Google docs knocks of socks - but still no docks to OS chops

I've been traveling about for the last few days and with limited connectivity my online time has mostly been spent dealing with email and other coms rather than 'productivity' applications, so when I got back to my desk this morning and opened up Google Docs to check the progress of a collaboration I got a surprise - a brand spanking new interface.


(pic from ZDnet review)

That is to say that the home/file page has been revamped - the apps themselves remain unaffected.
It is an improvement on the previous incarnation. There is more detail in front of the eye and dragging and dropping has been introduced both of which cut down time and effort. However, as a long time heavy Gmail user the file list layout with its new chronology based view, fires my 'inbox recognition neurons' which is confusing as I keep thinking I'm looking at mail. To my mind it all looks a bit cluttered - although the ability to see file name, shares and access date without extra clicking or mouse movement is welcome. You can also now view the doc list by collaborator as well topic or time frame.
How long before we get the ability to define a 'group' for sharing? That would be useful.
'Folders' have now appeared, which is I guess merely a matter of sticking alternate interfacing on tagging of old; I've heard many a call for the introduction of folders to Google Docs, which I assume is a result of years of conditioning in the desk top construct - will that metaphor never die - and it looks like Google may have succumbed!

As I expected, a quick check of the blogosphere turns up a myriad of rave reviews about the genius of the system and congratulating the Google team for a job well done. Remember guys, the apps themselves haven't changed yet and Zoho and Thinkfree and probably a few others arguably have better offerings, albeit with a much lower profile. [hmmm - future post on the topic of Gmail as gateway drug to seizing the lion's share of the online app market]

So what everyone is raving about then is in fact not the functions of the 'office' apps but the file organization component - the File Manager of the Google OS if you like.
Now within the context of the 'online' application and the Web 2.0 this is fair, if over hyperbolic praise but lets talk a step back for a moment.
In the wider scheme of things, the state of the art in online interfacing has barely achieved things we used to see in Windows 3.1. In short, if 'Google Docs' was running as a desk top app, we'd all point and laugh. Of course, it is unfair to compare the two deployment contexts, at least until Web apps escape the browser - roll on Apollo/Air, Silverlight etc and the potential hybrid web/desk top app.

It is the liminal area between online and offline which interests me most and having made a start on replicating file management devices online I wonder when Google will switch some attention to the device. What I imagine is essentially for Google ( or Zoho, Thinkfree at al) to provide system hooks which allow an OS to treat the file management aspect of their service as a 'virtual drive'. Now if this 'virtual file system' could also play nicely with the OS to the extent that it could be used as a basis for document sharing from the machine, then I'd start to get really excited, but just being able to use the local power of a machine OS to manipulate online files would be a nice start.

For now, it is possible with some effort to get Google Calendar to sync with my desk top, and Gmail can now play nicely with POP3 etc but what I want is one easy to use method to get all the Google productivity and coms apps plumbed into my OS.

All of this raises some interesting questions which I'll probably get around to addressing in a future post but ... What percentage of online app use is taking advantage of the abilities to access from a 'borrowed' terminal? In other words, how important is it to keep online apps non-dependent on client-side capabilities? or When can we start to treat the Web as an extension of a specific device? or Can we throw all the required 'local' requirements/ setup metadata etc down the wire at runtime?