Slashdot Mirror


Jabber As The Coming IM Standard?

deran9ed writes: "Rocky Mountain News just posted an decent article regarding Jabber. "That makes Jabber the "best candidate for becoming the de facto standard" of the instant-messaging industry, Kobielus said, in much the same way Linux has been to the Unix operating system and Apache has been to Web servers." Article is written rather well for a change with comments on concerns of companies, and their employees use of other IM protocols (AIM, Yahoo), a brief history of Jabber, and its authors, etc. Read on" One thing's for sure -- AOL hasn't made any friends by periodically kicking off all non-official clients from AIM, and companies would like to know that won't happen to them with a custom client.

8 of 190 comments (clear)

  1. It's like we've regressed to the 80s! by roystgnr · · Score: 4

    It's been almost a decade since the last holdouts (Prodigy, MSN, AOL, etc... remember when they weren't just expensive ISPs?) figured out that making email for the entire world dependent on a single server farm might be a bad idea... or at least, at the time I'd assumed that they had figured it out. Now I realize that they were forced to accept internet email standards because no single one of them controlled a majority of the market, and each of them dreams of catching the next big technology and entrapping it on their own LAN. My email address is roystgnr@rice.edu; why should my instant messaging address be in a flat namespace (AIM, pre-internet AOL email), or god forbid even a flat numerical namespace (ICQ, pre-internet compuserve email)!?

    Does managing a technical company kill your long term memory?

  2. Talk about over-zealous... by MidKnight · · Score: 5
    .... That makes Jabber the "best candidate for becoming the de facto standard" of the instant-messaging industry, Kobielus said, in much the same way Linux has been to the Unix operating system...."

    Now, I'm a full convert on the usefulness of Linux. I've got it running on two different platforms in my house right now. But, calling it an industry standard is probably taking that a bit too far.

    It may become a defacto standard one day, but in my opinion we're still quite a way off (and Linux has a lot of growing up to do) before we reach that point.

    {{donning fire-retardant clothing}}
    --Mid

  3. An observation .... by LL · · Score: 5
    Simplicity (TM) and interoperability are good but is that sufficient to convince the average person to substitute to change their ICQ/AIM/whather just for a slightly better interface? The mail system which is *THE* killer-app of the internet relied on divying up the system into 3 components
    • - mail transfer agent (MTA);
    • - mail delivery agent (MDA); and
    • - mail user agent (MUA).
    Because the three components are somehwat independent and substitutable (e.g. sendmail/qmail, pine/elm/eudora) different palyers can upgrade without breaking some critical day-to-day use. Looking at the Jabber, it tries to be the polygot of IMs which while laudable, does make it a little unwieldly to offer alternatives and competition in the form of low barriers to entry tis'good (TM). For example, stuff like Elvin which is content-based messaging looks intriguing.

    Perhaps some thought should be given to aligning the components in an analogous fashion. Has someone looked into comparison of the key attributes of the different IM system to see whether a similar structure could be nominated? For example, I would hazard

    • - message session agent - handshaking/setup
    • - message resolution agent - figuring out namespace conflicts
    • - message distribution agent - multicast/AIM/etc
    • - message client agent - the GUI thingy-a-bob

    In fact spliting channels into a separate session control and others is what is suggested by BXXP framework.

    LL

  4. Re:AOL is a success story for the ages by ywwg · · Score: 5

    man, do they have templates for trolls these days?

  5. Why doesn't... by jeffsenter · · Score: 4

    I don't understand why Microsoft doesn't just build an Instant Messanger into their OS's like they did with IE and make that the standard by brute force. Conceivably Microsoft could agree to an IM truce with AOL and have their Windows/MSN IM work with AOL and ICQ. Then that would be the standard. The Bush administration wouldn't go after such an action on anti-trust grounds and that is the only possible deterant I can come up with. Dominance of IM also further isolates non-Microsoft OS's.

  6. Why Jabber COULD Work by alexhmit01 · · Score: 5

    IM compatibility is nice, and necessary, but isn't the secret to Jabber.

    Jabber needs real clients (i.e. Win32 and Mac) that don't suck, and people are comfortable with. It needs the power of ICQ with the simplicity of AIM. It also needs moron proof servers.

    This is the key point. The majority of computers are still in the corporate sector. We all use ICQ and AIM for communication, and nobody is happy about it. Some companies have tried to block AIM as a security risk (you can send corporate information out without any log of it), but found that it became key to the company's communication.

    A real system where I could communicate externally but have a special internal system would be helpful.

    Now, the real solution, IMO, is a Open Source/Corporate combo. In that scenario, there is a freely available public product that is really good. However, there should be a commercial (but inexpensive, IT budgets have gotten tighter) product that works with an internal server that is easy to install. Additionally, include an Admin kit so companies can configure what is allowed.

    For example, if I could only allow people to send URLs and text externally, but files internally, that would be a useful collaborative tool. That let's them communicate/goof off/whatever, while not exposing my company except internally. This would also take the load off my e-mail servers.

    Additionally, the corporate version should allow the corporate server to communicate on behalf of the clients. That way, I can block ICQ/AIM at my firewall, but allow the corporately supported client through.

    Do that, and Jabber takes a REAL foothold. Make the corporate version license access to AIM/ICQ servers (cobranded perhaps) so there isn't a risk of it breaking.

    Corporate America is NOT happy with AIM/ICQ. ICQ Groupware dying was a shame. There needs to be a real solution, and there is money to be made in this space. AOL with it's FCC agreement would likely jump at this, they could get revenue to cover costs. The Open Source community gets Jabber to NOT be harassed, and corporate America gets a real communicative tool.

    Alex

  7. Editorial Integrity Alert by istartedi · · Score: 5

    See http://www.jabber.com/news/release_102400.shtml for a press release from last fall disclosing the partnership between Jabber and VA Linux, Slashdot's corporate parent.

    --
    For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
  8. JabberIM is the way to go, but.... by madumas · · Score: 5
    Let's talk about JabberIM. I know there is alternatives, but last time I checked, it's the only one that works ok on a network drive under windows.

    The interface is simple, it's easy to use. But there is some problems:

    Frequent disconnection

    Concurrent connection: If I open two JabberIM on different machines, they will battle for the control of the connection!

    MSN stay connected when I close JabberIM. Very annoying, friends talk to a wall during hours.

    Or the messages pop and hide my work, or I never see them... I can't wait a few seconds before reading the mail like I was used to on ICQ and MSN.

    If a new user send me a message while I write to the other, the new window will capture my keystroke. Very annoying when you say : "I love you!".

    If those isues would be resolved, JabberIM would perfect for my needs.