweets. So, you can figure out what sort of population density exists at a given time – for example, it’d be useful for figuring out traffic trends. Even if the information is anonymous (“a person exists in this vague radius”), and only tracked in densely-populated areas (for privacy concerns), it’s quite useful.

Why do I really care about real-time data for SEARCH, besides trending topics? Twitter solves this problem, but so does Google! Just think of Twitter users’ Tweets as isomorphic to Google users’ searches. Google has the engineering power to determine what trends are emerging in real-time, if they wanted to disclose it. Have you ever been to the Google HQ and seen the LED signs with scrolling real-time searches?

III. GOOGLE RTS

Google does indeed have a real-time strategy. GoogleWars 2000 will have you pitted against drones from Facebook and Twitter. You mine for resources in the company cafeterias. The Googler race clearly has an advantage, here, with all their luxury cafeterias (despite reduced benefits in this “down economy”). However, when it comes to battle, Googlers are fatigued due to bureacracy, and the Twitter race takes the advantage there.

B. PLEADING:

I. CHOOSE ME

I am a young “Hackepreneur” who is set to graduate from University soon, and I am looking for a job/inspiration. My paltry student finances preclude me from attendance and a ticket subsidized by TechCrunch would be just wonderful.

II. THANKS

Thanks for your consideration, despite the fact that I elected to disagree with your “RSS is dead” post.

My google search plug-in crashed today. I didn’t know how to get to my favourite websites such as Facebook and Twitter. The 5th most searched term on Google is Google. Google is the gatekeeper to the web, even for themselves. If google says ‘thou shall not pass’ then it is so.

why is my comment not searchable not searchable & show up ?!? see it on my blog

This response shows why your contest give away is a bad idea. Some boneheads yammering on about how they think they understand tech while also kissing the TC ass, boring. I’d rather read a schonfeld post. All you free ride losers should just fork over the cash, or at worst, just sneak in.

Heh…

You didn’t finish the question, though.

At the moment, I do not believe that Google is entrenched in “the real-time wars”. Google has far more advanced weaponry in its arsenal to make “real-time” data more available (in terms of speed and reliability), scalable (x years of archived/indexed formerly-real-time data), and relevant (showing keyword or category based results ordered not only by freshness, but by relevance/significance).

There are certain sources of data/information/events in the Twitter and Facebook real-time status realm that may be of value beyond “the now”; however, I am certain that we will derive very little value from 99% of historical “real-time” data in the form of 140 to 255 character status updates in the short (now+30 minutes) and long (> tomorrow) term.

When blogs became more popular, we used to discuss the fears of blurring the line between facts and fiction/fantasy, and how that would play on search result relevancy. Google even built a separate search index/interface specifically targeting the blogosphere. The same thing can easily be done by Google for the “statusphere”.. applying clever and powerful search algorithms to weed out the spam and noise. However, Google is driven by purpose-based engineering, and the question that begs to be asked is, “What’s the actual purpose of this?”

Also, “Death of RSS” sounds like a story headline from The Onion. Twitter is not a substitute for blogs. Blogs are not a substitute for investigative journalism. This comment, however, *IS* a substitute for a ticket of admission to Google I/O. I’ll reciprocate with breakfast/dinner @ Mel’s Diner on Mission.

You’re a student.. admission is only $50.

Then, they should buy me a student ticket.

P.S., TechCrunch team: Facebook Connect hasn’t yet been implemented for page 2 replies

Google has a synchronous (realtime) strategy that will likely consist of leveraging voice and text via its Grandcentral platform (http://grandcentral.com/ and http://tinyurl.com/c4xxzo) “utterfail”

Google’s synchronous strategy will likely consist of leveraging voice and text via its Grandcentral platform

Google will aggressively pursue real-time search the same way as it has pursued its OpenSocial and iGoogle strategy. Instead of trying to own the underlying real-time data, they will serve as an open platform to aggregate meaningful real-time information and present it in a relevant search way.

In doing so, Google can aggregate real-time data from Twitter, FriendFeed, blog comments, etc. The challenge will be aggregating data from Facebook, which has been a very closed system in the past (and it has failed to date work with Facebook for their OpenSocial\FriendConnect\or iGoogle initializes). Without Facebook, the Google real-time strategy could result in a dichotomy, as has happened with the Facebook platform vs. the OpenSocial platform.

Well I hope I’m not too late for this but I believe that Google does have a strategy. Currently, if you view a real-time search on Twitter or Facebook it will give an answer to a question. Example: who just got booted off of American Idle.
Your likely to get several responses with the persons name who was kicked off, or if you search twitter for a keyword using one of the search trends it will give you all the results with those words in it.
However, Twitter and Facebook search doesn’t currently provide you with actual concrete details or entire stories about the hot trends. Which kind of makes it a spam machine or just plain useless for getting really useful information in real-time. That’s where google comes in. I believe Google will index all of the popular twitter search queries and trends using popular link shortening services like bit.ly, digg, is.gd and other sites that currently take advantage of the twitter API in order to index popular topics in real-time time like tweetmeme for example.
Then offer users detailed or more specific information related to a specific query. Basically google will enrich all of the real-time search capabilities of twitter, facebook using the data from shortened URL’s by pulling the actual stories from the shortened URL’s and relating them to those real-time trends. Then integrating it all into its own search.

That’s my take on it.

Never mind it posted Sorry site admin but I am still getting a facebook error pop-up

Declaring RSS dead is a first fatal flaw in the premise of contextualizing “Real Time.” Not everything happens at the rate of TWeeTS. Just like we have different senses separating input we process as well as different nervous system networks managing our body functions, “Real Time” is more than one data source. RSS is far from irrelevant and it triggers many development networks.

Google is a 24/7 operation, I don’t know how much more real time you can get. They have crawled your web site handled your search, delivered you ads, put a phone in your hands and an OS on phones. Google provides Cloud services for Billions of activity hours, and is wanting to provide the routing of those activity hours through it’s development with OpenSocial.

By it’s diversity, Google has seen your fleeting TWeeTs, and raised you with an African Parrot. (Birds and Poker- eh) An African Parrot has a vocabulary that not only can chirp, tweet and whistle, it can do it in the languages of other species. The strategy is not relying on the one card turning up to make your bets pay off, as if the whole story is how/when will Twitter monetize it’s shimmering brilliance. The Real Time Strategy is staying at the table, or hell, owning the table/the house and running multiple games.

Steve There are all kinds of tools we pick up and put down. And buggy whips are still used very infrequently today. But Steve, just because you haven’t used an RSS reader like you used to do it doesn’t make RSS dead.

The key word is relevancy Steve. Making an outrageous dogmatic claim announcing, declaring the death of RSS is the myopic stunt of old media trying to sell papers. It can work, YOU will get some attention. You might even find some diamonds in the rough in reactions to the stunt. But overall the perception of integrity will be lost in the sheering grind of the voice above the din.

The hawker can be right all the time, because their message is selling the message/the show/the media. That doesn’t necessarily make them a part of the conversation, or endear them to the conversation. That isolation is part of the hawker’s drama, it disconnects the message being conveyed, and shifts the focus to personality.

Holding meaning close and keeping it relevant is not just about opinion. Shaping opinion or the faddish Meme/buzz word/talking point/sound bite/topic-of-the-day is Political Drama. The real time relevancy is not just a binary switch set to tell you all the things you want to hear, like a private yesman, nor is it just the filtered elephant talk you want me to pay attention to as though it were full of profound meaning.

It is not the data holding meaning. It is not just what you say, it is how you say it. Old media deadlines getting the story out to the hawker, commoditize words, drawing on their mediocrity. That routine grinds the fine details off the story, and what is lost is the humanity. Putting teeth on a story or spinning it is again a matter of politics. That may have relevancy, it may not. We would have to discuss it, shake the grind dust off it, sharpen it back up, working it in commonality, by attributing meaning.

It is us as humanity taking the time to invest not in the mediocre impulsive immediacy, but the commonality. The word “mean” root of “meaning” is a math equation too, which if we allow the the reduction to the limited average alone we once again will have embraced the mediocrity. The middle the commonality does not have to eliminate all differences. Compromises have two edges. They can cut one way or another, in favor of one or another. As well they can cut both ways with the point thrusting with the mean brutality that only ends in isolation.

I believe the relevancy of compromise to Real Time strategies is understanding. While the blunt end of a stick can create a different understanding than the pointy end, those understandings are yet different than the understanding of differences not in opposition or competition to the commonality, but the contextual relevancy shaping the meeting of conversation and dialog.

Irresistible force meets immovable object. The classic paradox. Persuasion meets judgment, grock meets the 40 second live delay, Pretense meets Real Time.

If Real Time existed Steve what would we do with the fantasies of our ideals? Would we dream anymore? Where would time be marching toward? …just ticking into the future? Real Time should be as scary as a perfect circle, an infinite loop. The differences are as important as the commonality, as the commonalities are as important as the differences. Time is an irrational reference point to stop us from getting motion sickness: Time is a Dramamine.

What is that thing that has changed from where we were when we began and where we are now? What transpires across the distances that differentiates you and I or says Yes we hold this place in common? Is real time a pseudonym for the quest to a deeper meaning in peace for it’s own sake, not as the aftermath or in the midst of chaos? How many licks does it take to get to the tootsie roll center? To ask the owl is to question Athena, to bring wisdom to the city state.

Maybe I’m being too literal in finding the solution presented in the question, but what if Google bought Bill Mahr’s HBO Show for the title, and that would be their Real Time strategy. They would show android cell phone videos, and take calls about google services between ads. Real Time as a showcase for the wondrous corporate culture that is google.

It seems that Google has one.

With newly-added feature for Android: upload video to youtube (other phones very soon), Google easily creates a new site realtime.youtube.com and let all Android/other smartphone users upload their videos to the site.

Google can limit the text send along with the video within 140 characters as Twitter does, creating a conception of being short and real time. The author of the video can add a longer text file to attach with the video later. The initial text of 140 characters can be used like a title.

It is even better if Google let users directly stream the video from their phone to Google youtube, i.e. NOT making the video and then upload. This likes using the phone as a camera to capture the real time video and transfer the real-time video directly to youtube, like a reporter’s reporting news in real time.

If Google can offer this, it’s huge. Not only this can be used as an interactive multimedia format twitter-like users, but potentially become a serious news-report format for all amateur/professional reporters.

I believe twitter would offer video-twitter very soon. So the sooner Google offers this, the better to capture the market.

When the 4th generation wireless technology (Wimax/LTE) is available & popular, this potentially becomes a huge environment for real-time news reporting.

& Google suddenly has a vast environment to get real-time news, can AP, AFP, etc. match that? and a vast environment for ads.

Ggfantx

And I’d like to add some more.

Google can limit users to upload/stream a video of 140 seconds (over 2 minutes) to create the conception of real-time (short and instant)

Ggfantx

I’d like to add some more about social networking real-time impacts.

If what I discuss above in place, users can create their groups on realtime.youtube.com and post/upload/stream their videos their.

It means that users are doing both real-time twitter & facebook activities at the same time. The difference is that at a higher level with real-time videos.

For examples, 2 friends in the same group can stream 2 real-time videos to the group and by that way, they actually can do “social” activities with each other even they are currently thousands of miles apart: real-time and interactive! Not only both of them can see all these interactive videos, all other users can see their videos, sharing the social activities.

People will really love it: for examples, 2 children of the same family are attending different graduation ceremonies at the same time: all the friends, relatives, etc. can share their joy.

Ggfantx

that is a really great point, why limit youtube channels just to video? they could easily add microblogging services to youtube channels, they would go together so well. with direct upload/streaming from phones they will have geotagging available as well giving us a massive about of realtime, localized video and text.

Matthew you won one of the free tickets. COntact me at steve@techcrunch.com for the code

Zachary
contact me at steve@techcrunch.com for your reg code

Anyone actually get a free ticket to this thing? I was told I was a winner and then admission info never came (after getting work off)!

weeeeeeeeeak.

really could’ve used that free Android phone to hack on.

please send me email at steve at techcrunch.com as I can’t reach you at anonymous at mac.com

I was one of the ‘winners’. I emailed you last night.

Thanks guys for the free tickets I found the IO conference pretty useful and fun. The free Android phone was a complete surprise … will try to build some apps on that..

But, once again.. thanks a bunch !!

Google Wave == tools behind a real-time strategy of our own making

Thanks for the ticket, TechCrunch and Steve. Google I/O is very useful. Many of the OpenSocial and AppEngine scalability sessions are very applicable to what we are working on. I am glad that many of the AppEngine sessions dive inside AppEngine to show how they store and query using BigTable.
Now that they’ve given me a free phone, I might be building some Android app too.
Thank you.

Well, Google Wave is much much more beyond Google’s own real time strategy… If successful, from a technical perspective, it will change the face of email/IM/Blogs/Wikis etc ie building blocks of collaboration we know till now..

Apps like these, which rely on upcoming Specs (HTML5, the new XMPP based Wave protocol, CSS3 tomorrow etc) first of all make desktop apps look irrelevant.

From a business perspective, Microsoft’s outlook could become irrelevant. Then, MS office can become irrelevant as one starts to build realtime collabative editing supported Docs apps.
Browsers which support latest specs will take over. Microsoft IE will be forced to implement them or just go into oblivion…

Loosely put, the ultimate stategy is to replace desktop computing with “WebTop” computing.

And now there is Buzz. They are leveraging other systems like Twitter with a heavy emphasis on location.

Any IO tickets for 2010?

I need 2 google io tix for tomorrow? can pay with paypal…can anyone help me? Please call 203.820.6048. Can pay $800 each.