Slashdot Mirror
AOL IM Rival Pulls The Plug
A reader writes: "719software.com has an interesting story about TribalVoice who was probably the only real threat to AOL in the instant messenger field, since AOL's acquisition of ICQ. David fought Goliath and lost. Now the only one left fighting AOL over IM, is Microsoft. How ironic." There's actually more then just Pow Wow left - Jabber comes to mind, but the field has definitely narrowed over the last few years.
"Pinky, you've left the lens cap of your mind on again." - P&TB
"I can see my house from here!" - ST:
Now certainly there are much better things about IRC than IM, IMO, but most are related to the stability and scalability of the system. In addition, there's some privacy concerns, given that with IM, all your information and messages are going through a central server. And there are some things that IM can do that IRC can't, and vice versa. But from John Q. Public, those 'important' features are in IM, and not IRC.
"Pinky, you've left the lens cap of your mind on again." - P&TB
"I can see my house from here!" - ST:
MSN IM doesn't allow you to send messages to somebody who is offline, or if you're in invisible mode. I had to install it for work, and I hate it. I can't belive a 350K d/l made me reboot too! Anyway, I've already typed several message and they had it tell me that it couldn't connect due to that person going off line. It's a POS. Somebody in another thread had indicated that AOL IM is similar. Yahoo IM is the best that I've tried!
Yahoo IM is my favourite. I just had to install MSN IM for work, and I hate it. Yahoo IM lets me stay invisible, but still send and receive messages. It lets me send messages to people who are not there, and it lets me take messages when I'm logged of. Conferencing is easy. It maintains one connection, logging me off when I log on from another machine. It doesn't require a reboot to install. It's cross platform.
Personally I prefer the Yahoo IM over MSN IM. It doesn't look as flashy as the MSN one, but it has better functionality. It doesn't require a reboot to install either.
Does anybody know what is going on with MessengerA2Z. I contacted them asking for the source code under the GPL. They responded that it would be available very shortly on sourceforge, but I haven't seen the site change at all:
http://sourceforge.net/projects/messengera2z
Bite me. I installed it on a Win2K AS and a Win2K Pro machine. It asked to reboot them both.
Maybe I'm old fashioned about it, but I figure IRC is a better way of doing this stuff, but then I also don't like IRC that much. Like MUDs and other things, they steal a lot of time. IRC, MUD and IM are the sitcoms of the internet.
-- Solaris Central - http://w
Yahoo! does IM too, including voice.
Yet there are tons of free/open software clients working flawlessly. If we can figure it out, why can't they? Are they more vulnerable to legal action from AOL regarding reverse engineering?
jabberview.com has a list of all the public servers with all the gateways they have installed.
Tribal Voice's PowWow has been around longer than AOL's internet gateway to its instant messaging. They have always had tacky, cheap-looking software and a small number of active users. Three million? Sure, maybe cumulative in the 5 years after they first launched.
They had more active users than MSN and Yahoo instant messaging in the end? I find that hard to believe. This is like saying Vivo is still a "threat" to RealPlayer and MS Media Player, or that the Amiga is a "threat" to anything.
Like many CMGI acquisitions, TribalVoice was a cheap, third-rate product snapped up at a fire-sale price from yet another owner that couldn't make it fly.
Maybe because IRC is only realtime. It does not enable leaving messages when the recipient is offline. But email is ideal for when the correspondents are not online at the same time, so IM is not needed in that situation either.
AIM is probably the easiest to use, and I still use it. I also use ICQ, which is my preferred app, since I can communicate in ways other than just typing back and forth. I'll probably get rid of AIM one day, but I will stick to ICQ. I know AOL, a big evil corporation makes this stuff, but it still doesn't mean that it isn't useful. (I had the displeasure of working for them... trust me, its even more disorganized on the inside than it appears!)
A slip of the foot you may soon recover, but a slip of the tongue you may never get over. -Benjamin Franklin
I cannot believe you forgot Yahoo. It is small, fast, stores your contact list on the server, has almost no ads, and has Linux and FreeBSD clients.
They are also on the IMunited committee.
http://messenger.yahoo.com
-----
If you don't like all the marketing hype and shockwave movies don't go to jabber.com, but try the Free Software community site www.jabber.ORG.
I swear it is just like watch a bunch of preschoolers arguing over a toy or something.
Unfortunately, there is nobody to come in and make them "share".
Why the hell should AOL share? They spent the money to develop the service and view it as a differentiation to sell their services. Its their servers and they should have the right to tell other people who want to use them to go screw themselves.
You can bet if IM had failed, all of AOL's competitors wouldn't be falling over themselves to help AOL pay for their failure....
DrLunch.com The site that tells you what's for lunch!
There are probably quite a few reasons for this . . . the one that comes to mind first is the fact that instant messengers are somewhat more user-friendly than IRC. Extra features, such as voice or graphical smileys could also be a reason.
Expanding on the user friendly thread, registered screen names/nicks could be an issue as well. Granted there are services on some of the IRC networks but they're not simple point and click deals. You have to learn the commands, which are often beyond the grasp of regular Windows users. And dialup users can forget having a 24/7 connection, or perhaps eggdrops to keep their nicks on networks that don't have nick services.
Yet another reason could be the sheer number of IRC networks. I usually have 2 irc clients open so I can be on two networks simultaneously, to stay in touch with different groups of people. (Admittedly, I know of people who run 2 or more IM clients as well.)
And perhaps the biggest reason is AOL itself. Every subscriber they have is automatically an IM user, and if you want to converse in real time with AOL users, IM is the easiest way to do so. AOL users have no real reason to go and learn IRC, when most of the people they want to chat with have accepted, and use, AOL's defacto standard.
I go to one of the top CS schools and I have never seen anyone actually use Jabber or its clones...but Hemos et. al. seem to treat it like its popular and everyone uses it...
;-)
Do people out there actually use it, and if so, what's so great about it? Or is this just GNU/FUD?
--------------------------
While I haven't used GNOME-ICU since it was still called GTK-ICQ, it also looks like a good product, good competition for LICQ, though maybe not quite as advanced yet.
we use AIM at work - i would say it is a vital tool to our everyday development environment.
sure, we also use email and newsservers, but unlike these asynchronous-type mediums, chat proggys are synchronous (or at least more so than email.) when i pop a question to a mate, i usually get a prompt response...whether i am asking him for the next round of foosball or if the SQL server is up.
just b/c you don't see a use for it, don't think that it isn't useful to others. i am very happy in my open environment now where i have email and AIM, as opposed to the corporate hell-hole i worked for previously who wouldn't let us run AIM at all....
it's like everything else a tool!
/* Half alive and half dead too, work is for suckers and the sucker is you. - "Half-life" by Local H*/
Also, at work, my boss HATES people to be on IRC, but for AIM/ICQ they don't really care, in fact we use ICQ for inter-office stuff all the time.
--
Free Mac Mini
I think I heard of them maybe once before this article. So I don't quite get this quote:
"TribalVoice who was probably the only real threat to AOL in the instant messenger field"
How can a geek who almost always has 4 IM programs running(ICQ, MSN, Yahoo!, and AIM) and has on several occasions looked for more not have gotten into "the only real threat to AOL in the instant messenger field"?? Why is it that I see people put Yahoo Messenger names on email sig files, but never TribalVoice??? And TV is the only real IM competition AOL had?? Just seems odd to me... Yahoo at least is a serious competitor to AIM, but not something I almost never heard of.
But the cool part is that you can go online to the AIM, Yahoo! and ICQ networks from one IM interface. The only quip is that AOL sets up some block regularly (at least last time I used Odgio, need to set it up on my home/new work box). But Odigo would inevitably bypass it.
Overall, I liked it and used it. It also allowed you to find people (If you're looking for love, conversation, etc.) by profiles or make yourself invisible. They are making a Mac version now, which they didn't before...don't see why they wouldn't make a Linux version. Would the source open up? Dunno! Anyone else use it/know of any Odigo for Linux movements?
Cheers,
Galego
Que Deus te de em dobro o que me desejas
[May God give you double that which you wish for me]
It's a good thing you didn't ask me about STABLE Jabber servers. I don't know what I could've answered then.
Sure, Jabber is there, but I think it will be a long time, unfortunately, before it has anything meaningful to offer.
The server, to my knowledge, only runs on Linux, and still has some bugs -- especially in the agents. The clients (I've only tried the Windows flavor) are either buggy or lacking in features -- or both!
In fact, I tried experimentally to use Jabber last week instead of AIM (I tried JabberIM, WinJab and myJabber). I had to change servers twice because the previous one shut down an agent, or shut down completely. Each time, I essentially had to hand-enter my Roster items (a.k.a. buddy list) again since there is no way to import/export rosters.
I'm pretty close to installing VMWare and running Linux in it so I can run a Jabber server and develop my own client. But, who am I kidding? I don't have time for that!
I'll just stick to AIM, with all of its glorious bloat, for now
In order to use the full AIM protocol, you have to reverse engineer it - besause the specs are not given out, and plus you are vulnerable to blocking and bugs if you dont interact well with the AIM servers.
Microsoft is also unlike Free developers, since it has a large concentrations of liability absorbing capital. I.E., they can be sued. Until they get out from under the "Antitrust" issue, they are not likely to countersue or do any "Microsoft pressure" tactics to force the issue.
For the life of me, I cannot figure out why people prefer AIM over ICQ. ICQ can do everything that AIM can do and there are no ads on ICQ. (of course, you can remove the ads on AIM) If you want a real-time chat in ICQ you just open up a talk session. Someone sends you a message, and you get a notification in the sys tray, not a huge window. The beautiful thing is you can just let it sit there in the queue with ICQ. You'll get to it when you get to it. With AIM, this large window pops up right in your face. "You WILL chat with me!" Subtlety is a lost art.
The truth is that AOL spends all it's time pushing AIM and none on ICQ. That's tragic. AOL bought a great product/service in ICQ. It's just too bad that they are not giving it a real chance.
What needs to happen is make a standard for IMing, and then have every messenger compatible with it.
Its like if every single telephone company wasn't compatible with each other... whats the point of using a smaller company if you cant talk to anyone? At least if they are all equal in service you can freely choose the one that gives you the best options.
Wait...if AOL/timewarner/everything and Microsoft are feuding over this...should we be upset? THey are both huge companies!! They could destroy each other!!! /me prays!
:)
also...I found a typo..there-can-onlby-be-one dept.
Hemos, how do you spell only? slow down on those keys!
of course...by pointing out a spelling mistake, i have probably made several in this post....
The anti-salmon
ICQ doesn't have rotating ads like AIM and MSN, but the advertising is still there. Whenever you first start ICQ it pops up a window, with plenty of advertisments. Check out the ICQ homepage. Chock full of advertising. What AOL is failing to realize about ICQ is that it is not My Yahoo, or even AOL Lite. If they just stuck to a barebones IM client, instead of having all the bells and whistles of a "portal," I would be more willing to use them. The RAM that ICQ sucks up on a windows client is astounding.
Unfortunately, there is nobody to come in and make them "share".
You can see parallels on a larger scale with other not so civilized types who come in and rip off people "for their own good".
"This reduction of service is by popular demand". etc.
a pox on all their houses.
"It is a greater offense to steal men's labor, than their clothes"
Well, while the titans are fighting, we users can just have a look at the advantages of using one or other IM. Why should we or not use their products?
Actually I use both Microsoft IM and ICQ.
I use MS IM because:
I work at different offices on different nt through port 80, that is in most cases open to workstations and firewall configs, so IM connects preserve internet browsing to their employees. In most cases I am unabled to use ICQ.
You can check your hotmail account (that I use for the same reason as MS IM) without actually browsing to the webpage.
My contactlist is kept serverside. (or is this a disadvantage?)
I use ICQ because:
I can send messages to people not online, they'll receive it when they come online
There is a version for my linuxbox
I don't get adds
"Everything that can be invented has been invented."
--I assume full responsibility for my actions, except the ones that are someone else's fault.
Did you forget to pay the typo tax, Hemos?
Except if AOL/MSN, etc. just decide to update their protocols to force the public to upgrade towards their tools...
--
Trolling using another account since 2005.
I see that AIM has their own little AOL ads embedded, and MSN IM has their own MSN ads embedded into them, but ICQ never pops up any ads on me. Why is it that there is this stupid competition out there for a chat service? Do AOL & Microsoft want to collect terabytes of pre-teen chatting? What is the deal?
When my gaming clan originally made the form for our join page, ICQ was required. However, once I went around checking what everybody had, ALL of the members already had AIM, while only 3 or 4 had ICQ. I'm not suprised. I've grown to like AIM more than ICQ, if only for it's quick messaging. I've customized it so it works for me, pretty much. The annoying sounds only ring when I first get a message, and I changed them to a random sound depending on my mood...
I think AIM's warning system is a pile of crap. In fact, BLOCK should be the ONLY option, and it should be taken effect immediately. As of right now, If you respond to a message and then block someone when they start warning you, they can still warn you to their full extent.. Wha? That's totally abused... Not to mention AOL's stupid system of allowing anyone to create any name at any time... All it asks for is differant email addresses. Hell, I have UNLIMITED email addresses. I could sit there all nite and create. There is no limit! Even if you use the SAME email, you can still do it 5 or so times before it asks you to change!
I don't know whether to be excited or scared. After AOL bought ICQ and Netscape, the world has been a scary place. Gah.
Seeka
Odigo is an AOL and ICQ-compliant IM. Whenever AOL finds a way to cut them off, Odigo releases a patch fix a day later :)
The global economy is a great thing until you feel it locally.
Why are people using incompatible Instant Messangers, when there is IRC? IRCs protocol is open, it has clients for nearly every OS and arch, and only because A uses mIRC and B uses xchat it doesn't mean they can't talk to each other...
Ok, I'm wondering... how much does ICQ/IM/etc have to suffer from DOS attacks relative to e.g. IRC?
I'm guessing AOL has some bandwidth to spare, but still...
Is this less bad since there are no 'channels' to take over or what?
Moz.
see a Text Widget