Slashdot Mirror

A monopoly? Surely you jest!

Microsoft is a called a monopoly, yet still there are other OS's, other browsers and other Office Suites.

Now, how many are STANDARDS based?

There is a standard? IMUnified was supposed to create one, but there site seems to not have been updated in some time (I e-mailed their contact to learn why). The IETF had a task force or something to hammer one out, too, but I've not heard a peep from them either.

And remember, it atkes more than a 'better' product to move market share. VHS won out over beta but beta was technically superior.

Everytime something has come out that interoperates with AIM, I've tried it -- as have many others. I've done this because I saw it as a better mouse trap (because, again, I think AOL's AIM client SUCKS!!!) But we always have to drop it because AOL starts to block it. I can't get my "buddies" to switch off AIM because their buddies won't. So, if I want to chat with them, I have to use AIM too.

You're right about fearing the DMCA. I would have a hard time seeing our blocking access would be 'copy protection' (since that's what the DMCA makes it illegal to circumvent). Then again, since CSS was deemed a 'copy protection' device instead of an 'access control' device, I wouldn't put it past AOL to twist it in such a way.

You can go to www.imunified.org for some early information on it. The members include AT&T, Excite@home, MSN, Odigo, Phone.com, Prodigy, and Yahoo! AOL's been battling this all the way.

As for AOL, I think they should be able to do whatever they want with AIM/ICQ, since it's their product. Knock off the calls for regulation by government members who don't know anything about these technologies. BTW, this doesn't violate anything that they agreed to in order to merge with Time-Warner. The IM thing they agreed to was a very narrow clause about IM and high-speed networks, I believe. Possibly about high-speed wireless, I forget.

Really, though, I know that down the road they're going to want badly to interop with the clients above — they're only going to screw their own users once the other ones get popular, especially since MSN now has more people using their IM than are using AIM. The same thing's going to eventually happen to ICQ if they wall themselves off from everyone else.

Here's the really ironic thing about this particular situation, though. They were just complaining to the DoJ last Friday about the possibility of them being shut out by Microsoft's HailStorm initiative (which right now is planning to interop with IMUnified -- MS wants traffic through their system more than they care about whose client/OS you access it with, hence the recent talk about .NET stuff on other platforms). After AOL started up with this talk, AOL's blocking of non-AIM/ICQ users was brought up, and lo and behold, by Monday they come out with this hilarious rationalization: "AOL suggested that its efforts to open its instant-messaging system to rivals could be affected by Microsoft's attempt to incorporate the messaging service into its Web-based programs." AOL Executive VP Kenneth B. Lerer even says, "We are working toward interoperability with conviction and expect to be in a position to begin testing this summer." This latest move sure clears that up, don't it? :)

Cheers,

AOL is just teasing IMunified by opening up something (rather than nothing from IMunified for almost half a year), albeit something that's practically useless.

Was it a real developmental entity, or just a lot of marketing and political posturing?

It would be wonderful to have a standard transport mechanism across devices and different types of nets. It appears that IETF does not consider IM to be a very high priority.

The link is here.

The contact list in ICQ is stored at the client-end (so no roaming access, you have to re-build your contact list if you migrate). Most other IM service providers (MSN, Y!, AOL) use a server-based contact list.

There are indeed loads of other such technical differences which make me feel that getting ICQ and AIM to interoperate will be quite a task. The good thing to do is to build a common IM protocol (and that's just what IETF is at). That will break the IM monopoly and there will loads of IM service providers all over the world (like Email).

Interesting sites -
ICQ Protocol
IM Unified


--
#define __mjplusplus

err... www.IMUnified.org

The IETF is already working on a common protocol for all instant messaging systems. Like we have the email protocols. And IMUnified (http://www.imunified.org/) is working towards implementing a standard protocol. Yeah, this org. has y!, ms, and other major players, so we can expect these prop. co.s to implement a common protocol and make it an open standard.

--
#define __mjplusplus