backtop


Print 24 comment(s) - last by DrApop.. on Nov 27 at 8:06 PM


RIP Google Wave, along with many other Google products   (Source: engadget.com)
This is the third installment in the fall spring-cleaning series

Back in September, Google announced that it would be conducting a fall spring-cleaning over the coming months in order to eliminate the products that aren't providing the expected results and focus on those that are. It is now in the third phase of this cleaning process.

Google has announced the elimination of seven products/initiatives in its latest bout of cleaning. These seven items include Google Bookmarks Lists, Google Friend Connect, Google Wave, Google Gears, Google Search Timeline, Knol and Renewable Energy Cheaper than Coal.

Google Bookmarks Lists allowed users to share bookmarks with friends. It will end December 19, 2011, but all bookmarks within lists will remain. Google Bookmarks will run normally.

Google Friend Connect gives webmasters the ability to add social features to their websites via a specific code. This will be eliminated for all non-Blogger sites starting March 1, 2012.

Google Wave is both a conversation and a document where users are allowed to communicate and work together via text, photos, videos, etc. It will become read-only on January 31, 2012, and will be turned off completely April 30, 2012.

Google Gears was a browser that was eliminated in March, but starting December 1, 2011, its email and calendars will say goodbye as well. In late December, it will be impossible to download Gears altogether.

Google Search Timeline is a graph of historical trends. Users will still be able to search particular time periods via refinement tools on the search page.

Knol helps experts work together on "in-depth articles." From May 1, 2012 to October 1, 2012, Knols will be available for download but will not be viewable. After October 1, it will cease.

The Renewable Energy Cheaper than Coal initiative aimed to lower the costs of renewable energy, but Google mentioned that other institutions are "better positioned" to take this matter head on. It published its results, but will end its efforts. However, Google is present in many other renewable energy efforts, such as a $75 million residential solar panel venture and offshore wind turbine projects.

Google started its fall spring-cleaning in early September when it eliminated products like Aardvark, Google Pack, Image Labeler, and Fast Flip. It continued cleaning in a second session in October, where Code Search, Google Buzz, Jaiku, iGoogle, and the University Research Program for Google Search were removed.

Source: The Official Google Blog



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: How to make cheap renewable energy...
By corduroygt on 11/23/2011 1:39:43 PM , Rating: 1
How about making everyone do it for the sake of getting in shape and lowering healthcare costs for everyone?


By bugleyman on 11/23/2011 1:44:28 PM , Rating: 2
Hey, I'm all for cardiovascular health, but the idea that this could "generate" energy is simply nonsense.


RE: How to make cheap renewable energy...
By NihilistZerO on 11/23/2011 2:00:56 PM , Rating: 2
How about the gubment stop "making" people do so much and let the markets function on their own.


RE: How to make cheap renewable energy...
By gamerk2 on 11/23/2011 3:44:33 PM , Rating: 4
quote:
How about the gubment stop "making" people do so much and let the markets function on their own.


Because free markets lead directly to monopolism, which eventually leads to economic stagnation and depression. Every attempt at a pure free-market has ended in abject failure due to economic collapse, hence why most are open-markets with government regulation in an attempt to keep the wealth evenly distributed [success varies by nation; the US is back to 1900's era wealth distribution, with predictable economic results.]

Frankly, if we had a Federal Work Program directly run by the Federal Government, instead of the Stimulus package, we'd be doing a heck of a lot better then we are now [via multiplyer effect, as a result of the middle/lower classes having and spending more money]. But that wasn't politically acceptable, so we went with the cheapest possible option, and got results to match.

Its sad, but the economy has moved basically according to Keynesian theory. With no middle class spending to drive the economy, there is no increases to consumer demand, adn thus no reason for business to hire more workers to increase supply [and no amount of tax cedits will change that fact]. Hence the case for more direct intervention.


By Jedi2155 on 11/23/2011 4:30:08 PM , Rating: 2
The market has already attempted, and the numbers don't sound so good.

http://spectrum.ieee.org/green-tech/conservation/t...


RE: How to make cheap renewable energy...
By ebakke on 11/23/2011 2:58:51 PM , Rating: 2
If Bob wants to eat 32 cheese burgers a week, doesn't want to work out, and is willing to pay for his quadruple bypass (and/or risk death) why do I care?


RE: How to make cheap renewable energy...
By gamerk2 on 11/23/2011 3:54:57 PM , Rating: 3
Heres the problem though: Bob gets treated even if he doesn't have the money to pay. So in order to sustain a profit [healthcare is a business, after all], everyone else has to pay higher rates to cover for Bob not paying his bills.

So as the US population gets fatter and unhealthier, and as the middle class continues to shrink, healthcare costs will continue to skyrocket, as there is no mechanism to keep prices in check.

Hence why mandatory insurance is a good cost-cutting measure: The insurance companies would be the ones on the hook to pay for Bob if he can't pay, and since there is significantly more options for most people to buy insurance, prices are will continue to increase, but at a more controlled pace.

The ultimate solution is a system run at-cost, which due to basic economic necessitates a government run system. [I'm not procluding a system where private insureres can offer better coverage for additional cost, but a basic at-cost system would dramatically cut costs overall]


By nocturne_81 on 11/23/2011 7:22:25 PM , Rating: 3
I really wish this was the case, but... nobody gets treatment that doesn't pay. Sure, in an ER you have the choice to 'self-claim' in which you pledge you'll pay for all expenses, but if you refuse to sign -- you get no treatment. Unless you were lucky enough to get checked in without your id being checked and you gave them a false name -- you will pay for it, one way or another.

And, do a bit of research next time... Medical (product) costs haven't really increased in the last few decades, though that doesn't stop a hospital from charging 10 bux for a bandaid. Likewise, malpractice insurance costs have skyrocketed, even though payout amounts are at an all time low. Hell, why does it cost me $800 to go to the ER, sit in an empty room waiting for two hours, and then be told to go to a pharmacy and buy some over-the-counter product?

The expenditure can't be blamed on the symptom, but rather the system that necessitates it.


"Let's face it, we're not changing the world. We're building a product that helps people buy more crap - and watch porn." -- Seagate CEO Bill Watkins














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki