Slashdot Mirror
AOL To Open AIM Protocol?
Vintage was the first person to write with the word from Betanews that AOL will be opening their Instant Messenger Protocol up. The comment from Betanews is that this may be part of an attempt to appease the FTC in regards to the AOL-TimeWarner merger.
If I set up a server that uses a proprietary protocol (think trade secret here), what gives you the right to connect to my server with your program?
--
$x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
$x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
--
$x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
$x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
TiK, the client of which you speak is available at sourceforge
It works well. I've been playing with gabber, a gtk jabber client, thats pretty cool too.
I was an ICQ junkie for years, ICQ allows you to block people from adding you as a contact, you can be invisible, etc... But I started Using AIM so i could talk to family and friends who used AOL. SO it was a convienience thing to talk to my mom and sister. As AIM worked better behind all of the firewalls my friends and I have we kinda used it more and more.
Now AIM is basically "Online Stalking in can". You cant prevent anyone from seeing if you're on unless you use a different screen name to stalk them back. ICQ provides a better service for such things. BUT ICQ gets continually bigger and bloated and just really pisses me off, Especially when the features i like (privacy etc) cause me to wait 3 weeks after a format or crash to add contacts and get re authorized. So its a trade off. Privacy for convienience. But Ill take it. The thing i would like to see implemented into AIM and the OpenAIM is password encryption. I think that TOC is clear text, prolly oscar also. Privacy doesn't mean all that much to me as far as messaging clients go, other than password encryption, or maybe 2 way encrypted file transfers. say you're sending a hot steamy love letter to someone and your netadmin ( possibly me ) used a really nice sniffer and captures all the packets and assembles them... blah blah i know e can all dream for total encryption
I like AIM better because of the way i use it. ICQ is nicer some times but behind a firewall, EVEN with the newer versions... It is still a shitload slower than AIM. and it still wont talk to AOL users.
Cluster
we'll be able to figure out how to get rid of those near constant "Clippy of the Internet" "Sign up for AOL Messaging Today!" ads that pop up when running certain versions of Netscape?
--- Jump!! Fire!! Bullet time!! - Lego version of the Matrix
ICQ has got to be one of the worst put together pieces of software in general use. On a lot of people's machines it takes longer to load ICQ then it does to boot windows. What the hell is taking so long?
The interface is just terrible, here's just one example: If you want to do an operation on a user name, you pull up a menu. In most windows programs, using the right mouse button causes a context menu. But not in ICQ. In ICQ you can switch it. Clicking on the other mouse button causes I dialog box asking if you want to switch them (complete with a big bitmap of a mouse).
What the hell is that?? If there's only one single click operation why not just make **BOTH** mouse buttons do it? Instead of having the other one pull up the stupid "would you like to switch mouse buttons" dialog???
The whole thing is chunky, the interface sucks ass... it's just bad software.
Amber Yuan 2k A.D
"and dear god does this website suck now." -- CmdrTaco
There is some more info on the episode on The Simpsons Archive
-legolas
i've looked at love from both sides now. from win and lose, and still somehow...
I believe actually, TOC was the protocol that commonly changed, and OSCAR has stayed pretty much constant, the official aim clients use oscar and don't require changes very often.
Anyways, OSCAR has been reverse-engineered, see http://www.auk.cx/faim for details. This is libfaim, which gaim uses if you use oscar rather than toc (./configure --enable-oscar)
-skip
Here is the page announcing the proposal, with links to the proposal itself (a formal Internet Draft and this diagram showing the client/server and server/server architecture.
Stupid job ads, weird spam, occasional insight at
--
$x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
$x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
This is just a temporary appeasement by AOL to deflect scrutiny until the merger goes through. "Opening" the protocol isn't functionally any different than having everyone reverse engineer it. Just because it's "open" doesn't mean they can't or won't start mutating it again every 3 days once the merger goes through. My money is on a rapid return to this anti-competitive practice the instant the merger is complete.
Opening it up permanently is WAY too forward-thinking for AOL/TW; I think companies that size are prevented by law from making any decision that sacrifices present monopoly for long-term viability. They're only allowed to consider the current quarter, I think that's an SEC regulation.
From reading many of these postings, it seems as if many people aren't aware that TiK is again under active development over at
http://tik.sourceforge.net
The current release is 0.87.
Also, regarding the ICQ protocol, you can now login with some aim clients (I've personally verified TiK and heard that Gaim worked, too.) Just type in your UIN and password. I have reason to believe that the release of the "aim" protocol will, consequently, contain information for ICQ, as well. I just hope this release will actually occur. . .
Actually, if you create and upload the content yourself (as well you should), you can avoid the ads, while having more control over the design of the web page.
Think --> Think Different --> Think OSS
Sure, Jesse Berst ranted about it. AOL keeping it closed stops Microsoft from getting to use AOL's capital investments for free, and Microsoft (through ads) pays Jesse Berst's salary.
Steven E. Ehrbar
Just a client that would sign on as yourself or an ID you own. For example, a coworker wrote one that he would run when not at his desk. Any messages would be mailed to his pager. Since our org uses email address as the unique ID for our IM system, the next logical step is to encode the reply-to so that you can converse over the IM system w/ your 2-way pager!
Not much time for this thee days...it's a shame. Should n't take to long either...
Blar.
A lot of exciting things are happening on the jabber front. As I type this, developers are finishing up a proposal to the ITEF to make Jabber a standard. You can check it out at core.jabber.org Also check out jabber.org (general site), jabber.com (for businesses), and jabbercentral.com (for end-users).
AOL has submitted it's IMX draft to the IETF and it is available on the Internet at http://aim.aol.com/openim.
At work, we started using some Lotus peice of shit, "Sametime". (Our vp used to work for Lotus, what a coincidence!)
It won't let me log in, despite the fact that my account and password are correct. I can't log in as myself, or as any one of three new accounts we created just for kicks, or as guest. It's just fucked, and they (Lotus support) haven't figured it out yet. It's been three weeks now. What gets me is we PAID for this - while all the free ones out there work just fine. (okay, so they don't offer the security Sametime does. . . some security, it's so secure, even valid users can't get in.)
If it ain't broke, fix it 'til it is!
These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
(NOTE: Links blatantly stolen from LinuxToday)
Work for Change & GET PAID!
In AIM, if you click on (either file or edit, it's been too long...) and go into the preferences, under connection (again, I think) you'll find a box that says "load on startup". It's somewhere in there, I promise. You can kill it by unchecking that box.
We don't need no Net Explorer We don't need no Thought control
I wouldn't even begin to characterize a product or service as holding a monopoly unless they were able to begin benefiting from "network effects", which clearly hasn't happened in the IM space yet. For any player.
Regardless of marketshare.
If it ain't broke, fix it 'til it is!
These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
I thought AOL did own icq?
Jabber - open source messaging. No doubt somebody else is posting this as I type, so sorry if it's redundant :)
Now I can remove the auto-smiley faces, fix the (incredibly bad) text handling, turn the volume down, and prevent AIM from switching me out of a full-screen game.
If you can't do it right, let someone else do it for you.
"Beware he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart he deems himself your master."
Correct. TOC doesnt allow most of the features as OSCAR. They did, in recent versions, implement password changing, screen name reformatting, file receive, and it looks like the skeleton of sending files. You can also send a file if an OSCAR user sends you a request for a file. Cheers.
---
---
Rob Flynn
Pidgin
I mean does anyone really use this chat stuff, besides horny 14 year-olds, 45 year-old pedophiles, and cops pretending to be Natalie Portman?
--
...that after the AIM protocol is opened, that AOL will suddenly be flooded with clueless newbies?
Gaim actually uses OSCAR; if my history is correct, a client called faim (free aim) reverse engineered the protocol, and then made libfaim for use by other clients. gaim uses libfaim.
But the vast majority of the OSCAR AIM protocol was already made available through reverse engineering. I don't see how this will make any real difference.
There is actually an AIM client written in Tcl/Tk and based on the Tik release from America Online. It runs on any system that supports Tcl/Tk.
MiniTik AOL Instant Messenger Client
___________
Yep, they really do need to inforce the AIM TLD, so that you don't mistake AOLers for normal people :-)
-
Ekapshi
If we had such a client, we could run our own IM network
That's easy. Just take some code from a common IRC client and add it to EveryBuddy. Any takers?
Will I retire or break 10K?
In fact, with minimal additions, IRC could be the basis for a global, distributed IM system.
That would be a really good idea. Perhaps somebody could hack something into Everybuddy to send private messages over IRC. Of course, there would have to be a special channel with a bot that manages buddy notification.
Will I retire or break 10K?
AOL representatives stated that they didn't want to open the source of AIM because it would most likely let in chain letters and spam, as ICQ suffers from. I have to say, from my experience with GAIM, I have recevied hardly any unwanted messages. I remember a coupla years ago, I had ICQ, and it was horrible.
--------
Oscarfish.com: tropical fish with attitude. Way t
I can't resist.. shoot me if you must, moderators! That comment just screams for me to mention my app.
The Kit AIM client already exists, for linux as well as other Unixes, I believe (I have no access to other Unixes, so I can't say for certain how portable it is)
The most recent version is in the kdenetwork package, on the KDE cvs. The first stable version will be released with KDE 2.
Oh, yes.. and there's already Kaim, Gaim, laim, TiK (GPL for Tcl/Tk by AOL), TNT (GPL for emacs by AOL), QuickBuddy (binary-only for Java by AOL).
AOL has posted an Internet Draft on their proposed IM protocol. It is very similar in overall concept to the e-mail system - similarities such as introducing a new "IMX" record into DNS, the use of MIME as a message format, and providing each user with a unique myname@mydomain identifier, are some of the more obvious. It differs in a few ways - most notably, it is only a specification for server-to-server communication. Each server can, within the restrictions placed on it by its need to communicate with other servers, implement whatever server-to-client communication scheme it chooses. This means that protocols within individual IM services might be different - but nobody's getting locked out, since anyone with a domain can start their own IM service - just as anyone with a domain can send e-mail from that domain.
Note: this means that if you're not on AOL (or using an AOL client), your IM address will be someone@somewhere.xxx. To you, AOL users will be someone@aol.com, unless your IM server sends unknown users to AOL (and then you have the issue of collisions between local usernames and AOL names - but people/servers with small userbases probably wouldn't care much).
This solution appears to open (some) IM (not all features are supported via OpenIM in the draft, and there's no guarantee that AOL will support more advanced features in their OpenIM gateways). However, it also preserves AOL's lock on it's username-space and adds inconvenience for non-AOL-IM users, encouraging them to use AOL's client.
Still, it basically puts IM on the same footing and a similar architecture to email, which is a Good Thing.
Randell
p.s. Note: in a previous life, I was one of 4 or 5 people at a company called PlayNet that wrote what later became AOL, including the original IM design. (This was in '84/85.)
Take a look at Everybuddy. This is a great Unix program that does exactly that. Many bells and whistles, too (like spell checking). No plans for a non-Unix version.
so this means that very soon, i will be able to chat with my idot friends who use aim. someone or the other *will* write the aim4linux.
Incidentally, there's also svc_irc. Open an irc connection to irc.jabber.org:6667 and see what I mean.
Visit me on #weirdness on the Galaxynet.
What I'm hoping for is that they also release the ICQ spec.
Knowledge is power. Knowledge shared is power multiplied.
Instant Messenger
Free for all to use until...
Protocol "updates"
I've been doing bots and such with the Lotus SameTime product, which is an off-shoot of the AOL IM product. It's usefull to have an entity available that is hooked into your Enterprise Directory so a person look-up is only an IM away. The API is horrid! It uses lots of class variables so that you can only have one connection to the server per JVM! Ugly. The Win32 API is not an option for me ;-). Hopefully AOL will provide an API a bit more...uh...modular than SameTime's
I did see a page which had some of the AIM protocol reverse engineered, but I figured since the MS/AOL pissing match the page would be out of date.
Blar.
Someone mentioned bundling all of the protocols (AIM, MSN, etc) into one client... this is shortsighted.
Imagine the multitude of messaging protocols out there... AIM, MSN, YahooPager, ICQ to name the most popular. As more capability is added, all that is required is additional server modules. No client upgrade is necessary. Since it is all XML based, it has total flexibility.
Jabber isn't limited to just instant messaging either... the architecture allows for expanding into pretty much anywhere. Cell-phones may become Jabber-enabled in the future... who knows? Anyway, check it out at jabber.org
What would be nice, is if in additioning to opening up the client/server protocol, they'd implement and open a server-to-server protocol. This would instantly create an open, universal instant messaging network. If they want to guarantee their position as the instant messaging leader forever, this is the way to go. If they don't, it's only a matter of time before Microsoft figures out a way to eclipse them (as is evident in the fact that Exchange 2000 will include an IM server as part of the install).
Now is the time to do this right.
--
Tired of FB/Google censorship? Visit UNCENSORED!
As many probably know, M$ has been a noisemaker in trying to get AOL to open the IM protocols so that it can try to take over the IM world with it's Messenger service. if you want more info on the petition that's been going around about this, go to http://www.freeim.org
first i think, oh wow, maybe now ICQ and AIM will be able to communicate with eachother and i won't have to have both programs. but the i think "AOL owns ICQ and AIM already, so they already knew the protocol!"
but i suppose this means someone will write a plugin for licq now that allows linux users to use both services with on client. can't wait!
A slashdotter who didn't build his own computer is like a Jedi who didn't build his own lightsaber.
Now, that gets the Dumb Statment of the Day award.
No, I think you should re-read that. What the original poster meant was that "trying to talk to their [AOL's] servers without permission" is arguably illegal. Which is, of course, arguable.
I agree with your statement, but you might want to read a post twice before you flame someone...
The Daily Build
I was under the impression that AOL had opened the protocol up earlier to let clones like GAIM enact with the protocol. Wasn't this what prompted the whole Microsoft-AOL battle, where AOL kept trying to lock MS out? However, I think this is the way it should be-this will enable people to use clones of AIM without fear of compatibility issues.
Colin Winters
--
$x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
$x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
I don't think the AIM protocol was a secret, considering how many clones there are out there. There may have been a few items in the protocol that people didn't know about, but nothing majorly functional AFAIK.
Still, it's a good thing that they did this, since even though it's possible to reverse engineer these protocols, doesn't mean it's fun, quick, or easy.
-- Truth goes out the door when rumor comes innuendo. -- Groucho Marx
Heya. There's also been plenty of work out there in backwards engineering the oscar client -- we won't go into that here, though. heh. Anyways, You're correct on the TOC server being a "scaled down" version of OSCAR. Currently TOC does not support: Talk, Direct Connections (Images/etc), sending files, and buddy icons. In the TOC Protocol spec there are places set up for rvous_propose which would allow you to send propose requests. With this implemented sending/receiving files, talks, etc should be trivial. We'd just need to be told what protocol to use once the clientClient talks have been initiated. If not, I'm sure we could hack them up ourselves. The only other thing lying around other than that would be buddy icons. Either way, this can be a Good Thing(tm). Cheers and Happy /.'ing
---
---
Rob Flynn
Pidgin
I think that they were stalling in order to figure out the right way to "open" it up, without having MS stranglehold them out of their essential IM monopoly. You know MS would find a way, look at what they tried to do to Java. Also, if people are using other IM clients but accessing AOL's servers, they aren't looking at AOL's banner ads which are supporting the servers that they're letting you use for free.
On the other hand, I find AOL really annoying in the fact that if you go to http://www.aol.com you get an annoying pop up window advertising their 500 hours free! Anyone that goes to their site is either a) an AOL subscriber already or b) already knows about AOL Besides, it's not really 500 hours free, it's a month free, and if you wish to spend 24/7 up to 500 hours on AOL, then so be it, go for it. That's a bit of false advertising. Disclaimer: I have an aol account since work pays for it and I have cable modem at home, so it is very handy when I am out of town on business and can dial in. Thus I use AOL email once in awhile.
Here's a more detailed article on C|Net basically AOL has said they will soon present a proposal for interoperability with AIM. This seems like instead of making the protocol open, they'll release some sort of AIM API. The FTC investigation of the AOL-Time Warner merger is also sited as the cause for this move my C|Net. It's about time AOL did this, heck even Jesse Berst ranted about this yesterday.
Gnutella didn't have a worm. There was a trojan horse program that automatically put itself on Gnutella if the user had Gnutella on the box. But that's no more of a worm than is a sh script containing "cp $0 ~ftp/pub/run_this_as_root.sh"
IM should either be a server-side service like SMTP, provided by your ISP, a peer to peer system like Gnutella, or an open distributed system like IRC. In fact, with minimal additions, IRC could be the basis for a global, distributed IM system.
IMXP is, as the authors of the IETF draft put it, "extensible, asynchronous message relaying service for application layer programs."
Another way to look at IMXP is a kind of SMTP for instant messaging, except that communication takes place in XML instead of some other format, and instead of handling mail messages, IMXP handles IM requests and responses.
IMXP is implemented as a profile for a new protocol framework called BXXP, or the Blocks eXtensible eXchange Protocol. This protocol framework also uses XML instead of some other format to specify authentication and transport security, as well as the type of data communication profile used between two endpoints.
Here is more information about BXXP.
............ kris
Kris Magnusson
Director, Developer Relations
"I thought I could organize freedom. How Scandinavian of me."
Link: http://www.jabber.org
I'm still waiting for an IM client that doesn't SUCK. Resources that is. Every one I've used is an atrocious resource hog...especially ICQ with all it's bells and whistles and garish eye-gauging UI.
How about a good ole command line client? Messages (or notices of messages) could just pop up on the command line. Enter a command or two to look through the list of messages. Enter another command to set up a "talk"-like chat.
It's 10 PM. Do you know if you're un-American?
Really? I haven't seen another IM client that matches AIM feature for feature.
ICQ 2000 comes close but doesn't quite match it.
GAIM is almost a joke. Same with GnomeICU.
I sincereally hope that in the process of opening the protocal, things such as the WARNING system get Removed. In my opinion, this is the most worst abused function I've *ever* seen, and I have never seen it used for what it was intended... I heard it was supposed to help "regulate" AIM and things like that, but it just doesn't work and is a major annoyance for people like me who get ganged up on by vast groups of warning fiends!
-rodent
Stop it right there. This is your IT department. We are coming to apprehend you. We also don't like the idea of your putting your butt on your web site.
They are alive! I've just pulled down the 1.0 server and got it going. Its pretty slick. The handling of the various protocols are handled by the server, so the client doesn't even have to worry about if its talking to jabber/icq/aim
plus, the protocol agents run independently of the main jabber server, so you can update one at a time, plus completely GPL'd.
Run. I like water. Push My rutabaga.
Although considered a rival of us by some people, EveryBuddy has been doing this for a while. http://www.everybudy.com Give them a look :) Cheers
---
---
Rob Flynn
Pidgin
Check out Everybuddy
It currently uses the TOC protocol, which is the Used-to-be-open protocol that gaim and tik and every other aim clone uses. It doesn't have all the features that OSCAR has, like file transfer and all that. If the OSCAR protocol is opened up then all the clones will increase in quality across the board. If they are just "re-opening" TOC, then nothing will change really.
But if people are looking for something that uses multiple services in one client, check out Everybuddy.
Ben Rigas
Are there many AIM clones that support Buddy Icon, Chat, Get File, IM Image, Send File, and Talk? How about the news and stock tickers? Not to my knowledge.
Granted, the only feature of that list that I care for is the file transfer capability, and maybe the stock ticker, but your statement that the clones support "all the stuff" isn't accurate.<P>
All double-talk about open standards and consumer interest aside, the feds *want* to see AIM become *the* messaging standard for chat traffic for one simple reason - it's centralized. All message traffic transits AOL servers for easy monitoring and collection by the boys in blue (or men in black, for that matter).
These pressures from the FTC are meant to drive wider adoption of AIM (the standard), whether or not the "AOL" is necessarily part of it.
Just my take on the situation, of course
-Isaac
I am not a lawyer, and this is not legal advice. For Entertainment Purposes Only.
AOL owns 90% of the IM market share. that is over the 50% needed to be accused of having a monopoly. By AOL's continued refusal to allow other companies into the IM market it is participating in unfair and ILLEGAL business practices here in the US. This would not even be an issue if AOL was out of the US, or if AOL DID NOT have a 90% market share.
The people who made the anti-trust laws did so for a reason. they were not doing this because they were communist. By giving others a chance to enter the IM market the consumer can benefit by a greater selection of products and services.
that is all!
"The importance of using technology in the right way has never been more clear."
Yeah, I saw everybuddy when I first started my project. I had assumed that no Win32 port would be made so I figured that I should I keep pushing the OpenIM project.
The Jabber idea is good, supporting various protocols through XML and then just updating the server to server interface on the server. Wish I could have come up with that.
"After three days without programming, life becomes meaningless." - Tao of Programming
actually - it's not, b/c if i have VCDS or break a DVD case, i can just use the ones that the AOL cds come in.
it's a great way to get free cases
-Jae
Meow meow,
Unix Talk For Ever!
Meow,
Rob's Cat Matrix
Its a shame that AOL stopped development of the Java version of the AIM client. I guess its been about two years now, but it used to be a viable solution to us non-Win32 folk.
--
Never hit your grandmother with a shovel, for it leaves a bad impression on her mind...
Well given that AOL owns ICQ slaughtering everyone but ICQ, pretty much means slaughtering everyone doesn't it? Always wondered why they never intergrated the two though. Most likely because intergrating ICQ into AIM basically means opening up AIM to the world.
Abstract Dynamics
Help me out with something. Say I spend the money to develop and put up a 'free' service, and I plan on funding that service by advertising in the a custom client I developed for that service.
Now, someone else comes up with a client that is advertising-free, but it still connects to my service, and uses my capacity. If that client is more popular than my own client (because of the no-advertising thing), I will need more capacity. But I can't justify an increased cost to advertisers because my client usage is decreasing, and their advertising dollars are LESS affective.
So, at what point am I allowed to BLOCK people from using my service with other clients? If the service is no longer cost-effective for me to run, I'd have to shut down the entire service, and then no one can use it.
So, where is the sweet spot in this? Somewhere, there has to be a balance between a monopoly, the 'free service through advertising' funding model, and open protocols.
-- You can't idiot-proof anything, because they're always coming out with better idiots.
I'm guessing you didn't see the ;).
Refrag
I have a website. It's about Macs.
The announcement is not clear on what everyone here is assuming. Does opening up a protocol also mean AOL is letting everyone use their IM servers?
I mean just cause you know the FTP protocol doesn't mean you can use my FTP server!
If AOL doesn't want to open up their protocol, they shouldn't have to. If my place_your_own_relative's_name_here gets tired of seeing all of those ads on their IM client, they will switch services. If they realize that they can't talk to everyone in the family, they will switch services. This is what the free market is all about.
If AOL keeps their system closed, they lose. We shouldn't keep reminding them of that fact.
Check out Everybuddy.
No one ever says, 'I can't read that ASCII E-mail you sent me.'
I have, and I'd like to point out three other posters interpreted what the original poster said the same way I did.
Second, given the syntactical structure of English, the subclause following the comma refers to the AOL policy. "[T]o reflexively block anyone who implements the protocol and tries to talk to their servers without their permission" is a prepositional phrase describing the policy, so the sentence is equivalent to saying "What likely happened here is that AOL has/had a policy which is arguably llegal."
But I do apologize if I misunderstood the author's intent. I did not intend to accidentally flame someone because of his grammar, given my tendency to make similar errors.
Steven E. Ehrbar
If they want advertisements, they can just send messages to anyone using a non-AOL client periodically, and tell them they should be using AOL.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
I never liked Jabber.
They have spent so long building it into a huge project.... it really seems to be not worth the trouble. How many years have they been working to release 1.0? For a messaging system that seems a little long, especially considering the number of developers working on it.
It seems like a much too complicated and too large thing, and I don't like the fundamental feel of how they did the project. It seems to be making things overly complex, and I think the long development time confirms this.
This is not a flame, just an oppinion.
~Chris
How can you sleep at night with all the blood on your hands??? ;)
If you look at the BetaNews URL, you'll note it is "betanews.efront.com". Apparently they're related, and sort of forgot who was writing the story and credited each other...
When I say forcing competition out of the market, I mean acting to prevent any other company (such as Microsoft, Yahoo, and others) from developing their own instant messenging services that compete with AIM. To my knowledge, AOL has not done this at all. They're simply not allowing other clients to use AOL's own servers. Microsoft's client has to use Microsoft's servers, and Yahoo's client has to use Yahoo's servers. AOL has no problem with this.
--
$x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
$x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
What a bunch of crap. That's like saying Ford has a monopoly in the Ford Mustang market because they don't let other people license the design for their cars.
There are no end of entrients in the IM market... MS, Yahoo, Tribal Voice all come to mind without thinking about it very hard.
Besides, Mr. Anti trust lawyer, there is nothing magical that says a) if you have over 50% market share you are a monopoly and b) there is nothing illegal about being a monopoly per se.
DrLunch.com The site that tells you what's for lunch!
If I set up a server that uses a proprietary protocol (think trade secret here), what gives you the right to connect to my server with your program?
It's not using the same protocol that's the no-no here, of course. It's using their servers without permission, and facilitating others doing so.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Third, they will slaughter all the other messaging services except for ICQ, and even ICQ is going to hurt a little. Having the biggest installed base counts for more than having the broadest featureset.
Didn't AOL purchase ICQ?
Don't you mean that they'll integrate the client with the next release of Windows? ;)
Refrag
I have a website. It's about Macs.
The very popular mIRC has a lot of scripting abilities in it. Older versions had "default scripts," and, if you had DCC autoget enabled, someone could replace your default scripts rather easily, and you would start sending out the virus yourself. I've also seen a newer version of that which relies on .bat files of some kind.
Also, the much older ircii had numerous "warscripts," "botscripts," and so forth that, at the very least, were often useful-but-trojaned, allowing remote users to control IRC clients. Worse yet, ircii even had an "/exec" command, allowing you to execute commands right onto your shell. As you might imagine, getting newbies to "/exec rm [fileglob of your choice]" was considered high sport.
Basically, they had roughly the same susceptibility to attacks as does the oft-maligned-and-deserving-it Microsoft Outlook.
I don't see why Microsoft OS inc. couldn't, however, license the 'amazing' new 'IntelliActiveDirectMessageX' application from 'Microsoft Apps, inc.', and then include it anyway.
Quite simply, I think it'll take proliferation of an open standard/protocol to fix any monopolization of this 'market', just as with so many others.
Joe Sixpack is dead!
Hacker Public Radio is our Friend
The problem with this is when a new protocol is added, the client has to be updated. Clients are also more bloated. Jabber solves this problem by making the clients talk XML to protocol transports, which understand IM protocols. Clients are upgraded less and leave a smaller footprint beacause of this. This issue was discussed on the jabber mailing list a while back, check the archives for more information.
I can't believe that nobody mentioned Gale, and now it's too late for me to mention it and have a significant portion of people see it. Ack!
Gale
Maybe the state's highest function is to grind out insoluble problems. (Zelazny, Hall of Mirrors)
That's okay, I'll forgive you. My grammar is usually decent, but sometimes in my excitement over writing a post which I feel will get moderated up, I get carried away :)
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Is it true that AOL is working on a new version of AOL that will run on Linux boxes? If this is the case, has anyone else noticed that the industry is starting to migrate AWAY from MonopolySoft?
Backyard Soul : Beats for the body, music for the soul
AOL ..I have offten wondered why? make it simple and put it every where..simple thing for simple minds , however the AMI thing ... bug the heck out of me ok I can see the point if you like there format or if you like linx or windows or Be what ever is your choice should be that... In the IM world as in email there should be one format so that we all can interact I use both linux and windows reason being my kids don;t get linux all that well so be it as for the IMA AND EMAIL it should be all one .... now we can go after Microsoft but in the AOL world they do as they wish to me there anti free speach say dam or shit and you are tossed by TOS, I had AOL for one year 1994 and that was more than enough for me Thank god for andover net and slashdot where free speach is still the rule
Incase anyone hasn't heard yet, AOL has posted a small press release accompanied by some documentation/information about their "release" of AIM. You can find the necessary info here. Cheers and happy hacking.
---
---
Rob Flynn
Pidgin
At first, everything was nice and simple. Keychains were keychains, coffee makers were coffee makers, and radios were radios. Then everything got a digital clock put into it (see the afore mentioned items). NOW some genius is gonna start putting little AIM modules in everypiece of consumer electronics out there!
-- From my Best Friend (Written to me over ICQ): "i was gonna go to a party...but i had to reinstall windows"
theres nothing illegal about being a monopoly, but there is something wrong with abusing a monopoly.
"The importance of using technology in the right way has never been more clear."
thats not the point of my post. the point of my post is that AOL is restricting other people from trying to create any sort of standard. also, due to the enormous market share they possess, their competition doesnt stand a chance against them. after all who wants to be the only person who has a new messaging client.
"The importance of using technology in the right way has never been more clear."
Check out: http://aim.aol.com/openim/ to read the RFC AOL submitted to the IETF working group. The RFC link is on the bottom of the page. Also check in on the working group mailing list archive here and see other proposals that were submitted today, the deadline day for proposals that will be used to judge whether the wg wakes up from its current sleep mode.
When I get in a programming mode
Compile and run
It is so much fun
"If I were to ask you a hypothetical question, what would you like it to be about?"
The official AOL documentation for TOC is included in the GAIM distrobution. I doubt that they are just re-releasing that, but I suppose it is possible.
Several days ago, the TOC server went down for some time. I re-compiled GAIM to use the "experimental" OSCAR support, and I've been online ever since.
Ah, the joys of open source software. My GAIM conversation windows have a big toggle button on the bottom marked "Sveedish Cheff". Turn it on, and everything I say gets converted before being sent. Bork Bork Bork!
------
This is at least one thing that the antitrust case should prevent. Windows, Inc. will not be allowed to bundle Microsoft applications (such as Microsoft Messenger) as part of the operating system. This assumes, of course, that the appeals courts uphold Jackson's ruling.
--
$x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
$x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
Personally, I don't like AOL, and I don't like Microsoft all that much either. But, why should they open it up? It's a private network. These companies that are whining to use this protocol can't write their own software for instant messaging? And with the gevernment just HAS to get involved somehow. Can't keep their noses out of anything.
I'm all for open source. I like it, but then again I also don't think that an entity should be forced to it.
You mean, more clueless newbies than they already have? Where would they _find_ them? Cloning? Putting AOL devices in zoos for the chimps to play with? The mind boggles....
-reemul
You're just jealous 'cuz the voices talk to *me*
ICQ assigns people by number, not name. (trying to do names in something like the Internet is stupid anyway, I don't want to be known as Bob1027)
So its quite easy to have multiple people on your list with the exact same name, in fact I have two of them right now. Its not really a problem because when they message you, its usually pretty easy to tell which one is which by their email addy and what they're actually saying.
It might get more difficult if you have like six of them that way, but you can rename people in ICQ on your list to whatever you want, so its a non issue. Besides, its easier to keep track of that then of Bob_1, Bob102, Bob5, 2343Bob, and the other assorted myriad of idiotic names the AOL system conjures up.
-- "So they told me that using the download page to download something was not something they anticipated." - Bill Gates
One of the new features in AIM is, when you point to a name on your Buddy List, it gives you a list of the features that their particular client version supports (chat, talk, IM images, buddy icons, file transfers, etc.).
--
$x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
$x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
If you'll take a look at Everybuddy, it combine's everyone's accounts under a "Contact Name." A contact name can be a real world name. For example you can have a Contact of "Rob Flynn". Within that contact would be: Rob Flynn RobFlynn 1358450 IBRRob Cheers.
---
---
Rob Flynn
Pidgin
It's funny this announcement comes just four days after they block the Odigo Messenger from communicating with users of its instant messaging service. News story can be found at:
http://www.zdnet.com/intweek/stories/news/0,416
When life hands you a lemon, find some Tequilla and salt.
AOL owns 90% of the IM market share. that is over the 50% needed to be accused of having a monopoly. By AOL's continued refusal to allow other companies into the IM market it is participating in unfair and ILLEGAL business practices here in the US. This would not even be an issue if AOL was out of the US, or if AOL DID NOT have a 90% market share. They own their own software (aim) and network. Are software developers out there so inept that they can't write a different protocol and software?
Anyone know what the deal is on Jabber? I know the project is alive, and they now have reached version 1.0 for their server (which incidentally is an open server-to-server protocol like another post here wished for). I just don't ever hear anything about jabber anymore unless I go to their website.
Anyway, if AOL is opening their Oscar protocol (as opposed to the TOC protocol) this could be a great help to Jabber, if they incorporate it. Let's make this thing more widespread people! If you work at an ISP, set up a jabber server and provide your customers with clients and instructions for setting it up. Same thing if you manage a University computing center or, possibly, a business. This is our chance to make a decentralized worldwide free instant messing network. And the software is _already here_.
--
grappler
Vidi, Vici, Veni
Heh. Hack up a swedish Chef plugin and send that to me :-) Cheers.
---
---
Rob Flynn
Pidgin
I like the way Everybuddy does it - each user on your contact list can have an arbitrary number of user IDs for any of the supported IM systems associated with it. If the user comes online on any of the accounts it shows the user as online. I think there's a way to set a preferred protocol to use if the user is online using more than one system.
Also see the poster who mentioned Jabber.
--
CPAN rules. - Guido van Rossum
I read about this over at news.com and some things NEED to be cleared up.
1: The FTC does not care about AOL opening up the protocol because it is a free service.
2: Furthermore the article states "We are planning to put out to the industry a way we think that can be done in terms of commitment to interoperability. (The industry) will hear something from us soon,"
The SOON means whenever AOL get's around it. They will probably say WE are the standard in their proposal. And it will get drafted to death by Microsoft and others which will delay the process. There is and won't be a universal chat client for a long time.
The decision to open the protocol is surprising as just this week a rival program entitled Odigo debuted its latest version with connectivity to AOL and ICQ, making it universal. In a not-so-surprising move, AOL blocked that access like it had in the past to Odigo, Microsoft, and Yahoo chat programs.
What likely happened here is that AOL has/had a policy to reflexively block anyone who implements the protocol and tries to talk to their servers without their permission, which is arguably illegal and definitely inappropriate, or at least impolite.
However, opening it up actually does show some benefit; First of all, this gives still more benefit to AOL users, allowing them to trade messages with people who won't use AIM (because it sucks.) Second, they can stop fighting legal battles over it. Third, they will slaughter all the other messaging services except for ICQ, and even ICQ is going to hurt a little. Having the biggest installed base counts for more than having the broadest featureset.
In any case, this will put an end to anyone who has implemented their own messaging service. It's over, folks. Change your messager to support AIM and put an ad in it, and move on to the next software development project. You missed the boat.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Wouldn't it be great if they started off by integrating their 2 IM thingies? We have half the world on ICQ and the other half on AIM. There is nothing stopping them from integrating the 2 together. NS would also be good if it came with ICQ instead of AIM. I don't know anybody that uses AIM who doesn't have AOL.
---
----
I think it would be nicest if the whole system was simplified.
At the moment the main model (commercial/propriety or not) is that the one system does everything. It registers people's online state, stores undelivered messages, stores people's personal details, performs searches, etc etc.
Some systems use client-to-client protocols to lower the load on the server and that's great, but IMHO it'd be even better if the services were completely separate. All that the main system would ever need to do is register whether people were online or not, and dictate who was allowed to know about who else was on.
Having different servers implementing standardised protocols for every service and letting the clients decide which ones they're going to use would make the whole thing much easier to extend. (Even if the services were all provided by the same provider.)
Splitting them up and modulising would also give providers and users the freedom to choose what services they wanted, and it'd generally make it easier for each module to be developed separately. If the original system didn't support server-server communication, someone could quite easily write a new one that did.
I personally like the idea for the plug-in. And GAIM rules this weak world.
Ever wonder why gaim couldn't send files quite like AIM clients can (gaim comes close though, to its credit)? Why you can't do the "direct connection" like you can on AIM clients? This is exactly why. AOL has kept the TOC and OSCAR protocols quite hidden as to dissuade customers from going to other clients (MS, Yahoo) in order to keep their ad revenue. The annoying ads are how AOL makes money off of this "free" service. However the FTC (Federal Trade Commission) was peeping into the case as AOL may be monopolizing the communications market. I'm not quite sure what the FTC was looking at, but AOL didn't want any part of it, especially since the AOL/Time Warner merger was announced. Everyone who works at AOL (myself included) as well as other stockholders want this merger to go through. I'm damn glad AOL decided to open up the protocol -- now gaim will completely kick (even more) ass.
Open standards have been shown over and over to be essential in preventing abuse of power by companies with large market shares. This is why Microsoft has been trying to corrupt standards everywhere with "extentions" which they control - they know perfectly well that control of this type of standard can make or break control of a market. If AOL really does open up their standards for this communication protocal, and doesn't try the game of "extending" them, it will be a great benefit for consumers. AOL will not be able to play the lockout game, allowing choice. And choice, as has been said before, is the lifeblood of consumer welfare.
"I object to doing things that computers can do." -- Olin Shivers, lispers.org
Sorry I can't give you an exact location; Windows 9x differs from NT/2000 and I don't know either location =)
First of all, I'd love to see the AIM protocol be opened. AIM is way, way, better then ICQ, and opening up the protocol could allow it to become an open standard like HTTP, available everywhere. Making it even easier to find hot guys to chat with whenever I want? While this could certainly be about trying to make the AOL-TW merger more 'palatable'. It would also be a boon to the open source community. AOL has often, in the past few months done very 'nice things' for the open source community not the least of witch is maintaing Mozilla. I wonder if AOL sees Open Source as a way to harm Microsoft, and possibly remove them as a powerful player in new-media. As well as talk about using FreeBSD in set top boxes. Arguably, MS is the only company right now with the power to stop AOL. They're really the only ones trying to play AOL's game anymore. (other then perhaps @home ). If M$ goes away, there will be nothing to stop AOL's quest for world domination or whatever. So maybe they don't 'get it', not the same way we do, but what they do get is that Open Source can kill M$
Amber Yuan 2k A.D
"and dear god does this website suck now." -- CmdrTaco
Everyone who works at AOL (myself included) as well as other stockholders want this merger to go through.
The idea doesn?t bother you? Don't get me wrong, I like AOL as much as everyone else (*cough*), but doesn?t the idea of one company having so much power disturb you? AOL has constantly been disruptive force online. And their policies about things like free speech are not anywhere near the policies laid out in the US constitution.
When I had an AOL account, back in the day, the provided free web space. And they still do, it's just, you need to have a huge add plastered up on your site. I find that disgusting. Profiting of other peoples work (when they are already paying for the service). AOL is commoditizing its user base in more ways than I can imagine (this is a company that used to sell mailing lists of its users). I don't think AOL owing one of the largest 'old media' companies in the US (and the world) doesn't exactly warm my heart.
It used to be the dream that the Internet would break down the barriers of nation and the world. And in some ways, it has. The other day I got an ICQ message from someone in Iran. But in that world it isn't the individual that's being empowered, it?s the corporation.
I hope the FTC cuts this merger like a dead rat.
Amber Yuan 2k A.D
"and dear god does this website suck now." -- CmdrTaco
Well the Oscar protocol opens and closes every now and then, but not in the traditional sense. If you search enough, you can find [outdated] Oscar protocol specifications. In fact, my roommate was working on a C++ Builder library for Win32 to implement what he found of it. Granted he doesn't get the Voice over IP feature (or whatever it is) but he'll get most of the protocol.
The TOC protocol has always been open since they released the specifications for the Java TIC and Tcl/Tk TiK clients some time ago.
Then you have Jabber, which offers free open source clients and servers that bridge between their own open source XML protocol, AOL's [TOC probably] and AOL's/Mirabilis ICQ. Unfortunately this doesn't seem to be incredibly popular.
Why not marshall all the protocols together on the client end? MSN, Yahoo!, AIM... whatever.
I've been working on an open source prototype using this idea for a bit now. Its Win32 and written in VB6, but the final product is planned to be compiled in Delphi 5.0: elysium.systemcrash.org.
"After three days without programming, life becomes meaningless." - Tao of Programming
To which the obvious answer is, bundle MS Mess with all other MS-Apps offerings (Office, IE). MSA can even use the same licensing tricks: "Want to bundle Office with some of your systems? It'll be $10 per system you don't put it on." So much for the "remedy"...
-- LoonXTall
~~~LXT~~~
Life is like a computer program: anything that can't happen, will.
For example, you could talk to user@aim.jabber.org and user@icq.jabber.org without a naming conflict.
I've seen Jabber mentioned a few times already but I think it deserves to be be recognized. A GPLed instant messaging client/server is a good thing. I think they have a good design using XML and an email like postoffice system. I plan on starting up my own public jabber server as soon as I get a dedicated Internet connection.
People need to start using Jabber. The have a few clients up already and are working on more, it seems this projects only problem is a shortage of users and testers.
--
$x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
$x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
yeah - when I was at school (umich) we had access to a 40 year old IBM mainframe (MTS - Michgan Terminal System) that kept everything internally. You could chat with others online, and the best part was the fact that if you flamed someone (or hit on them, or whatever) and later decided that you shouldn't have sent that message - you could retract it (if they hadn't read it first).
- passion
Actually, I think they knew all along they had to open it up...they were just stalling for every day they could possibly get. The longer they held the monopoly, the more substantial their market lead gets, and the harder it is to break the stranglehold. More importantly, the damn thing is always blinking a "Get 500 hours FREE!" message at you which must be getting them tens of thousands of new sign-ups every day. With that kind of customer acquisition, every day they managed to keep the monopoly going was a big plus to the bottom line for them.
THANK GOD! I can now no longer be forced to use an AOL product just because 90% of the people I need to talk to are using it!
It's not funny till someone gets hurt.
-legolas
i've looked at love from both sides now. from win and lose, and still somehow...
As much as respect stepping down from a childish pissing contest, this doesn't show a damn thing, except maybe the FTC is easily placated.
Conscience is the inner voice which warns us that someone may be looking.
Conscience is the inner voice which warns us that someone may be looking.
-- H. L. Mencken
And I quote them all. . .
Here is the article on eFront. And here is the Register article about FTC's request.
And here are some additional background links from c|net: 1 and 2. Each of those is extensively linked to additional information about AOL's previous runins with Tribal Voice and MS.
Work for Change & GET PAID!
from my understanding of it, AIM has two protocols. Oscar, and TOC.
TOC is what AOL had all the docs for, and what thier TiK client used. It's also what gaim uses to communicate with.TOC basicly being a "front-end" so to speak for the real protocol
Oscar is their closed protocol they use for their own official clients. Probably better then TOC, I'm not sure on the specifics, hopefully others will post. This has NEVER been open, and subject to change. I'm sure all gaim users remember a couple weeks ago, when they changed to login sequence and we couldn't get in for a few days until the gaim guys figured out how they changed it.
If it's just TOC they are re-releasing, then it's not much more then all the info that's already out there. If it's Oscar, then it should let all clents such as gaim, and even the un-offical icq clients, like licq and gnomeicq, to intergrate AIM support.
But I have a feeling it's TOC, and not Oscar they are going to open up. Hopefully others will post and set all the technical details straight.
But how do you differentiate between all the users on the current systems? What if there are 2 different people, one on AIM, one on ICQ, both using the same nickname? Split it up into seperate sections as to which client they are using?
AIM List
Randomguy
lalala
mr.nobody
ICQ List
Randomguy
YetAnotherInstantMessenger
lalala
pete
Might be a little weird if a bunch more IM programs begin showing up/getting popular.. hmm.
BilldaCat
As much inconvenience as it's caused and most posts here to the contrary, I completely understand AOL's past position on this, at least from a business standpoint.
Microsoft's IM client will become an integrated part of all future releases of their OSes, and they'll annex the man-share of new subscribers. After that, the only ones signing up for AIM will be AOL subscribers who become AIM users by default.
AOL users (of which I doubt there are many on /.) can expect this experience:
This type of experience is just going to get worse and worse. [SARCASM]But take comfort. At least more and more of your Windows desktop will be displaying ads you can't get rid of.[/SARCASM]
f by "they" you mean AOL, then that's not possible... ICQ isn't owned by America Online.
Um, yes it is. moron. AOL baught that den of idiot programmers Mirablis (or whatever). I don't know why they didn't take over the codebase, those ICQ programers should all be taken out and shot.
Amber Yuan 2k A.D
"and dear god does this website suck now." -- CmdrTaco
Indeed, the first Bitnet chat server was written in the early '80's, in EXEC2, before Rexx was available. It was 576 lines of the ugliest ampersand-ridden code that you ever saw. It ran on a VM/CMS system in Maine in late '82 / early '83. Originally called 'Converse', it was rewritten in Rexx and called 'Chat' sometime later.
Not long after, a group at PSU wrote a another version by the same name (with permission!). That server was better known, and soon brought the 9600 baud lines we were using to their knees.
Soon after *that*, came Relay, the first distributed chat system. The phone lines cooled down and all was well in the world.
When the Internet started to become more generally available, we acquired IRC (The Internet Relay Chat), I think that history is well known now.
Don't ask me why, but the original Chat used '*' as the escape character. The signon greeting looked like this:
This is CONVERSE, Version 1.0
Please sign on to join the
conference, or type '*?'.
Ahh, memories...
A.
...bringing you cynical quips since 1998
Also, a bit offtopic. For GAIM, I want to program a plugin. Let me know if you like this idea: It's a bit like call-screening. Basically, you go into away mode, but then there are some people that you select that CAN IM you without an away message (like your best friends). You all know why this would be useful... think of when you're busy but want to be online in case your best buds have somethin to say. But filter the rest out without hurting their feelings! It wouldn't be that hard to program, everything we have is there, I just suck with C. Let me know if anyone is interested. Thanks!
Mike Roberto (roberto@soul.apk.net) -GAIM: MicroBerto
Berto
Windows runs command stored in these registry keys:
r entVersion/Run
e ntVersion/Run
HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE/software/Microsoft/Windows/Cur
HKEY_CURRENT_USER/software/Microsoft/Windows/Curr
As well as like runOnce and every thing like that in the same directorys.
Btw, a good way to find something in the registry is to do a search for something like the program file name.
Amber Yuan 2k A.D
"and dear god does this website suck now." -- CmdrTaco
Hmm...Ive been hacking up a AIM clone on Visual Basic so the IT department where I work can't detect it, so I know the limitations of the TOC protocol :o) Lets take a look at the basic features OSCAR has over TOC. Buddy Icon - Although it is pretty fun to play with it is not that useful. Chat - Hmmmm You can do that with the TOC server... Get File - I can think of a lot better ways to send a file than over AIM. When I went from modem to DSL it stopped working for me. They I went to cable and it works again. But I still prefer IRC, Email or what not. Talk - I have tried the talk feature on AIM and I find that you can get free third part utilities that work better for low bandwidth solutions. New and Stock Ticker - Well I spend my money before I earn it so I haven't found too much of a use for this one either, put their are a million other better programs that will give you the stock and news ticker for free(ex: www.yahoo.com) BTW, if I ever get off by butt I might just put it on my web site.
Of course, Jabber clients require an extraordinary amount of support packages from GNOME just to get running. Now, far be it from me to stop anyone from using GNOME/KDE, but I've got an old machine. It handles X fine, and I can use it just perfectly for what I need it for. That doesn't include a desktop "environment," but it does include both AIM (via TiK) and ICQ.
Is it really so hard for people to write up clients that don't require a few hundred megs worth of support packages nowadays? You can open all the protocols you want, but it's not going to do any good if the guy on the other end has to upgrade *again* just to make it work, especially when he's already low on disk space.
Just another disgruntled old linux user...
Raptor
Raptor
"Procrastination is great. It gives me a lot more time to do things that I'm never going to do."
Well, if you know the registry, just delete the AIM key in HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\Microsoft\Windows\Curre ntVersion\Run Otherwise, run the System Information tool in Start/Accessories/System Tools. Then click Tool/System Configuration Utility. Click the startup tab and there's all the stuff that will start up. AIM's in there, ready to be unchecked.
If you are running Win98, you should be able to run a utility called msconfig. Just use your Run... launcher from the Start button. Flip through the panels and look for something AIM related. Take it out. Love life.
I've already made an irc client that is very much a lookalike of AIM. You can find it at http://www.fozztexx.com/Fixxm.
There's a version for Windoze, MacOS X, and OPENSTEP 4.2. I'll port it to Linux if they ever get around to making a usable GNUstep.
so what's the benefit?
--
Expect Microsoft to embrace this with a new client, integrate the client with the next release of IE, and add proprietary extensions to eventually subvert any other players in the field.
I'm not a big fan of AOL, but I'd rather have two big companies at each others throat than just one company controlling everything.
Back when I was in college (Around '88) we had bitnet and bitnet relay chat. Built into VM/CMS was the ability to send an instant message to any other user on the network, find out if that user was logged in and chat real time with one or many users. The messages were easy to field using your own REXX code and you could pretty much do anything with them. In fact, I wrote a client-server remote control app that would allow you to send messages to a server on a remote system and execute commands on that system, forwarding the output of the commands back to you. Hmm. I should have patented that...
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
So let me get this right.. I have an essentially private network (AOL), build a tool that I never claim is open (AIM), and then I get government pressure to let other people use it? Why? AOL's competitors don't have any "right" to interoperate with AIM, they didn't spend any money developing it, didn't build up the infrastructure, didn't send out a bajillion CDs to get people to use it, but now they want to leverage it. Why does crap like this happen? What ever happened to private property rights in this country?
DrLunch.com The site that tells you what's for lunch!