Slashdot Mirror


Official AIM for Linux

topdown writes "I just noticed that AOL released Instant Messenger Beta for Linux (rpm format for RedHat, SuSE, and Mandrake). Don't know about you, but I'll be sticking with gaim for now." Wow, this is fantastic news. Way to be on the cutting edge, AOL. Sorry, but this release doesn't even warrant a copy of our home game. I still don't forgive you for using the Jetsons theme music in your commercials.

17 of 299 comments (clear)

  1. Let me get this straight by Zelxyb · · Score: 4

    You're telling me that AOL is sucking? I don't believe that for a minute.

  2. Gaim? No thanks... by rkent · · Score: 3

    Why fiddle around with one chat protocol at a time? I'll take Everybuddy any day. Even over the new AOL client, btw, but I guess I might download it to check it out.

  3. Linux86. by freebe · · Score: 4

    It's annoying to see XYZ for Linux! when it's really Linux/x86. Years ago, people came up with the word Wintel to describe Windows on Intel. Perhaps we should coin Linux86 to describe Linux on x86 so people understand what platform of Linux you're talking about. Remember - you heard it here first!

    --

    Free BeOS, runs from a Linux partition

    1. Re:Linux86. by gwernol · · Score: 5

      It's annoying to see XYZ for Linux! when it's really Linux/x86. Years ago, people came up with the word Wintel to describe Windows on Intel. Perhaps we should coin Linux86 to describe Linux on x86 so people understand what platform of Linux you're talking about. Remember - you heard it here first!

      Surely it should be Lintel. After all, a lintel is that piece of architecture that goes above your Windows.

      --
      Sailing over the event horizon
    2. Re:Linux86. by Temporal · · Score: 3
      Perhaps we should coin Linux86 to describe Linux on x86 so people understand what platform of Linux you're talking about.

      Nah - All the Windows 9x people would think Linux86 was 14 years old.

      ------

  4. AIM For Linux- Co-Opting IM Standard? by Eharley · · Score: 3

    I wonder if AOL is releasing a version of AIM for Linux so that AIM will gain more support, and thus displace the AT&T, Excite@Home, iCAST, MSN, Odigo, Phone.com, Prodigy, Tribal Voice, and Yahoo! from getting their "open" IM standard adopted.

  5. Re:Instead of ICQ? by larz · · Score: 5

    Jabber is has a functioning and robust XML-based independent instant messaging protocol. It interoperates with AIM, ICQ and other IM systems. Clients are currently much more functional than AOL's linux beta. There's a good list of clients and user info at Jabber Central.

  6. And it'll have a linux specific name, too: by stienman · · Score: 5

    So the new name for the Linux version is, what, LAIM?

    People who use LAIM will be called LAIMers.

    And that one actor on Star Wars episode one will sue when AOL gets the domain name LAIM

    -Adam

    How are we clapping?
    I have no idea...

    1. Re:And it'll have a linux specific name, too: by joshwa · · Score: 3

      Oops. There is a Linux AIM project called LAIM. Careful! :)

  7. LICQ Features... by suwalski · · Score: 3

    LICQ is a great ICQ program for, well, just about any UNIX-y platform. I for one, refuse to use an official client that doesn't have such features as ping flood and UIN spoofing. If AOL puts these in, maybe they'll get some ICQ converts. Otherwise, AIM is obviously inferior. =P

  8. Instant-Messenger alternatives by Kiro · · Score: 3
    Here are some open-source, free alternatives to AIM:

    GAIM
    GnomeICU
    LICQ

    Considering what AOL did to Mozilla, you're probably better off with an open-source clone.

    --
    Kiro

    1. Re:Instant-Messenger alternatives by Erbo · · Score: 3
      Absolutely, and we have transports for MSN and IRC as well. The Jabber protocol is based on streaming XML, which makes it very flexible. Here are some good Jabber sites to check out:

      Jabber.org
      Jabber.com
      Jabber Central

      Eric
      --

      --
      Be who you are...and be it in style!
  9. Let me get this straight, too... by Golias · · Score: 3

    They don't "warrant a copy of our home game", but they do deserve to have a link to their press release posted on Slashdot?

    --

    Information wants to be anthropomorphized.

  10. Re:What's Next, AOL for Linux? by rho · · Score: 5
    Then there's the aolserver, whatever the advantages of that over apache I haven't a clue.

    Gotta stand up for my webserver of choice, here :)

    AOLserver is a full multi-threaded webserver that has a built-in TCL interpreter. It's easy to install, and the latest version (3.0) is wicked fast. It also excels at database connectivity.

    Due to it's threaded nature, and the pooling of DB connections, it tends to be faster than Apache in dynamically generated web sites. An Apache God could probably match AOLserver with careful tuning, so speed isn't really much of an issue.

    I just like AOLserver better than Apache, mainly due to the OpenACS guys and the work they've done. Great out-of-the-box functionality (and, soon available for Apache as well).

    AOLserver 3.0 is also open-sourced (a true GPL, I believe). Be nice to those guys -- they did the right thing with AOLserver; maybe they'll do the same for AIM (errmmm.... maybe).

    --
    Potato chips are a by-yourself food.
  11. Re:Instead of ICQ? by Tassach · · Score: 5
    What advantage does AIM have over ICQ, other than the fact that it's used by millions of AOL users (no comment on that one :)?

    Being able to talk to millions of people is a handy feature at times. Probably about 1/2 to 3/4 of my non-(computer)-geek friends are on AOL, and most of the rest use AIM; while maybe 2 use ICQ. Being able to chat with your friends & family is the whole point of messaging software. It's the old betamax vs VHS thing: one is technically superior while the other is incredibly popular.

    The main technical difference between the two protocols is that (IIRC) ICQ messages are delivered peer-to-peer, whereas AIM messages are all routed via their servers. This is a big security advantage because random lusers and script kiddies can't find out your IP address (unless you use the newer features like buddy icons, file x-fer, and voice chat).

    If you think that by using ICQ you arn't fuelling the AOL collective, guess again -- AOL assimilated ICQ years ago.

    The advantage of this, as I see it, is that it helps show the non-geek masses that Linux is a viable alternative to M$ Winblows. Say what you will about their (hideous) software or their (horrible) customer service -- they make getting online about as idiot-proof as is possible. If you have the hardware, a pulse, and one of their coasters, you can get on line.

    There are a lot of people need that kind of simplicity. Anyone who's ever worked tech support knows how confused the average windows luser gets when you try and walk them thru setting up dial-up networking and mail settings.


    "The axiom 'An honest man has nothing to fear from the police'

    --
    Why is it that the proponents of "one nation under God" are so eager to get rid of "liberty and justice for all"?
  12. Re:What's Next, AOL for Linux? by generic-man · · Score: 3

    The beef that AOL had with Yahoo, Microsoft, and Odigo wasn't just that they were allowing AIM customers in, but that other companies were slapping their OWN ads on these clients. Can you imagine how aggravating it would be if you built up a whole network for years at your own expense, and other people started making money off of it without your permission?

    GAIM, Everybuddy, TiK, et al don't have ads in them, so AOL doesn't consider them threats. The fact that they don't run out of the box on Windows or MacOS, the OS's that most of their customers use, makes them that much less of a threat.

    --
    For more information, click here.
  13. That's Why Open Source is sooo good. by BadlandZ · · Score: 3
    I have been saying it for a long long time. There is power in Open Source software, and hardly anyone is unleashing it yet. (Although I know the lifetime of /. articals is short, I figure if I manage to convince ONE person, it's worth a try).

    For years people have proclaimed "now you have the code, you can make changes if you want." Well, guess what, 99.5% of the people who use software don't know how to make changes!

    So again I'd like to point out, "Now that you have the code, you can OPTIMIZE it for your system." And, yes, that does really matter. And, no, you don't need to know how to program to do it.

    Take the example of Mandrake, maybe you think Mandrake is all hype, it's not. I started using Mandrake about a year ago after getting sick of recompiling everything by hand. I have done tests to prove to myself that Mandrake benchmark scores are higher than other Linux distributions like Gentus Benchmark Results on the exact same system (NOTE 1).

    And that's not the end of it... that's just Pentium optimized, I could throw a few more flags in for kicks and tweak the scores more.

    So, when I can get a gain of almost 40% using FREE software, try to compare the costs of doing it with hardware. A system that would be 40% faster (using hardware alone) would cost significantly more. Or, your going to get better preformance even on better hardware with optimized flags... so....

    I'm a little supprised that this benifit to Open Source (that applies to all hardware types, not just x86) is soo overlooked, and "the ability to change the code" is so bragged about.

    NOTE 1: Gentus is completely based on Red Hat, and Mandrake has it's roots in Red Hat software optimizations. Gentus is Red Hat with specific additions for Abit hardware, thus the better disk access times with Gentus (I can use ATA100) that with Mandrake (using only UDMA 66).