--- Save some time with Google's .new-Domains ---

A few days ago, Google announced their new '.new' domains.
By using them you can save plenty of time when creating new Docs, Sheets, Slides, Sites or Forms.
So instead of going to Google Drive and creating the document there, users can just input the corresponding URL into the browser!

Here are a few examples:
> 'doc.new' or 'docs.new' or 'documents.new' to create a new Google Docs document (https://doc.new/)

> 'sheet.new' or 'sheets.new' or 'spreadsheet.new' to create a new Google Spreadsheets document (https://sheet.new/)

> 'site.new' or 'sites.new' or 'website.new' to create a new Google Sites website (https://site.new/)

> 'slide.new' or 'slides.new' or 'deck.new' or 'presentation.new' to create a new Google Slides document (https://slide.new/)

> 'form.new' or 'forms.new' to create a new Google Forms form (https://form.new/)

This is also useful for creating special bookmarks in the browser!

  • 8
    Thank you 😊
  • 6
    Was introduced 7 days ago, so I'm a little late I know.
    But devNews didn't even exist there yet and I just wanted to let you guys know...
  • 0
    No problem :)
  • 1
    Feels so familiar...
  • 2
    ++ to devNews, nice addition
  • 19
    This is a terrible, terrible bastardization of TLDs.

    Do it with a subdomain. Then you don't have to buy 50 .new domains (that probably aren't available anyway).

    This really makes me angry. Google is ruining the internet.
  • 6
    @devios1 I don't see how the ruin the internet with their ".new" TLD.
    Maybe the just bought one ".new" domain and use some fancy forwarding to their Google drive.
    And even if the bought 50+ ".new" domains, who the fuck cares as long as there are some assholes who park or reservate some domains do sell them for thousands of €/$
  • 2
    @devios1 I wonder if they just bought 50 domains.. I've never heard of this TLD before. Have they really shelled out what money it costs to get a TLD of your own, just for this little feature? From what $ dig doc.new ns returned, it does seem like Google is holding the authoritative nameservers for it.
  • 8
    @iKameo It matters because like I said it’s a bastardization: it is using them in a manner that goes against their intended meaning and which does not provide any real capability other than people thinking it’s “cool” to use TLDs as though they were verbs.

    If you are a believer in standards like HTTP and conventions like REST this should really upset you.
  • 5
    @Condor Google has a huge lobbying force behind new TLDs and had established itself as the registry of quite a few new TLDs. Which means they can register as many as they want for dirt cheap while selling the ones they don’t want to the public.

    But what really bothers me is WHY? Why not just docs.google.com/new? That makes sense and follows established conventions.
  • 2
    @devios1 because it is more than twice as long as docs.new?
  • 1
    @devios1 but realistically there's very few organizations who can afford to just pay the fee for a gTLD anyway so why does it matter?
  • 1
    Also frankly if we listened to everyone who screamed about bastardization of protocols we'd still be using lynx to browse the world wide web
  • 7
    @plttn Just think about it. The idea is actually completely mental and the ONLY reason Google can do this is because they’re rich and they basically have first dibs at the registry.

    So right away this is just Google trying to be cooler than everyone else, at everyone else’s expense.

    But think about it. “new” is just one verb. Are we going to add .edit, .delete, .save, .share and every other conceivable action as a new domain where you have to BUY each one?

    Nobody can do this besides Google therefore *necessarily* it is non-standard and against conventions.

    It’s just Google thinking they are better than everyone else and to hell with standards.

    I really can’t believe you guys are defending this.
  • 0
    Is there a standard that says "don't buy verb gTLDs"

    I didn't think so. They went through the process, got it approved, so what
  • 2
    This is a thing of Google to tell the world they can do what they want with internet because from the UX perspective I don't see how can be difficult open google drive and click add to create a new doc or spreadsheet.
  • 2
    @plttn The order of the sub-domains in a domain go from most-specific to least-specific. That is their design. TLDs are intended to act as the first-level global identifier that specifies the url’s identity in the most general way. For example, .com for commercial, .org for organization, or the umpteen country codes.

    When you put a verb like “new” as the TLD it goes against that meaning. “new” is not a global concept. The site itself is not new (and if is it won’t be forever), rather “new” is being used as a sub-concept of its own sub-domain. It very much goes against the meaning of a domain.
  • 5
    As much as the new feature is useful, @devios1 is right on this one. If it was something like how chrome://history works, where it's just on the browser, or as part of a plugin, it would be fine, and it would probably be somewhat consistent, as it would essentially be a local shortcut. (I haven't looked exactly into how those work.) But it doesn't make sense as a TLD.

    "IANA currently distinguishes the following groups of top-level domains:

    country-code top-level domains (ccTLD)
    generic top-level domains (gTLD)
    sponsored top-level domains (sTLD)
    unsponsored top-level domains
    infrastructure top-level domain (.arpa)"

    Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

    All the examples I see for those seem to be for what the site is (is it for a business (.biz), a commercial page (.com), or education (.edu), for example), not for what the site does. This is an important distinction.
  • 0
    @devios1 do you also hate .xyz, .computer, and all the other ones I can't think of off the top of my head?
  • 1
    @plttn No, because those aren’t verbs that refer back to their own sub-domains as the subject.
  • 3
    There's an important point here that is not being mentioned yet: just like it's usually forbidden to trademark common names, it makes little sense to let something as generic as ".new" in the hands of a private organization.
    What if Microsoft wants to make xls.new? Can they do it? Or would they try to register xls.newer, then?
    It makes no sense. This works like a sponsored TLD but its meaning is generic.
  • 0
    @igorsantos07 and anyone could register a domain with .app, and Google is the registrar of record for that too. If Microsoft gives them money, I am sure they would.
  • 0
    @devios1 by that logic, is .me only acceptable when it's referring to Montenegro?
  • 2
    @plttn This is not about repurposing old TLDs to mean new things. I have no problem with that, *as long as they’re used as top-level domains* and not sub-concepts or actions of some other domain.
  • 1
    And I'm sure Charleston Road Registry told ICANN "you guys don't mind if we do this with .new right?".

    Fact of the matter is that standards and practices change. Remember when having TLS on your site was some wild concept only for banking?
  • 4
    @plttn Standards can change as better ideas come along and we learn from our mistakes.

    This is not a better idea. It is a bastardization of an already good idea. It is a mistake.
  • 0
    But it's not a harmful idea either. It's not like it suddenly ruins every other TLD.
  • 2
    @plttn It actually kind of does, and that’s my point. It changes the meaning of what a domain is.

    But worse, it establishes this exclusive club of companies who can afford to do this and leaves the rest of us without.
  • 1
    But that's kind of my point. People use country code TLDs that aren't for sites they're based in, the whole com/biz split disappeared when everyone thought com sounded better

    plus we're already at the point where .pizza is a tld
  • 2
    I see ".new" would work if it was a really public TLD and everyone had equal chances to buy their valuable names, as it was once on the .com bubble where you could register your brilliant domain idea whenever you had it.

    In this case it seems like Google decided to create .new just so it could use for cool domains, and f*ck the rest of the web coming later.
  • 1
    "Google Registry is excited to support G Suite in their innovative use of .new for new actions in Docs, Sheets, Slides and more. The .new TLD is open, secure by default, and will be available to everyone for registration in 2019. Please check back soon for more details."
  • 5
    @plttn You still don’t get it. .pizza is a noun and a general concept. It makes perfect sense to represent a class of websites for pizzerias.

    If I have a domain called alonzos.pizza, alonzos is a sub-concept of pizza. That is the proper order.

    However if I have a domain called alonzos.order, what the fuck does that mean? Alonzo’s is not a sub-concept of ordering. Ordering is a sub-concept of Alonzo’s. Suddenly we’re using verbs in a TLD and completely changing what a TLD is supposed to mean.

    What if I don’t want to order? What if I just want to check the menu or the nearest restaurant? Do I have to go to alonzos.menu or alonzos.directions?

    This is exactly what sub-domains are for, if you really want it to be its own domain in the first place, it should be this:

  • 1
    @plttn right, will be open to the mass after they get the best they can have out of it - but it's still a public known word, which they made private for first users.
  • 0
    Can I get a life.new
  • 0
    @electrineer nope, this ain't ruby.
Your Job Suck?
Get a Better Job
Add Comment