[1/7] from: petr::krenzelok::trz::cz at: 11-May-2001 20:14
----- Original Message ----- From: "Porter Woodward" <[woodward--shore--net]> To: <[rebol-list--rebol--com]> Sent: Friday, May 11, 2001 7:22 PM Subject: [REBOL] Groove?
> Hey - > > Please, everyone who is able - take a look at: > > http://www.groove.net/
Thanks Porter, I will check it out. I already heard the name (Groove) ... But ... we need some "killer" app/functionality in Rebol. I thought dialect base protocols would be cool, but am not able to implement them myself probably :-) Cheers, -pekr-
[2/7] from: jseq:mediaone at: 11-May-2001 14:34
I've been using Groove the application for about 6 months and find it invaluable to collaborate on projects with small teams. It's file sharing, chat, security and replication are so brain-dead simple that I've gotten many diverse groups and running very faster than you could spell Intranet. Thus inspired, I looked more into Groove the platform for P2P app delivery. Specifically, I looked into trying to write some code that would ride on top of their APIs so that I could deliver a better photo-sharing app to end-users. It wasn't a very straightforward process, and non-crossplatform COM is a major turn-off. A very approachable compromise would be to use Groove's file sharing to distribute Rebol scripts with embedded data. I started prototyping something like this to deliver a photo-browsing View application, embedding JPGs into my REBOL files (so I didn't have to deal with Groove's storage API). As much as I would like the architectural cleanliness of a REBOL-only solution, using Groove to bootstrap a subset of Link functionality was pretty attractive. I think under this scenario you'd only be on the hook for the View run-time licenses. Since it's not really clear how Groove will treat either small developers or alternate platforms in terms of pricing, licensing and development roadmap, I would hesitate to code anything that relies any more heavily on that platform. JS [johnseq--pobox--com] http://www.pobox.com/~johnseq 5/11/01 1:22:51 PM, Porter Woodward <[woodward--shore--net]> wrote:
[3/7] from: carl:rebol at: 11-May-2001 11:45
Porter, Yes, very familiar with it for many months... We were not that impressed, but then we are hard to impress. However, I do like Groove's marketing message, and it takes more than one company to make a market. They will help open a lot of minds. I think of REBOL as a lightweight & quicker approach to what Groove spent $50 million doing. That is, we could write Groove in REBOL in a couple months, but you could not write REBOL in Groove any time soon. REBOL is a true distributed computing platform, it is a powerful next generation architecture, where Groove is essentially a stack of COM and XML plug-ins that only run under Windows. Currently, REBOL/View runs on 26 platforms other than Windows. (This is important because so much of the back end of the Internet does not run on windows... and DC needs to run on both sides of the wire, not just on the client.) But I agree... Groove does have a slick UI.... and I'm hoping that perhaps a few folks on this email list may get inspired to knock out a version of it for REBOL. I think that would be very cool... and I think it could be done by an expert REBOLer in a couple weeks, at least for the GUI side of it. For the back end, we've already created it... It's called REBOL/Express. In summary, REBOL's vision is much broader and deeper than Groove. We have created a true technological advancement that will lead to a brighter future for distributed Internet applications. In fact, our vision is similar to that of the original Web... except that we seek a world of open inter-operability of distributed applications rather than just the distribution of document pages. So, I think I'm in total agreement with the spirit of your email. Let's see what we can do as a group to create an "Open Groove" written entirely in REBOL! Great idea, Porter. Let's go for it! -Carl Sassenrath Founder & CTO REBOL Technologies At 5/11/01 01:22 PM -0400, you wrote:
[4/7] from: woodward:shore at: 11-May-2001 15:53
On Fri, 11 May 2001, Carl Sassenrath wrote:
> I think of REBOL as a lightweight & quicker approach to what Groove > spent $50 million doing. That is, we could write Groove in REBOL
<<quoted lines omitted: 6>>> windows... and DC needs to run on both sides of the wire, not just > on the client.)
That has been my major "beef" with Groove so far - Windows & COM - and it's pretty much built up on top of all that. Not that that is a bad thing - it's about the most impressive thing I've seen done to utilize all that code that's in Windows so far. REBOL does have a leg up in the platform arena though - people are always amazed when I let them know how many systems it can run on. The fact that REBOL can run on so many platforms would make it ideal to address 2 major shortcomings in Groove's implementation (I won't say architecture, because that's something they have really done their homework on). 1> Relay servers. Probably implemented in a very similar fashion to the client - as in Windows/COM only. 2> BOT servers. Automated agents that you can invite to a shared space - again pretty much restricted to Windows/COM only.
> But I agree... > Groove does have a slick UI.... and I'm hoping that perhaps a few
<<quoted lines omitted: 3>>> for the GUI side of it. For the back end, we've already created > it... It's called REBOL/Express.
Overall it's a pretty slick package - friends of mine who are not techies have been suitably impressed by the shiny trinkets that it gives them. The instant messaging and voice chat are not new by any means - but their ubiquity within the application certainly is. It's overall ease of use is extremely high - however, having poked thru the developers docs, and tried my hand at some of the tutorial samples I'll have to say that new application development isn't trivial. Especially if you really intend to extend it in some new way. If you really just want to repackage the existing functionality in a new way and change their behavior a bit - then it's not such a big deal. Of course, REBOL is easier... Much easier.
> So, I think I'm in total agreement with the spirit of your email. > Let's see what we can do as a group to create an "Open Groove" > written entirely in REBOL! Great idea, Porter.
I think the most important tasks to get that going would be: 1> Digital Certificates for public/private key encryption. 2> Delta engine to capture and transmit user actions to participants. 3> Storage engine to persist data on each participants system. 4> Relay service to bounce initial contact, and do store-and-forward. I'm sure there are a lot of other tasks to get something like this really rolling - UI-wise there are a whole lot of things to build. But, I definitely think it would be possible to build a Groove-alike in REBOL - if only because it's possible to send bits of REBOL code to one another. The cranky bits are getting the encryption and signing standard in place (I won't say infrastructure because it's distributed) - developing a protocol to use to do that. Then writing a reusable engine that is a no-brainer to use in /View layouts to enable the capture and transmission of events as delta transactions to other systems. Following that a good way to persist data on each participants system... But, even having said that, I think it's possible. Maybe not by me - I'm no expert with REBOL (I'm better with Java, C++, VB, etc) - but I think it's doable. - Porter
[5/7] from: thundrebol::yahoo at: 11-May-2001 13:01
Hi-- I've just read some posts about Groove and I figured I'd add my own $.02. My initial impression of Groove was great. The UI looks really slick, plus it was neat that I didn't have to do anything to start using it; no proxy or network configuration was required. It's also clever the way they use e-mail as a way to virally attract (invite) new users. After a few sessions of using Groove, the novelty began to wear off. Although it appears to be slick, the UI can be confusing and clunky at times. Some tools add new layers of tabs often with the duplicate labels. Probably most disappointing was the sluggishness of the application. Chat really didn't feel like chat because of the excessive network latency. This didn't make sense to me, because I could chat with these same people using REBOL/Express and responses registered within 2 seconds. Your milage may vary, but I found many of the apps plagued by slow UI interaction. In a nutshell, Groove alone isn't a killer app. It's a platform (that's better than many) that's looking for a killer app. //Ed --- Porter Woodward <[woodward--shore--net]> wrote:
[6/7] from: woodward:shore at: 11-May-2001 16:53
On Fri, 11 May 2001, Ed O'Connor wrote:
> After a few sessions of using Groove, the novelty > began to wear off. Although it appears to be slick, > the UI can be confusing and clunky at times. Some > tools add new layers of tabs often with the duplicate > labels.
Yeah - the tabbed interface can be a little clunky. Not sure how to pack more into a space though; UI metaphores have a long way to go. One of the skins "cellular" was almost unusable. I almost wish the interface had retractable panels - kind of like the bookmarks panel under Mozilla.
> Probably most disappointing was the sluggishness of > the application. Chat really didn't feel like chat
<<quoted lines omitted: 3>>> within 2 seconds. Your milage may vary, but I found > many of the apps plagued by slow UI interaction.
I usually don't have any trouble with the latency. Generally much faster than 2 seconds - but then again I have a 100baseT LAN at home with an SDSL connection to the 'net. Also of all the systems I've used Groove on, the slowest was a K6-II 300MHz. Also keep in mind that Groove is always encrypting everything - as it goes onto disk, and out to the net. The MVC architecture has 2 additional layers in terms of managing the distribution of UI commands. So, as you click, and type - these events are queued up for processing against the local store, and packaged up as XML and encrypted for relay to the other participants in the shared space. In turn as the model executes these events - the persisted data is encrypted in stored in an XML object store! So, yeah it's not super fast. But - for better or worse, the bet is that people will get faster computing power at their disposal, and faster connections to the 'net.
> In a nutshell, Groove alone isn't a killer app. It's a > platform (that's better than many) that's looking for > a killer app.
Agreed... - Porter Woodward
[7/7] from: woodward:shore at: 11-May-2001 13:22
Hey - I'm sure some of you are already on the loop on this. But, have you all had a chance to check out Groove? While it is Windows only (right now) I would urge you all to try and take a look. Groove software lets you create secure shared spaces wher you make instant and direct online connections with others to share information and get things done... The Groove client and platform reside securely on the individual's PC, not on a Web site or server, giving users control over how, when and with whom they interact. The Groove client includes tools for voice, and text-based communications, file sharing, and many other interactive activities, while the Groove platform supports standard development languages, built in security and an XML code base, making it easy to build additional tools as needed... In short, it's pretty slick. The entirety of a shared space (all files, messages, pictures, sketchpads, notepads, outlines, etc) resides on the hard-disk of every participant of the shared space. It is secure both on-the-wire and on-disk (ie. encrypted). It uses the exchange of public keys to enable secure, instant messaging - as well as the exchange of changes to the shared space. I have the sneaking suspicion that one could do some of this with Rebol/View/Pro (encryption is a must). Groove is currently based on COM - which despite their developer docs to the contrary - is still pretty much a Windows only technology. Almost all of the "tools" in a space are built around standard COM objects, or around the framework of COM objects that Groove provides. So - like I said, some of this sort of thing could certainly be done with Rebol/View/Pro; even more could be done if you simply leveraged the COM objects they already provide - but then you would loose most of the cross-platform capability that Rebol provides. Please, everyone who is able - take a look at: http://www.groove.net/ - Porter Woodward
- Quoted lines have been omitted from some messages.
View the message alone to see the lines that have been omitted