Shareflow: it's kind of like Google Wave, but... not?(zenbe.com)
zenbe.com
Shareflow: it's kind of like Google Wave, but... not?
http://www.zenbe.com/shareflow
http://www.zenbe.com/shareflow
9 comments
Hi, I'm one of the developers of Shareflow. Although we are flattered by the comparisons to the amazing work Google is doing on Wave, it's true that we are lacking some of the innovative features Wave provides (open protocol, federation, Operational Transformation data sync).
That said Shareflow was conceived of without any knowledge that Google was working on Wave and developed with limited resources on a tight timeline. When we kicked off the project earlier this year, we discussed our ideal vision for Shareflow which looked a lot like wave (open protocol, federation, pluggable widget architecture, integration with external sites); however, as a small team focused on becoming profitable, we decided to focus on getting a product out there for people to use first.
The day Google Wave was announced there was a mix of excitement, tech envy and some frustration in the office about Google releasing something similar to what we had envisioned. Now we are looking forward to the possibilities that Wave opens. A company of Google's size has the ability to push paradigm shifting innovations and new standards. As people become used to new forms of communication and collaboration I believe there will be more opportunity for products like Shareflow. The fact that Google is making Wave an open system means there will hopefully be an ecosystem of products communicating on this emerging standard. As a company focused on innovating in personal and group communication, we're following it closely.
We're continuing to build out Shareflow based on our users feedback. Thanks for checking it out!
That said Shareflow was conceived of without any knowledge that Google was working on Wave and developed with limited resources on a tight timeline. When we kicked off the project earlier this year, we discussed our ideal vision for Shareflow which looked a lot like wave (open protocol, federation, pluggable widget architecture, integration with external sites); however, as a small team focused on becoming profitable, we decided to focus on getting a product out there for people to use first.
The day Google Wave was announced there was a mix of excitement, tech envy and some frustration in the office about Google releasing something similar to what we had envisioned. Now we are looking forward to the possibilities that Wave opens. A company of Google's size has the ability to push paradigm shifting innovations and new standards. As people become used to new forms of communication and collaboration I believe there will be more opportunity for products like Shareflow. The fact that Google is making Wave an open system means there will hopefully be an ecosystem of products communicating on this emerging standard. As a company focused on innovating in personal and group communication, we're following it closely.
We're continuing to build out Shareflow based on our users feedback. Thanks for checking it out!
Great work, I am trying it.
It is very easy to sign up. But I cannot find the link to log in once you already signed up.
Also the "Mail log in" is confusing. I was trying to use it to log in to Shareflow.
It is very easy to sign up. But I cannot find the link to log in once you already signed up.
Also the "Mail log in" is confusing. I was trying to use it to log in to Shareflow.
guys amazing job. i really like it. they are always naysayers. same people mocked at Tonido before opera unite come into the picture. Internet is big place. You will get your share.
best of luck to you, its a great idea. I hope your learn to live harmoniously with Google.
Everybody's right in that it's a) not free, b) not an open protocol, and c) not a huge quantum leap past message boards, but I gotta tell you: I was interested in this anyway because I am desperate at this point. I am so sick of email—a dozen individual messages being sent one at a time between one person and another, out of multiple participants, somehow magically supposed to be forming a single conversation; people sending individual copies of a document, editing them, then replying all with a new version, et cetera. It's maddening.
So, what do people do? Generally speaking, one's coworkers are simply not going to sign up for a web app if it's not simple and obvious to them. Email is easy. What tools DO people use like this, to create centralized, threaded conversations, that don't require you to create a new account or pay $6 a month for what (so often) amounts to a message board?
So, what do people do? Generally speaking, one's coworkers are simply not going to sign up for a web app if it's not simple and obvious to them. Email is easy. What tools DO people use like this, to create centralized, threaded conversations, that don't require you to create a new account or pay $6 a month for what (so often) amounts to a message board?
In my ideal world a software (or any other) team would agree that any decision, spec, design, procedure, etc., would all live in a wiki (e.g. download and install http://twiki.org). It's structured but very flexible.
The team would use IM, e-mail, etc. to discuss these things, but anything of substance would be kept in the wiki. The wiki would be interlinked with a source code repository (e.g. subversion), a bug-tracking system, and a large file-share (the share is only for storing common data sets, DVD/CD images, documentation, 3rd party source, large data files/file-sets too large to store in bug-tracking, support info, etc. ... BUT NOT DESIGN OR OTHER DOCS, except maybe snapshots of Perl-pod or doxygen or javadoc or other auto-generated documentation from source code). Everyone would only work on stuff in that federated system ... no critical docs floating around in e-mail or file shares -- everything's in the Wiki.
One would structure Wiki to track these things:
The team would use IM, e-mail, etc. to discuss these things, but anything of substance would be kept in the wiki. The wiki would be interlinked with a source code repository (e.g. subversion), a bug-tracking system, and a large file-share (the share is only for storing common data sets, DVD/CD images, documentation, 3rd party source, large data files/file-sets too large to store in bug-tracking, support info, etc. ... BUT NOT DESIGN OR OTHER DOCS, except maybe snapshots of Perl-pod or doxygen or javadoc or other auto-generated documentation from source code). Everyone would only work on stuff in that federated system ... no critical docs floating around in e-mail or file shares -- everything's in the Wiki.
One would structure Wiki to track these things:
* dev teams & their to-do lists & related stuff & diaries
* research into systems with which software being
developed must integrate
* software procedures (how to build, continuously
integrate, etc.) ... any new team member should
be able to consult this and know how to build,
test, and deploy the product
* products and product lines
* releases
* fun stuff, links to online videos, restaurant reviews,
pictures from Friday afternoon margarita fest, etc.
Even the most expensive plan, $80/month, is limited to 200 "flows". So it's not a viable email replacement in the way it seems like Wave might be.
http://www.zenbe.com/shareflow/plans
http://www.zenbe.com/shareflow/plans
We've been using Shareflow internally for many months. think of Flows more as folders in email rather than conversations. In our expeience of using Shareflow internally for many months even 30 flows is a lot for a user. Hope that helps.
Looks like it came before Google Wave
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GpJEA-dMhDA&feature=chann...
Looks like a message board to me. A lot of these types of technologies seems like variations on what's been accomplished with message boards and bbs's.
I agree.
Where is the innovation? Packing a mashup with a forum thread isn't all that amazing.
One day, an entrepreneur will come up with a business collaboration tool that isn't based off a message board or a wiki.
Where is the innovation? Packing a mashup with a forum thread isn't all that amazing.
One day, an entrepreneur will come up with a business collaboration tool that isn't based off a message board or a wiki.
> One day, an entrepreneur will come up with a business collaboration tool that isn't based off a message board or a wiki.
I don't think that's really possible, as you're likely defining "message board" as "individual contributors make individual contributions over time" and "wiki" as "individual contributors co-author centralized contributions." There aren't really any other approaches to collaboration, online or off.
I don't think that's really possible, as you're likely defining "message board" as "individual contributors make individual contributions over time" and "wiki" as "individual contributors co-author centralized contributions." There aren't really any other approaches to collaboration, online or off.
It does have live updates which changes things contextually.
We are following Wave protocol. Shareflow will implement it once it settles.
95% of what interests me about Google Wave is that it's an open protocol that anyone can implement. So, I'm 5% interested in this.
Shareflow and Wave address a common issue that everybody has to figure out: what to use instead of email, that old-warhorse
There have to be better ways for teams to work together
Shareflow looks like it is one way!
There have to be better ways for teams to work together
Shareflow looks like it is one way!
Nahh.. it is more like drop.io. But drop.io is better.