Talk:Microsoft Groove

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 This article is within the scope of Computing WikiProject, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to computers and computing. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
??? This article has not yet received an rating on the importance scale.

For the lame windows office user, can someone please explain how groove will work for me. For instance, do I need to purchase an account? Is there free server space somewhere that I can use. Are there file size limitations? etc. The microsoft descriptions are far to vague and theoretical. The product sounds like it will revolutionize people's relationships, but seriously, exactly what do I need to know?

Watch th demo video on the Official Microsoft Groove page.

The "Criticisms of Groove 2007" section is NOT NPOV and needs cleaning up with sources citing.There is a complaint further down which also states this.

And also, the Subversion reference is valid, Subversion clearly is an alternate collaboration product (or actually, many). --VirianFlux 21:25, 22 March 2007 (GMT) (not signed in)

[edit] 'Grooviquette'?

This product has barely been released... I can't imagine many people are already using a colloquial term like 'grooviquette' when talking about it. I propose removing this section. CarrerCrytharis 01:33, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

"Barely been released"? As a Microsoft Office component, certainly, but it was a standalone product for a long time before the Microsoft buyout. Simxp 15:29, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

I think the reference to Subversion be removed. Subversion has nothing to do with this product, it is only a RCS not a collaboration product.

[edit] Criticisms

OK, I'm too new to Wikipedia to take a bold action like this, but it seems the "criticisms" section is purely editorial (non-neutral and non-verifiable). Is this the kind of thing one should feel free to edit out? --24.34.151.67 16:41, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

I removed the entire section. It was totally unreferenced, and written in an unencyclopediac, editorial, PoV tone. It can be readded with enough referenced and proper criticisms. Or criticisms be inlined. --soum (0_o) 07:35, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
Likewise, the "Vendor Lock-in" section is just as non-NPOV. Maybe it's true, maybe it's not, but just saying it doesn't make it so. If it's really an issue there should be some supporting evidence. I'm removing that section. 196.40.38.33 (talk) 19:12, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Grooveicon.png

Image:Grooveicon.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 22:14, 6 November 2007 (UTC)