Slashdot Mirror
AOL vs. Trillian
Trinition writes: "ZDNews is reporting that AOL is once again trying to shut out the competition. Trillian has been updated twice in the past 24 hours to work around the blocks AOL is throwing up to prevent the popular IM client from interoperating with the AOL Instant Messenger service. Will Cerulean Studios hold up better than those they follow in the footsteps of (i.e. Microsoft, AT&T and Jabber)?"
Will Cerulean Studios hold up better than those they follow in the footsteps of (i.e. Microsoft, AT&T and Jabber)
I don't see someone fighting AOL's lawyers better than AT&T and MS, honestly.
Only thing that can topple big companies are big companies...
Good quote, too many chars. Seriously, the slashdot 120 char limit sucks!
Trillian is a great program. I don't use the AOL IM portion of it, but since work forces us to use MSN messenger, I use Trillian so I can run ICQ as well. And the interface is far better than those of any of the messengers it uses, except for ICQ. Keep up the good work, Cerulean!
do not read this line twice.
AOL owns the login servers and databses, so its not like an evil strategy, i mean, would you build a cinema where everybody can enter for free?... i dont think so...
Sigs are for morons... Wait a minute...
I'm not sure of the current status of the application, but AOL has been doing the same thing to the OS X application Fire (a multi network IM client). Ever since it's release it's been a game of AOL blocking and subsequent update "fixing" the block,
Seems to me that all this extra programming is wasted cycles that could be better used for additional features for applications.
This is one area where greed is holding back innovation in the IM market.
More proof that multilateral action only prevents you from accomplishing your goals.
It's AOL's software, AOL's servers and AOL's IM protocol. Why should they feel compelled to allow 3rd party software to access their network?
from the article...
"But AOL said it's a matter of security..."
Sure it is. How bout it's a matter of we don't want you playing in our sandbox. Or, we don't like you because your client does stuff that would hurt us finacially? Or, we are stupid, greedy, corporate slugs who don't think programs should be able to talk to one another.
Wouldn't you love to see AOL go before a Senate Hearing for unfair business practices?
I know I would.
Sent from your iPad.
And since Trillian is able to keep up within a day's notice, I can't see how the efforts on AOL's part are making any significant dent.
Of course, thats not really the issue here. But its better they do it this way than sue competitors. Not to say thats not an option they're reserving for the future.
-Restil
Play with my webcams and lights here
If it turns out I cannot use my Trillian to access AIM, I think I'm going to have to take drastic action. I will sign onto the AIM clint one more time, just to see who advertises on it. Then, I will write them and tell them as long as they advertise on AIM, I will not buy anything from them. Its that simple, the only reason I can think that AOL blocks other cliants is that they want more ad money. So, the only way I can fight this action is to attack that money. I must say, I love Trillian, its one of the best programs that I've ever used in terms of its usabilty and sheer neat factor. I'm very disapointed at this series of events.
Sleep is for the weak!
Trillian is a very nice client - we use it almost exclusively here at work, as it lets us keep in contact with people using multiple IM platforms, and also doesn't ram ads down our throats.
One interesting thing is that the new AIM blocks only seem to affect Trillian v0.7x - some of our users still using v0.6x are still working fine, whereas us early adopters are having to update rapidly.
Luckily, the newest (v0.721) build includes an auto update function, so keeping up to date is likely to be much easier in the future. Bear in mind that there's a limit to how much AOL can do to break the protocols, as they don't want to shut out all of their previous clients.
Maybe they should change there slogon to...
So Easy to Use Because if you use anyone else we will make it impossible for you to keep up!!
With PR efforts like this who wouldnt want to use AOL??
"All I can tell the "lesser of two evils" folks is that if they keep voting for evil, they'll keep getting evil."-Lp.org
But AOL is fighting Trillian simply that they want as many poeple as possible to use their service.
Yes, it is selfish, as mentioned in the article.
But can you blame them? They are a corporation, fed by profits. They are staving off a possible competitor that is small, fast, and most of all, free (which means they beat AOL in that arena, except for the stand-alone AIM).
I'm not afraid of falling, it's the sudden stop at the end that frightens me.
Is that they're killing off Trillian, and their first fix was to force them to turn off their "SecureIM" feature. Something that uses 128bit encryption between trillian clients. I loved that feature. The other odd thing is AOL isn't stopping third party clients from attaching to ICQ, another IM network that they own.
Oh well.. I'm glad I signed up for MSN Messenger and Yahoo Messenger and use trillian for both of those too..
Free Mac Mini
It's exactly this sort of behaviour that made so many people nervous about the AOL buying RedHat story.
I, for one, am glad that that turned out to be a non-story
I am not making a comment on the fairness of the practice here, just stating the reality of the situation.
Curb CO2 emissions: Kill yourself today!
Personally I wish it hadn't gone that far. Better to stay under the radar.. But anyways.. trillian was cut off, unless you disabled secureIM. That only worked for a day though. Cerulean released a patch that disabled it automatically but the next day access was blocked again.
Someone though AOL was on a mission. He even showed a screen shot that showed the uninstall icon for AIM being a crossed out trillian icon. Too bad he didn't realize that that icon was some kind of bug, cuz my uninstall icon was a vncviewer icon. GO figure.
But the fix for that second day was to go back to an even older version of trillian. Now cerulean just released one that works now without having to go back to an older version.
Some people just seemed to jump the gun a little I think.
Then again.. maybe AOL does have it in for them. Either way the cerulean guys are doing a great job!
You crazy man? You piss off supahfly!
Check out Gaim. It does AOL IM, Microsoft Messenger, Yahoo, etc. as long as you put the right plugin. I find it's an easy way to stay connected with friends even though they don't all use the same Messenger-type clients.
I wonder if the Gaim people ever had any problems with AOL...I sure hope they don't now that I've posted this message (although I figure their program is already quite well known in the Linux community...)
Reminder: find a new sig
Twice is 24 hours... and now they added autoupdate to the client. Seems like they expect even more "hostilities".
I really like Trillian (yes, I use Windows). In only 8 megs of RAM i get all the functionality of 4 im's plus irc. ICQ alone is, like, 12 megs. Add to that the lack of ads and functions I never use (gaming, voice chat, etc) and it is the ideal im client, at least for me.
If I could, I'd stick to one im platform, but most of my coworkers use AIM and my friends ICQ and all those who use XP (for whatever reason), use MSN messenger.
No sig
Well, almost.
Trillian is a simple, small and pretty customizeable app that takes my start bar from 5 icons down to one and manages my history, chats and everything with one app.
It will be AOL's loss if they get rid of a chunk of people on the network. How it can be a security risk is beyond me. You have to signup the same way and access the same network, is AOL just so inept it doesn't know how to write a secure im client?
Oh well. Maybe it is time to sue AOL for having a monopoly and waiving its monopolostic powers over IM technology. Don't they own ICQ, don't they Own AIM? Doesn't owning that much marketshare and preventing other users from using such technology constitute a monopoly using its powers to prevent other business from competing in the market?
Oh well. trillian is great, i wish them the best of luck sneaking around IM's / AOL's policies.
I was turned on to the Trillian client a couple of weeks ago and it rocks. Stable, fast and well-thought out it reduced my two, and occasionally three IMs to one nice one. The stupid part of AOL blocking Trillian, is that once you have this product installed, it doesn't much matter which service you use.
From a Trillian standpoint, AIM, Y!, MSN, and ICQ all look much the same. They all act much the same. All they will be doing is increasing Y! and MSN's client base.
I also have to wonder about the thinking at AOL/TW. They own ICQ too, but never pull this kind of stuff with that. Why dick with AIM and then leave ICQ alone? I mean, if you really wanted to make it a long day at Ceurlean Studios, break both at the same time. It's all pretty stupid.
Only thing that can topple big companies are big companies...
Now, I disagree. Remember the Microsoft Antitrust case? I think we all saw how the little guy won that one.
Funny, that's about the same policy I use on my system, and the exact reason why I only use DeadAIM when I need to use AIM (which is very rarely). It's nice to be rid of the annoying mini-ads. I hope to try out Trillian sometime; it probably works better and has menus that aren't AOLified (they're not exactly "buddies" to me, Steve).
"Ancillary does not mean you get to rule the world." --U.S. Circuit Judge Harry Edwards, speaking to the FCC's lawyer
I must say that AIM is the best thing that AOL produces. (Not counting Winamp/ICQ as those are merely apps that they bought and haven't "AOL-ized" too much.) But some people I know are on AIM, Yahoo, and even ICQ. I tried out Trillian and now I'm loving being able to only run one IM client. (Plus it'll check for new Yahoo e-mail while I'm chatting with an AIM buddy.)
Back in July there was a story about AOL saying they were working on letting AIM access other messaging clients. I guess it's ok for AIM to access Yahoo/MS/etc buddy lists but it's not ok for another app to access the AIM servers. Nice double standard there AOL. (Apparently they want Open Standards for Instant Messaging to apply to everyone but them.)
My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
If AOL continue like this they will lose the battle for IM supremacy.
I used to run three clients, even four sometimes, which between them managed to consume about 15MB of RAM and confuse the shit out of me with CTRL-Return in some and Return in others to just send the damned message.
I installed Trillian the other day and think it's superb. Now I have a common interface, I've free'd up 10MB of RAM and I dont have to open and close three windows just to see if a certain friend is online.
Since Trillian removes the IM specific client from the equation, me and my mates really dont care which service we use as long as we can chat together, and if that means dumping AOL then so be it. Trillian seem to be responding to their uses requests for certain features, and they also manage to keep the bloat down. Keep up the good work, and if you can't interface with em, fuck em; they'll fall by the wayside eventually...
Invoicing, Time Tracking, Reporting
No doubt the posts will soon start flowing in that AOL is evil for preventing this little company from accessing their network. My question is why is this wrong? Why should America Online not be the exclusive provider of America Online Instant Messaging functionality? Sure they do it to make money off of ads and exert some kind of institutional control. But do other companies have a right to be a part of this? Is it merely that AOL will have a monopoly on the instant messaging market? There certainly seem to be enough big competitors out there to prevent this. Just curious about why all the fuss.
Do not taunt Happy Fun Ball(TM)
AOL and most of their user base are just a hindrance to society and the advancement of technology. Here is a perfect example...
On the one had I agree that Trillion should keep trying. That way more attention can be shed on just how childish this company can be and how if they react this way to IM clients, how will they react on larger issues that affect the public?
Conversely, why use up all of your resources reinventing somebody else's wheel?
AOL owns their IM standard lock, stock, and barrel. They aren't oboligated to allow any outside service to tie into it unless they want to allow the outside service to tie in. That's the long and short of it... they can block who they please.
Expecting AOL to allow others to user their IM system is like expecting one theater chain to take tickets bought at another theater chain.
Of course, I expect this to be modded down by the freeloaders.
-
Steve's Computer Service, Hobbs, NM
What little guy? AOL, Oracle, and Sun have all been pushing the Microsoft Antitrust case. I would hardly consider them "the little guy."
What AOL needs to do is to develop a secure login for AIM and then start charging a nominal fee for AIM use. I know that most people I know who use non-AOL AIM clients don't do so because they're trying to cheat AOL out of the chance to make a profit off of IM but rather because AOL doesn't make a usable client for their platform. I know that I would be more than happy to pay a couple of bucks a month for the ability to use ICQ, but I refuse to start running Windows just so that I can have the ability to run AOL's client. AOL could even do a two-tiered system like Opera, where they put out a free client that has ads, but allow you to pay for the ability to use an ad free client (including third-party open source clients).
"If English was good enough for Jesus, it's good enough for everyone else."
While I'm aware that Trillian is using OSCAR (I believe), why did AOL ever publicize its predecessor's specifications if they didn't anticipate new clients to be built and connected to AIM?
It's almost as though AOL is attempting to generate publicity for AIM.
Do you like German cars?
I thought the point of contention is not actual interoperability between the clients, but in use of the buddy lists. Access to buddy lists requires access to AOL's servers. Hence, anyone needing to replicate the function of buddy lists on their third-party client must be able to connect to AOL's servers, without asking AOL's permission. I'm almost certain there was a story about this a while ago that explicitly stated that the IM protocol was easily replicated by Yahoo, MSN, etc., but that buddy lists were the real obstacle.
Correct me if I'm wrong, please. AOL has spent a substantial amount of money on the infrastructure, and is giving away a free client with the caveat that it will display ads. AOL loses this ad revenue if other people hack into its network. I hate AOL's service, and I never use AIM, but I'm not under the delusion that they should have to allow other companies unfettered access to its resources. What the makers of Trillian are doing seems like grounds for a lawsuit or computer crime investigation.
"It has long been our very public policy that when a service unleashes software that hacks into our system, and endangers the security of our system, we stop it," AOL spokeswoman Kathy McKiernan said.
Sometimes you have to just sit back and admire the pr spins people can put on an issue. Since Sept.11 the security issue is a no brainer. However, the system hacking aspect is just above and beyond. Kathy recognizes that one can use enough half-truths to defend her statements that trillian is hacking into AIM servers. It's absolutely amazing how such blatant blocking of a service can spun so effectively. AOL gets some kudos from me on reminding us here on just how evil they can be. It's completely deceptive and underhanded, and yet completely unprovable to any but the technically literate.
The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was to convince the world he didn't exist. -Verbal Kint
I don't really understand why anyone gets upset whenever AOL blocks a non-AIM client from using their proprietary network and resources. AOL owns the systems that power AIM and should be allowed to prevent non-AIM clients from accessing them altogether, in fact, they have every right to protect their property and to see that their resources are used according to their will.
It has nothing to do with AOL being predatory (as mentioned in the article) or "selfish" (also mentioned in the article). It has everything to do with AOL protecting the resources that it, as a corporation, owns.
Okay, so if AIM blocks the clients that block the advertisements, you're going to boycott the advertisers? Okay, so if your boycott works, then AOL has problems funding AIM and are pushed to futher close it and be bastards to the independent messenger clients. Taking this to it's furthest extreme would mean eliminating AIM all together. Then what? Then you have one less viable option for instant messaging.
This is a rather nasty quandry. The people who run the servers that all of this traffic goes over need to fund those servers somehow. If they leave the protocol open to everybody and don't have some way to force through advertisements, how do they pay for it? I like using Trillian, and Gaim (depending on what OS I'm dealing with), but I can see AOL's point.
This sig has been temporarily disconnected or is no longer in service
Trillian is in my eyes much better than Aim, MSN, ICQ and all else i have used. Aol should ancourage them instead of letting the ICQ team get away with crap and constant beta limbo. Do as with Winamp, hold em under their wings but dont kill em off. Some day they will need good programmers as the ones developing trillian. -If you Chooke a Smurf, what colour does its face turn into?
HTTP/1.1 400
I hope there are no new updates for Trillian now because you aren't going to get them!
...aw shit! Now you got me worried!
You're using her as bait, Master!
Can anyone explain to me how AOL is changing their protocol without breaking their own IM? Is their client just more flexible, or does it have built in support for a dozen protocol revisions?
I would hope that whatever they're doing the clues as to what the next change might be are already there in the client. Perhaps we could build a fake ICQ server and run tests on the AOL client with slightly modified protocols to see what it supports. Then build in the same support into Trillian et al.
For me I'd love to stop using AOL's ICQ since I use OS X. The official client doesn't behave at all like a good OS X app should.
I can't spell or type, but that doesn't mean I'm unusually stupid.
I mean, think about it, if 1million people are using Trillian, that's probably 1million people who aren't seeing AOL's built-in AIM ads, and that would probably throw off their selling points. Maybe a solve for this would be for trillian to implement AOL's ads? (of course ads do suck, but maybe that would be a compromise that AOL could live with?)
-- Dan
I couldn't care less about AIM. Who Cares. There are a bunch of other IMs out there, and What's up AOLs ass. Just play nice with others, and get over it. (It wont eat up all your programmers time.)
AOL Bite me.
"If you have done 6 impossible things this morning, why not round it off with breakfast at Milliways" -- hhgg
The article does not mention them even contacting Trillion before imposing this "block". Surely playing nice and coming up with a mutual agreement would be better business.
The Register had a short story about this today ( http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/4/23891.html )that indicated it was the 128 bit encryption capability between Trillian clients. One bit I didn't understand was their comment that AOL might "daren't" implement this kind of encryption in their IM client.
Anyone care to speculate why?
It seems to be a matter of which protocoll Trillian uses, from my limited understanding of the matter, there are two protocols to connect to the AIM service.
Toc - A pretty "open" protocol used for the AIMs Java clients, as well as a Tcl/Tk, and an emacs version.
Oscar - The original protcol, its pretty cryptic, whereas Toc uses ASCII for the transmitions, Oscar uses a more binary sort of comunication. I'm 90% sure that Trillian is now using Oscar so that they can include more of their features the notable feature being SecureIM
From the article, they said that they were doing it because of security. I don't buy that. I believe they are doing it because they are trying to make money off their ads, and don't want anyone to take that away. OK, fine. But, if that is the reason, SAY SO. No one will deny they are a public company, and want to protect their investment. THAT was my point, and it seems everyone missed it.
Sent from your iPad.
I wonder if, since AIM comes bundled with AOL this becomes an antitrust sort of thing ala Microsoft. AOL has a huge percentage of the internet provider market and is using that to leverage their Instant Messenger service and are actively trying to keep others out. My original point was that this promotes a Tower of Babel situation where all IMs can not communicate anymore. This is a bad thing. I'm pretty confident that soon, we'll know everything.
I've been using Gaim for a while. It lived through the whole A-I-M letters thing and the anti-libfaim stuff. I haven't noticed any glitches in the last day or so. Perhaps they're targeting specific things in Trillian as they did with Gaim back whenever with the checksumming thing. AOL either got tired of looking for things to break or they just ran out.
Are you pondering what I'm pondering?
What AOL should do is lock down their protocol so that nobody else can use it. Then, license the way for anybody to access the protocol providing that they show the advertisements that AOL provides. Thus anybody who wants to make a client can do so with little trouble and AOL doesn't have to worry about profits.
This sig has been temporarily disconnected or is no longer in service
YES! Not only my first '1st post' post, but also my first 'Troll' post! I'm the BEST!
Trillian released some updates pretty quickly, and it works great for me.
I switched from ICQ/YIM to trillian a few weeks ago. If only for the fact that i dont believe in running 2 apps, and sucking 2x the RAM to do the same job. Trillian is the first 'fully functional' Multi-client IM i've used. Taking Advantage of most of the different protocal's features.
:)
AOL may be killing AIM if they don't let multi-client IM's to use the protocal. I think the trend will be toward either a unified protocal, or more likely more Multi-protocal IM clients. It make SOOO much sense to only have one program running instead of 5 to do basically the same job.
I get so many complaints from not-so-quick users that thier computer's are running super slow, only to find out they have every IM client known to man on there and running. I switch them to trillian and they get their speed back and the ability to waste company time 5x times over
It seemed to me, as a Trillian user, as if it wasn't that AOL was trying to break trillian as much as Trillan broke when AOL applied their security patch about gaming...and it was just the Secure IM part of Trillian .71+ that was breaking;
.70 and lower versions never broke.
the
Seems to me either AOL wasn't trying very hard, or it was all just coincidence.
You know what. As much as I like open protocols etc, It is well within AOL's right to block unauthorized clients. They own the servers after all. I don't know what the hell people are talking about with a monopoly on instant messaging. There's MSN, Yahoo, Jabber, etc. And none of them cost a dime to run. If you don't like what's happening, start convincing your friends to switch to something like jabber. Jeez.
For the millionth time, AOL is not preventing 3rd party clients from interoperating with the AOL Instant Messenger system. What they are doing is preventing 3rd party clients from using OSCAR, which is AOL's "private" protocol for AIM. They're not touching TOC, which is the protocol which AOL makes available for 3rd party clients to use.
Sure, flame me because:
1) TOC doesn't have all the features of OSCAR
2) TOC (might) use more resources than OSCAR on AOL's side, so you're doing them a favor.
3) AOL's required by the court to let us play in their sandbox.
4) AOL's a big bully.
5) Information wants to be free, man!
If AOL wants to make a subset of the features available to 3rd party clients, it's their prerogative. They own the servers, they wrote the service, they pay for the people to maintain the servers. And if TOC uses more resources than OSCAR on AOL's servers (which is just a rumor, and not confirmed from anyone with any authority), that's AOL's business, not yours. And no, AOL is not required by any court to let 3rd party clients play with AIM. They're only required to make the "next generation" AIM available to 3rd parties.
If you use OSCAR to connect to AIM and you don't use AOL's clients to do it, you don't get to complain when they change OSCAR around, regardless of whether they're deliberately blocking someone or just making modifications to the protocol for something else. Use TOC, or use another IM service.
-Todd
"The details of my life are quite inconsequential..."
I run GAIM everyday. Is GAIM endorsed by AOL?
Chase
-==-
Gotta love the quote from the AOL spokeswoman:
"It has long been our very public policy that when a service unleashes software that hacks into our system, and endangers the security of our system, we stop it," AOL spokeswoman Kathy McKiernan said.
So, since I run Trillian does that make me a hacker? And here I thought I was running an app that just made my life a whole lot easier by combining various incompatible IM services into one easy-to-use application.
My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
I hope Trillian holds out. We need something like this.
Imagine if you were forced to have three telephones in your home just so you could contact all of your friends and family.
If AOL, Microsoft and Yahoo can't work it out, then I hope the all lose the IM war!
Last night I was using Fire, a program very similar to Trillian, but for os-X. Things seemed to be working fine.
I wonder how/why AOL targeted one client, but not others. I haven't updated my fire client in weeks, so I know they aren't jumping through hoops (yet).
--T
http://www.theMediaBunker.com
AOL purchased those servers, pays for the bandwidth and pays to maintain the servers. I am sure that these costs are not trivial for a user base as large as AIM. Why should they let another service? Some people seem to be arguing that they should let third parties use their servers because otherwise they will loose market share and therefore eventually loose the IM race. This might be true, but I don't think that there is any need to be outraged that AOL is blocking access to these servers! They are perfectly within their rights to disallow access to third parties that use their servers without helping to maintain them.
If you are outraged at AOL's actions.. well.. just go use another network.
<rant>
Stuff like this makes me so happy that I use Linux and dont have to bother with all of the crap these giant corporations shell out day after day. I am so sick of seeing news about AOL and MSN duking it out, or AOL shutting out a really nice IM client, or MSN shutting down support for non-IE browsers. It's pure bullshit, and I really hope there is a special place in hell for the CEO's and upper management of these companies. I also really hope that J. User starts to realize that they dont have to put up with this shit, and if they dont put up with this shit these companies will start to listen, and will maybe stop screwing their customers.
</rant>
(B) + (D) + (B) + (D) = (K) + (&)
First of all, I think Trillian looks like crap. The app may be useful, but it is damned ugly. Anyway, back to the topic...
Ok, I think AOL is right in what they are doing. It is their network, their protocol, and they don't have to let anyone use it if they don't want to.
However, I think the reason all these apps are out is because AOL's program doesn't provide what people want. If AOL would listen to people and provide updates other than "send IM greetings" maybe people wouldn't be flocking over to other programs.
I think this is an even bigger issue on a Mac. In OS X, the AIM client sucks. It's bloated and slow. It just recently got features added such as file transfer and IM images, but they aren't always stable. Because of this, I use Adium, which is smaller and much faster. I'm also able to keep everything in a single window, which eliminates screen clutter from all the open IM windows (to see what I'm talking about, go here).
Also, Adium's service has never been cut off by AOL. I think this is because they use TOC. If AOL can't shut off clients using TOC, why not move Trillian over to that protocol. I know that a lot of the extra features will disappear, but at least you'll be able to talk to your AIM friends.
I dunno who it is
but it prolly is fhqwhgads.
That I need to talk with the people on AIM regardless of the client I use.
:)
So what's going to happen if AOL successfully blocks Trillian from their network? I switch--with great annoyance--back to AIM. I _need_ this service for my day to day work (and asking everyone to switch to ICQ isn't exactly an option), and I will have to use whatever client works.
I think AOL knows this, they may be monopolistic megalomaniacs, but they ain't dumb.
When you come to rely on a service, you end up being at the beck and call of the provider of the service. Unfortunately.
Well, I'm not ready to throw in the towel just yet, give 'em a run for their money Trillian...I love a David & Goliath story.
"In the end, we all fall back on fiction." -- Lonely Planet
He was referring to Microsoft.
Bill Gates in real life is very tiny. About the
size of your *ahem* thingy.
-I like my women like I like my tea: green-
I see alot of posts that say AOL is trying to stop other IM clients from using their servers because of their ad revenue.. Funny thing is that I use the offical AOL Linux version of AIM, and I never see ads. Ever. Maybe they don't consider the Linux crowd worthwhile to show us ads? We're ceratinly not generating any income by using their normal AOL service.
Slashdot is like Playboy: I read it for the articles
Because they allow me to sign up for a free AIM account. If they wanted to keep it AOL-only, then they would only allow AOL users to have an account. The moment they allowed 3rd party users onto their system, they allowed those same users to use 3rd party clients. Sorry, but they said my account was "Free" - I take that to be ad-free, $-free, and free to use whatever client application I want as long as I don't abuse their servers. The ironic thing is that so many worms, virii, and SPAM originate from AOL users. Their system seems to be more of a security risk than 3rd party IM clients.
I AM, therefore I THINK!
Not sure what the submitter was implying, but whatever changes AOL has made recently hasn't affected my connectivity through my jabber server. Once it's set up, Jabber is so much better than Trillian, I don't see what all the fuss is about.
-gps
ok the trillian ftp servers are slashdotted
SecureIM is enabled again with the most recent Trillian release.
I use trillian because I'm not a drug dealer. I want one messenger service instead of having twelve pagers to keep everyone straight.
But, wow! I just downloaded this program, and it is sharp! I'm very impressed. You would think a multi-billion dollar company like AOL/TW would be able to put out a quality product like this, but once again, my theory that the little guys always do it better proves true. I hope the big guys realize this for once and give up on trying to shut out this chat client to their servers. If they were actually halfway smart, they'd get an agreement signed with Cerulean to allow some sort of advertising or something not too personally intrusive for the use of their aol servers.
If one million people are using Trillian instead of AIM, what makes you think any of these people would be using AIM if they weren't using Trillian? I for one have never seen the AIM client in my life, and I still use that portion of Trillian since it allows me to contact even more people. If I wasn't using Trillian, I would simply not be in touch with these people. I'm not prepared to run yet another IM program to do the exact same thing and I would rather just stay away from it. Especially with some security issues that have come up, and the potential bulkiness and advertisements of the AIM client.
Your idea is a valid thought at first glance, the comparison that 1M-people using Trillian "instead" of AIM means a 1M-ad-viewer loss to AIM. This is simply not true. It's the same kind of logic that applied when game publishers back in the heyday of Commodore 64 games pirating said that they were losing N times X dollars from piracy, where N is the number of pirate copies and X is the price per unit. Most of these N people would not pay the X dollars, or view the X advertisements and produce the N*X revenue the company claims to be losing.
If Trillian is forced to fall back to older AIM compatibility, or even drop AIM alltogether, I am hardly going out to get the AIM client. I'll badmouth the company by retelling this story when people ask me to go on AIM, and maybe I'll even win a few more contacts over to Trillian or ICQ or whatever service might be the most interesting.
I changed from ICQ to Trillian and found that I could even drop my old pIRCh as well. *I'm*not going to change IMs a second time. I'm staying.
/ Per
whine whine whine. yammer yammer yammer.
i need to take a leak.
Troll elsewhere please.
I've mostly used AIM, largely because that's what most people I wanted to chat with used. (And I'm really irritated at losing contact with some Trillian using buddies.)
I tried ICQ, but AIM does at least two things better:
* the ICQ UI is a horrendous mess. AIM has a good, simple UI. Cleaner in many ways then the Trillian version I used. And as the release new versions of the AIM client, whenever they change default behaviors (like minimizing to task bar vs system tray, etc) they're very good at letting users get the old behavior back in the options menu.
* I have never received AIM spam, but those two weeks of ICQ were nothing but teen porn ads. I'm not sure if its ICQ numbering scheme that makes it so spam prone, or something AIM does better
There are somethings AIM doesn't do, like my friend pointed out ICQ has a cool autolog of conversations feature, but overall, AIM is a
good little client, other clients could take a few pages from its usability book.
SO YOU'RE GOING TO DIE: The Comic for Dealing with Death
The main problem with AIM and Jabber is not the protocol, but AOL blocking the IP Address of Jabber's AIM transport. If it's moved to a new IP, it's usually blocked in a matter of only hours.
Apparently they notice when hundreds of client connections are coming off one IP Address, no problems.
I'd just like to say how much I enjoy using trillian and that it has really made things easy for my parents and grandparents who are too simple to understand concepts such as IM wars. Email works irregarless of what client you use, why the heck can't anyone figure out how to do the same with instant messaging? Selfishness has caused the electronic society to drop the ball on this one.
I'm a writer, a poet, a genius, I know it. I don't buy software, I grow it.
DAMN! You're right! Well...perhaps one day I will get that first post i've been planning for.
Thanks for your input though.
Maybe I'm wrong, but wasn't part of the AOL/Time Warner merger agreement that AOL had to open AIM up to whoever wanted to use it? Or did that just slip through the cracks of the FCC's fat, lazy ass?
----------
word to your moms... I came to drop bombs...
So why should they Allow Netscape Browsers to run on their OS? Why should they allow AOL to be installed on their OS?
Why should ISP's provide the bandwidth that AOL uses with there "proprietary application"?
Double standards R us
I realize this is a troll, but I just have to reply to one of these every-now-and-then. It's my air, so stop breathing!
Thank you so much for your knowledge and insight into this matter. While I do long for the first post I don't want to be a 'first post' hog. I want to ensure that everyone (except ACs) have their shot at the green jacket.
That being said perhaps some day in the near future will have the golden 'refresh' and I will get my shot at the title.
Thank you again...
AOLIM is free .
.. and done.
.. everything else uses trillian (whom I have sent 3 donations to via paypal of $15 each .. ) because there product is very smooth, works well.
.. but that could be the autoupdate thing kicking in.
.. AOL needs the ad revenue, Trillian is better. What I think a lot of folks also forget is .. there is NO WAY [at least as far as i can figure out] that aol can tell if someone is using trillian. I mean .. My Girlfriend uses aol 4.5 or something .. and that IM client still works .. so they haven't changed anything important .. right ?
.. or the 4-5 linux aol interfaces .. don't advertise by sending extra stuff on the stream.
.. charge a 1 time fee for user names. I mean .. we're talking about a company that doesnt even RECYCLE usernames when someone cancels the service.
I have it, and I havent had an active AOL account since 1995. When you used to be charged per min.
I just go in , sign up for an aol name
I use that on one machine at home
I also have not had any issues with aol
People here are screaming for both sides
Im sure trillian
If aol is really worried about it
[unless someone can explain to me how I can still log in with my 1995 aol account name as 'guest']
--Ne auderis delere orbem rigidum meum, non erravi pernicose!
You need a dictionary.
-I like my women like I like my tea: green-
Do we really think that AOl is mad about ppl accessing there server with third parties clients for the sake of keeping ppl off of there network? I think not. Lets remember that AOL offers its messenger as a FREE service and the only way that can can see to make ANY money off of it is to imbed adds in the AIM client. We all know that Trillian does not include banner adds and Iam sure this just pisses AOL off. So the bottom line is simple, Trillian does not allow for clients to possible spend money using any AOL service and that burns them up. My vote is for Trillian to keep up the good work, release a patch a day if you hafta to. This issue is not about if the client works or not, its about someone pushing some unwated servcies/advertisements down yer throat and expecting you to like it. Yet another reason to simply hate AOL.
It is currently in nobody's best interests that the world is fragmented among the 3-4 dominant IM services. I certainly don't enjoy having to install 4 different IM clients, each closed-source, with their own inherent privacy invasions and remote exploits.
Throw open the protocols, welcome the hordes of all-in-one IM client programmers, and let the telcos and ISPs serve up a network of open-source IM servers. You know, the way IRC is done. Or the way e-mail is done. Or the way the web is done. I'd rather foot the bill on my monthly DSL subscription than have my privacy endlessly invaded by unscrupulous corporations and their "free" software.
AOL Instant Messenger would survive, trust me. They might even manage to trick the gullible into using their software and viewing their ads. After all, AOL has tricked millions into paying for an ISP that still bombards you senseless with advertisements.
I find it hilarious that AOL claims that they don't allow other clients to connect to their networks because of "security" when a short time ago the AIM client millions of people use on their desktops was found to be vulnerable to a remote attack that could execute arbitrary code on the client's system.
Glad to see they're so concerned about security.
"Avoid employing unlucky people - throw half of the pile of CVs in the bin without reading them." -- David Brent
AOL owns the servers, they pay for the bandwidth and they obviously make some money off the advertisements. So why on earth would they let someone come in with a program to compete with theirs and them not get that advertisement money.
Let's see you invest millions in the servers, databases, bandwidth and have some other company come and use it with you getting compensated....Please
That with Cerulian already circumnavigating AOL's blocks twice so far, that AOL hasn't brought them up on DMCA violations.
I don't use trillian. I did for a little while because it let me access my various messaging services with a singer application. Most of the trillian users I know use it for this purpose. If the biggest draw for the program is its ability to acces several different services, where is AOL's monopoly? People want it because they are also using groups other than aol.
Since I signed up with a user name on AIM they make money off of me. They use me as a resource to fund their activities therefore I will use them as a resource for mine. If through my choice of clients I consume more resources than they gain from me then it's time for them to look at a different business model. The last time I looked the majority ad on AIM was still for AOL's own over priced service. I did not, upon signing up with AIM, agree to use a particular client to consume said resource therefore they should not block me from use because of my choice. Saying that there is no "business relationship" makes it appear that AOL wants one, this is not the case as has been proven time and time again. AOL does not want business relationships that will do nothing to further their capture of market share.
"Do not be swept up in the momentum of mediocrity." - anon
Cuz CNET just gave Trillian the "best of the IM" award, which I'm sure helped put a big target on Trillian.
That, and on download.com, Trillian is #2 behind ICQ..
Interesting how these attempts to block Trillian started within 48 hours of this publicity..
One of the best features IMHO is that Trillian provides 128-bit SSL style encryption OVER the AOL IM or ICQ system (to other Trillian clients).
I support the Trillian coders, and encourage others to do the same. I think it's deplorable the way AOL 'shifts' its attitude whenever it suits: When they wanted to expand their user base, and feared the big, scary 'internet', they integrated standard protocols etc into their closed dialup service. When they wanted to gain a foothold in the IM mindshare war, they allowed non-AOL users to use their IM service. Now that they ARE the leading IM service (and bought the #2), it's suddenly THEIR network, THEIR protocol; how dare you use a client that doesn't generate ad revenue for them?
The fact that they cater to the computer neophytes and Luddites only complicates the issue. Joe geek can download and learn any program he wants to so he can IM Grandma, but there's no way you're gonna get Grandma to try out a cool new IM system because AOL is Evil and throwing around its muscle.
When the AOL-Time-Warner-MegaCorp merger happened, I thought the forced opening of their networks might lead to other regulated use of systems in their control. I'm so naive.
m00.
Had that been the headline you all would be absolutely LOVING AOL!
Side note have you sent your PayPal support to Trillian, have you ever REALLY supported them?
Razzious Domini
I could be a GREAT KARMA WHORE if I could just shed the few morals I have left.
First of all, I thank you for mentioning Adium. I shall find information about it Elsewhere.
Second, I like your idea of using TOC. Perhaps it could be a fallback protocol if connection fails using the newer protocol?
Third, I point out the fact that Trillian skinning is Awesome.
/ Per
hmm why should ATand T allow other phones to work off their lines?
dumb argument bud , but dont worry many idiots make it
But don't you think it is a little odd that this mess starts with AOL not a week after Trillian gets top pick in a CNET review of IM clients?
Bleh!
I think MSN, AT&T, Jabber, Trillian, and anyone else who wants to get in on the act should get together and all work on making themselves interoperable with AOL Instant Messenger. They could tag team each other and go round the clock. AOL will do one of two things. Sue or give up after wasting all that effort on being assholes.
"You'll get nothing, and you'll like it!"
"I use Linux and dont have to bother"
/me smiles a brotherly smile.
You mean you are completely unable to bother because even if you did, you'd have to emulate another OS in order to do so. Also, it seems very few have even cared to mention that Trillian incorporates an IRC client as well - with multi-server operability, causing me to switch from pIRCh after 6 or 7 years of faithfulness.
/ Per
So why should they Allow Netscape Browsers to run on their OS?
Because web browsers and operating systems really lie in different markets. Some people try to say, "Well, it's all just software it's all the same," but this is really a fallacy.
How would you feel if General Motors, for example, forced you to use GM tires, GM wiper blades, GM light bulbs, GM cup holders, GM oil, GM mufflers, ad nauseum. Quite upset, I bet. However, this is exactly what <insert-mega-software-company> is doing to people!
Healthcare article at Kuro5hin
Funny, they don't seem to be blocking Gaim. Interesting selectivity.
Is there an open source project to make an Instant messanger ? Also could the open source community support a simple server to provide simple lookup services for such a project ? I think this is the way to go.
The only cost to trillian is a day to fix?
How much bandwidth/serverload do you estimate a software distribution to all trillian users takes?
Must...code...new...sig... Remove numerics to email.
Is that, as a Mac OS X user, I have a program called "Fire" which does MSN, ICQ, Yahoo!, Jabberr, irc, and AOL Instant Messenger in one program. This is so beneficial if you want to use multiple services but don't want 50 programs running. Why don't they move against Fire? Is it that there's not many people (ie. not enough Mac OS X users) to matter yet? Or is that phase two of their "Sue Everybody" plan?
Who did what now?
Imagine incompatible e-mail clients, online services, DNS, news, etc...
Instant Messaging should be decentralized. This is what happens when commercial interests drive communication "standards" over the net.
Remember pre-popular-internet when mail programs wouldn't talk to each other? Exchange, cc:mail, lotus notes, and a host of others? Remember early online services that didn't permit access to content outside their worlds? MSN, AOL, Compuserve, Genie, etc...?
There should be an RFC, each ISP or provider should host their own IM server, their customers connect to it using the client of their choice, and outsiders send messages in for instant delivery based on a standard naming convention.
But we'll never get there now, it's too late. I'm just thankful the rest of the net isn't in this mess.
"They aren't oboligated to allow any outside service to tie into it unless they want to allow the outside service to tie in."
Err, yes they are. Didn't you follow the AOL/TW merger? They have to open up the aim.
Since that was so long ago, I did a quick search for for this information:
AOL-Time Warner Merger OK'd With Conditions
'IM' Last Hurdle for AOL-Time Warner Merger
I can keep looking if you wish. Aim should be delt with the same way as email. Client peices shouldn't matter. All people want to do is comunicate in a manner they like.
The spirit of resistance to government is so valuable on certain occasions that I wish it to be always kept alive
1. ICQ now uses the OSCAR protocol, just like AOL IM.
:)
2. GAIM still works.
3. AOL's idea of cross-platform is the same as Microsoft's... make a Windows version and perhaps one for Macintosh. Hence the need for some third party clients (I realize Trillian is a Windows app, but theres many other 3rd client AOL IM apps which arent)
Stop these damn article postings.
MS is the only OS in town that people use, they have a monopoly, not because of illegal business practices. They have the monopoly because of effective advertising.
AOL owns the servers, and provide a free service, based on advertisine revenue, both real and future. It is a monopoly, because of marketing 9mor or less).
It isn't fair to MS or AOL to try to use the courts to some how artificially cripple the monopoly. The same solution that was used for the ATT breakup won't really hold water.
No matter what the government does to MS, two or three parts, whatever, won't solve the underlying problem. Then you will have an OS monopoly, and an business suite monopoly. A breakup just wouldn't work. The only other solution is to just fine them into the dirt, and this is so artificial, it isn't even reasonable. It has the ultimate result (since you haven't done anything to break the monopoly hold) is increase your taxes, using MS as a middle man to the IRS.
You can't use the infrastructure argument used against local telcos and cable compaies against AOL, because it really isn't a question of infrastructure and wires. It is one server (farm). The additional burden of third parties traffic is a direct burden that would be bore by AOL, and although this ins't terribly artificial like above, why would they keep the server up. Everyone would use a 3rd party client so they didn't have to read ads, and AOL would just turn off the service. Then everyone is screwed, including AOL. Every 3rd party client that does connect to AOL only adds strength to their user base and monopoly.
The only way to affect these monopolies is through education. Make linux easier to use for "Grandma", and then give it to her. Or give her OSX.
Use IRC, and tell all your friends to use IRC, or MSN, or ICQ. AOL will have to add value to make their service worth paying for.
As long as everyone around needs these big guys, they will remain big guys. I don't need them, so I don't use them. And I don't whine about the control they exert on me. Mainly, because they don't, nor any of my friends, as I always educate them, and don't use AOL-TW, or MS products.
Sure its AOL's servers/network and they dont have to let others onboard, but wouldnt it serve as a good-will gesture? The small amount of 'non official' cant be effecting revenue THAT much and would go a long way to not pissing us all off ...... ( icq is next guys.. )
---- Booth was a patriot ----
the real problem or it at least began with Miciosoft. MSN started to claim hugh numbers of people signing up for their service, AOL had to disprrove them
Here's AOL's response to an open IM network:
http://aim.aol.com/openim/
I'm using Trillian 0.70 right now at work and I seem to be able to communicate fine with my AIM contacts. I also hear that those who are using Trillian 6.x can also connect fine.
SageMadHatter
allowed to keep netscape out.
I know I won't use AIM much longer.
There are already open messaging standards and API, but that's not going to make either Microsoft or AOL open up their system. Now if only the W3C had seen this coming early on and made a standard protocol in the beginning this mess might not be as bad. Had ICQ and the other instant messaging systems used a public standard protocol, it might have turned out like HTML with minor incompatabilities, but maintains minimal functionality.
So why should they Allow Netscape Browsers to run on their OS? Why should they allow AOL to be installed on their OS?
Because people are paying for their product with the expectation of being able to do that, and because it's illegal to use a monopoly in one area to secure a monopoly in another.
Why should ISP's provide the bandwidth that AOL uses with there "proprietary application"?
Because people are paying for that bandwidth with the expectation of being able to do that, and would stop paying for it if no longer able to do that.
Exactly how much did you pay AOL for access to their network, again?
I have many friends who use AIM, who i must communicate with, they all use the client AOL supplies them, I use gaim because there is no official client which will run on my hardware, and gaim offers some features not present in the regular aol client (encryption of messages for instance). If non aol clients are banned from using aim, i will no longer be able to communicate with these people, and i will strongly encourage them to follow me to an alternative system.
And also since installing gaim i have been reasonably happy with it, and encouraged other users onto aim, most of which use the aol client too.
So if aol block alien clients, they will not only lose any users who run unsupported hardware/software combinations, and those who just refuse to use the official clients. but many of their friends too.
http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
In their next wave of evil, AOL submits a story about their practices to Slashdot, slashdotting the Trillian webserver to hell, so no new users can download the software!!! (it is slashdotted right now anyway).
Damn you AOL!!!!
Mark
I thought when Trillian 7.0 came out, that Cerulean was making an error in their policies toward AIM.
In version 6.x, Trillian did not have any non-AIM features for AIM chat windows. With the release of 7.0, Cerulean added secure 128 bit encryption to AIM connenctions between two Trillian users, and possibly other features. This of course required that two Trillian clients be able to identify each other as Trillian clients. Whatever mechanism was used to determine this could easily have been used to lock Trillian out of the AIM networks.
Atanamis
A lot of people have been saying that they like the non-comercial clients because they do not show adds. However, they fail to mention that the official AOL client for Linux (at least the one I run) does not show adds either. Don't people here us Linux any more?
But seriously...
AOL should be *irrelevant* to our IM needs. (the "we" here being /.'ers) Why should we be beholden to AOL, MSN, or any of the others when there's already a great alternative out there in Jabber? There are plenty of good clients out there. For Windows, there's Psi Messenger, for Linux/*BSD, there's the excellent Gabber, and for OSX, there's JabberFox, and Mac OS uh... "<X" has Jabbernaut*.
And, for the uber-geeks among us, you can even run your own Jabber *server*, too.
Also, contrary to popular belief, it's really not very hard to get all your current ICQ/AOL/MSN addicted friends to try out Jabber. I thought it would be difficult when I first started trying to convince my friends and family to use Jabber to talk to me, but they were actually happy to try it. People are so accustomed to running 2 or 3 IM programs (thank you, proprietary networks and protocols!) that they don't seem to mind one more. I've even gotten a few compliments on Jabber's lack of IM spam or ads. Plus, Psi for windows is pretty damn stable, so no worries about recommending a broken client. (how embarassing!)
So before you bitch about AOL, DO something about it instead. Support an already open, and far *superior* IM standard. Because it is AOL's right to say who does and doesn't get to use their networks and IM servers - after all, it's their stuff. But conversely, it's OUR right to say "FSCK YOU AOL!" and use and promote something BETTER.
*(for the sake of fairness, Jabbernaut really sucked hard last time I saw it, so Mac users not running OS X have my sympathy. Perhaps you should try one of the Java clients, like Shaolo...)
The Free desktop that Just Works
Even though Trillian doesn't require a payment for full functionality, it is not in fact freeware. The authors say in many places that they want a small donation. The authors also mentioned that the donations numbered in the hundreds, compared to the several hundred thousand downloads over the months. Come on guys, if you really love Trillian as much as you say you do, pay $5 for the damn thing and support the efforts of the programmers!
Think about it... By AOL doing this and blocking Trillian and in turn, Trillian going around it... and all this catching the press attention... AOL is only hurting themselves... This informs people who didn't know in the past about Trillian, and now they do.
If AOL would have just let the one million users that use Trillian quietly slip under the radar, it would have been much better than all the millions of people that have now heard about Trillian and will possible use it.
What does it matter to AOL anyways? They have over 33 million users to AOL alone... And only God knows how many on AIM... I think they've screwed themselves over on this one...
------
zap.....
Being that most messaging sessions are point to point, it would be nice if a new protcol could be set up for point to point communication only. This would eliminate the need for a central server and coincidentally improve security. Each client could initiate their session by sending an email message containing their ip address, authentication requirements, etc... to the other client. Once email is exchanged, the clients could establish a p2p session. This would improve security and be very easy for end users to use.
X
They addressed the whole multi-user issue *very* well with the new version. I had the same issues, but Cerulean did a wonderful job with it. Try to use an ICQ with more than one user and you're in for a nightmare!
Anyone ever notice that as time goes on, the AOL icon has begun more and more to look like the Eye of Shiva?
Why not make a standardized protocol to handle IM traffic? Why does AOL have to "own" the protocol?
And for that matter, why are all of these big ass companies so freakin greedy? Don't they know they are just holding back progress?
A vacuum is a hell of a lot better than some of the stuff that nature replaces it with. - Tennessee Williams
Not true. Advertising agencies take into account the number of active users. In addition, if an ad agency finds that less and less people are going to be using AIM (therefore less people actually viewing their ad), they would not pay as much. Think of it this way..there are going to be a couple million people watching TV on Super Bowl Sunday. Would you pay $1.5 million to advertise on PBS, who won't be showing the super bowl? That's the same logic in this case of Trillian vs AIM.
Again, another misconception. IANAL. AOL and AIM is a closed system. It is illegal for anybody or any group of people to intrude onto a closed system. AOL owns the servers, networks, etc to run this, why must they allow other people to use it for free? The reason they don't take them to court is 1) bad publicity. Anytime anybody is suing an underdog, it gets them bad publicity. Think of it this way, you and a couple million open source users would be pissed off at AOL if they were to sue Jabber (an open source IM client). They would be viewed as the RIAA of the IM world. 2) Litigations costs a lot of money and time. As a company (regardless of the size) time and money are two essential resources that can disappear rapidly. In the time that they put into this, something new might pop up and now their number 1 position fades to #3.
Again another falsehood. Under DMCA, reverse engineering a system is illegal. Look at Sony vs Modchip or Reverse Engineer of Adobe PDF or Sony Aibo vs Hackers or the DVD decryption... All of these were reverse engineering for interoperability.
AOL has a choice of doing something against a rival or not. It is the same as a police officer letting some speeders go without giving them a ticket. For them to go after EVERYONE would turn them more and more into RIAA.
"hacking" has a wide range of meanings. Again, I responded to the legal aspect above.
If this were true, Trillian could sue AOL. But instead of following the legal route, they are trying to do this through the backdoor. What you are saying is that Trillian is taking the law into their own hands. It is the same as shooting a thief instead of reporting it to the police.
The underlying fact is that, AIM belongs to AOL, they can choose who or what can use it. There is no law saying that any vendor must sell to everyone. The part about the security concern is this [my personal analysis] if I were to build a aim client put it out on the net for everyone to use, but hide a password sniffer in there, this creates a major vulnerability to the AOL system. Some AIM users are also AOL users. I could then access AOL using their account.
Quite true...I agree with you on this fact.
This is false. Any company can limit the amount of resources that you use. For example, there are FAP limits for cable modems and broadband. In addition, an "all you can eat" buffet is legally allowed to kick you out once you consume to much of their food (resources).
That is the exact definition of a business relationship. A company makes a business relationship so that it could make more money for itself. It's a fact. Companies aren't out there to save the world, companies sole purpose to to make a profit. This is a fact that a lot of times the people discussing business practices often miss. We often put ourselves in a idealized world where everyone helps out each other. In a capitalistic society that is not what the society is about. If you are looking for an environment where there is a fair sharing of profits where companies don't seek profits but to do some good, this is the socialist ideals at its core. Computer programmers and hackers alike from the very beginning have always been in a mindset of creating something for the shear joy of it and to help out the world. That is what drives many of us. In the past, there was very little profit to be made. Howerver, in the last couple of years, MBAs and marketting teams have taken over the industry. We are now subjected to their goals.
Now, again, I'm not bashing Trillian. I've been a long time trillian user. But it is hard to argue against facts of the law and facts of corporate/business world.
_______________________________
"I'm not Conceited...I'm just a realist..."
2. Ignore all messages/events from users not on my contact list. 'nuff said.
Don't think like a computer geek, think like the average computer user. Step 1: You start your computer and your IM client won't connect. Step 2: You start your AOL IM because Trillian is "broken". Step 3: You don't go back to Trillian because it is "broken". Everyone on slashdot knows enough to check Trillian's website to see what's going on and update thier software but 90% of computer users just switch to the software the "works". This is what AOL and Microsoft base most of thier business model on.
Several jabber server seem to be blocked as well from AIM/ICQ. (jabber.org is one of them)
Final word and final comment, hithero you have had free reign to voice your opinion on this matter. I have arrived wielding a blood dripping Jon Katz voicebox remover.
Thou shalt not make any further comment!
For all the complaining about AOL that happens in this slashdot forum, it seems quite a few of you use their services.
Noscor, Oscar, toscar, whatever, schmoscar, its all irrelevant.
Final Word. Final Comment.
Contain my voice. Place my user into your foe list.
Why shouldn't AOL block out other companies from using their own protocals to access their databases. AOL offers a service which they pay for out of their own pocket in most cases, since I don't have AOL I never give them money, but I use AIM all the time at school. Now, shouldn't we use the program that they offer and if we don't like the way they offer the service we can just leave and join ICQ or whatever else we would want. AOL has a right here. You use their server and whatever else it takes to run an IM then you use their program to access is. What is so wrong with that. Yeah, their program is fairly weak in the features and stability side of things, but we could change. I did try Trillion this past weekend, and I did like the features that it had, especially the resume feature for downloads. So I would like to see AOL lose, but they will probably win. Which, they probably should win cause they built this monopoly, and whatever profits that they make of it they should enjoy. Most people that I know that use AIM don't belong to AOL, they just use the service.
Trillian actually works were as Jabber does not.
SageMadHatter
I s because if they did let anyone and everyone in, then they would quickly lose the war with MS over the IM clients...........
think about it, why would anyone bother going to AOL to get an IM client when MS has one built into the OS for you already and is ready for you to go and set up so you can talk to your buddies on AIM....though they are using Windows messenger also..........
the net result........MS gets all the marketshare in IM clients, and AOL gets to pay the sys admins to watch the servers and keep the account data safe for MS.
sounds like a winning plan to me.
I am the Alpha and the Omega-3
Well, if Trillian's developers are anywhere close to as good as the Gaim developers they should make it. Afterall, Gaim had trouble connecting for quite a while, but its developers eventually got around the problems.
-Tim
-------------
"You would not get a high grade for such a design" -- Andy Tanenbaum on Linus' Linux design.
dude aol sucks, how about they should be put on trial fopr monopolizing. they even bought out icq. its all about control. i love trillian, i think is a great service with no ads and a nice client design. i say kick aols ass!!
If they care so much about third-party clients on their system, they would just make everyone upgrade to a new official AIM client and put some more secure protocol into place; I'm guessing this is largely a politically motivated action against Trillian.
"Reality is just a convenient measure of complexity" -Alvy Ray Smith
Who's being a freeloader?
I pay AOL for services. I'll use any damn client I want. And I refuse to use their creamy abortion as a communications tool.
i keep seeing several comments about "how will AOL fund AIM without the ads?"... most of you are forgetting that the ads are not the main reason that AOL wants you to download AIM... AIM is there mainly so that AOL users can contact their friends who do not*use AOL... if AIM didnt exist, imagine how many users would skip over AOL, just because all their friends have MSN, and they dont want to miss out on talking to their friends... however, if all their friends also have AIM, they dont miss a thing by having AOL (well, they get crappy internet service, but MSN is like that too :P )... this is espically true these days because of the amount of money that advertisers will pay for internet ads anymore... ads just arent that effective, and most of the people who use AIM either dont click on the ads, or minimize the whole damn buddy list window...
one great big open client/network scheme for IM's has occured before, but you're the first one on this thread to mention it, that's all.
i'd use the aol client, but it's too much of a pain to have MSN, AOL, etc. all running at the same time...if you look there are open standards - just nobody uses them. why don't you write some software, host a server, and start the ball rolling?
Who is this Anonymous Coward character, how does he post so much, and why is he always such a whore?
look here
and here
Maybe there is such a beast...take a look.
Who is this Anonymous Coward character, how does he post so much, and why is he always such a whore?
One of the great things about trillian is that it doesn't waste your space with ads, for MSN, Yahoo, or AOL. if it had to show all those ads, it would take up twice the room it does now for the main window. This isn't the solution...
And by the way...does anyone know exactly how much AOL/MSN/Yahoo makes on ads?
Who is this Anonymous Coward character, how does he post so much, and why is he always such a whore?
...I wonder how much more will it receive.
SageMadHatter
... to the terms mandated for the merger? I thought one of the stipulations by the FTC was that AOL would open AIM up and allow competitors to distribute their own instant messenger clients?
mje0w!!!1!
News flash: AOL's new marketing consultants, Underpants Gnomes Inc, just released AOL's new (beta) plan for it's IM client:
1. Allow infinite number of connections from non-AOL clients
2. (the beta part)
3. Money!
Who is this Anonymous Coward character, how does he post so much, and why is he always such a whore?
these people are working hard for nothing, and from the number of posts on this thread, it looks like a lot of people use trillian. i know i do, and have been for quite some time. just give em a dollar or two, it won't hurt you any.
AOL should really concentrate on fundamentally how to make money instead of tinkering with their lossmaking IM investments, unless they charge for all their services , the end is nigh for them.
its not if, but when
http://www.adage.com/news.cms?newsId=33935
I think we all need to get to the bottom of this.... investigate the board members of AOL.. check out their histories, backgrounds, criminal records (if any), and see what ties they have to the EVIL MICROSOFT CORPORATION!
I bet that good 'ole Billy-boy has a Voodoo doll of those AOL folks, and are controlling their minds and bodies to act in a monopolistic way that would take the heat off of Microsoft from the DoJ....
BEWARE THE EVIL CORPORATIONS... POINTY-HAIRED-BOSSES WILL TRY TO TAKE OVER THE INTERNET, AND THEN THE WORLD!
And they said zombies weren't real!
Yes, By all means, Topple AOL. After all, they can't just shut down the service if it becomes to heavily used to remain popular right? Oh wait, they can and will.
;).
I love this; a company produces a free product, does nothing to stop free competition (hello, if AOL were smart they're outright buy ICQ and Others, then charge 2 bucks a month to use their software.), they simply refuse to let other companies profit at their expense. What does this earn them? Cries of monopoly, and folks linking thier practices to Microsoft. Please note the lack of court proceedings. Please note the lack of impotent threats. Please note the lack of whining. AOL and Microsoft are linked only in that the two are succesful software companies, in an age when that is becoming rare (thanks to MS). When they Roll out the Lawyers to destroy Tillian for daring to exist in their space, then come talk to me. Until then, it's an amusing battle between the corp techs at AOL, and the corp hackers at Trillian.
Albeit, I've been an AOL user since before they allowed access to the 'net, so I'm certainly biased.
-GiH
ps - I'll put my money on Aztechnology buying them both in 20 or so years
I know some certain relatively tech savvy people who use AOL dispite the fact that it is not as good as a normal ISP. The ONLY reason they use it is so they can search AOL's vast database of users for a date! You can't search without having AOL, and AOL has the largest pool of 'babes' to choose from. AOL know that this captive community of people is the main real benefit of having AOL instead of a real ISP.
AOL sux because:
1) They cost $10 more/month than other ISPs
2) They still suffer from busy signals
3) They are the LEAST USER FRIENDLY ISP! By comparison, they are NOT EASY!
3A) I set up my generic ISP in one step! I merely typed in the phone number. AOL makes you search through a complcated phone directory to set it up.
3B) AOL is not integrated into the OS. You have to keep an app open to use it
3C) AOL hides the 'real internet' behind their junky browsing tools. AOL users most times don't know what MSIE is for!
3D) AOL boots you off for 'idleness' while you are downloading things
Eat at Joe's.
heh
It's not true that they left ICQ alone. For a few months (starting from late September or early October 2001) it is impossible to talk reliably to official ICQ2001 users.
Only in late December with new ICQ clients such as ickle is this problem on Linux solved (on Windows and Mac you can use AOL/Mirabilis' official client).
Incidentally, running the Mac ICQ client now on my new iBook. I find it funny that Licq has already copied ICQ2000's history+message view, and Ickle as well, while MacICQ has not. Oh well, at least it has Text-to-Speech.
Michel
Michel
Fedora Project Contribut
I helped spec another reasonably successful interoperable messenger: IndiaTimes, downloadable at http://messenger.indiatimes.com. Some of you may find this information of value: 1. IndiaTimes Messenger (developed by Geodesic: http://www.geodesic.org, the company I'm associated with) is the product we licensed to The Times Of India, India's largest newspaper - and, if they were to be believed, the world's no.2 English daily. It allows you to communicate with your AOL, Yahoo, MSN, ICQ and IndiaTimes buddies through one small (1.5 MB) free download and simple interface. When I last checked an hour ago - AOL interconnectivity was still on. Further, the service is difficult to block as it is not server-based, but P2P client based. 2. In the last 3 months, over 1.1 million downloads of this messenger have taken place. In effect, it has perhaps 10% to 20% of the market for messenger users in India. Yahoo and MSN are other leaders here, and AOL is nearly absent in this market. 3. What is unique about this messenger vis a vis others out there: Trillium / Odigo etc, apart from being client-based is its cross communication capabilities. i.e. If I am on IndiaTimes, 'A' is on MSN, 'B' is on Yahoo, 'C' is on AOL and 'D' on ICQ, then A, B, C and D can talk with each other. Hence, my MSN buddy can talk to my AOL buddy can talk to my ICQ buddy. Something, that, to the best of my knowledge, no other messenger allows. Something, perhaps, of some coolness and value:) 4. As far as legal and other threats, we have reasonable research to believe that, despite all the noise, _no messenger company has ever taken an interoperable messenger company to court_. Ever. This may either be because of a desire to avoid a costly legal battle, or to avoid unfavourable publicity - or, more likely we think - because such a case would be thrown out of court. 5. There is enough precedent, we believe, to prove that your communication sent through a messenger is your property - not that of the messenger company's. So you have the right to have your property pass through whatever route you desire to reach its final destination. (The letter / post office analogy). Similarly, I, the receipient can choose to see a communication meant for me through whatever system I desire (roughly analogous to me having the freedom to read my Hotmail on any POP account). 6. Further, there are specific legal rulings specifically favouring interoperability - and even defending reverse engineering to ensure interoperability. One may not be wrong in predicting that there will be no legal cases, but further time-delaying tactics by AOL or others re-engineering their software to keep out the interoperables. My $0.02, Mahesh
And their Investor's would sue them if they didn't. AOL is a for-proffit company that MUST takes steps to ensure they protect their profit margin. The Top Execs are liable to the investors if they don't. Particularly bad decisions can also land their Cxx level folk in jail.
Added liability in exchange for pleasing folk that have no intention of ever giving you money?
-GiH
ps - how many of you mock those same AOL users that pay for that service you demand they give away for free?
spells Attak Nik ... clearly a trojan program to hijack you NIC for DNS attacks.
If I am on IndiaTimes, 'A' is on MSN, 'B' is on Yahoo, 'C' is on AOL and 'D' on ICQ, then A, B, C and D can talk with each other.
Pardon me if I misinterpret your comment...
But GAIM does this already and it's GPL'd. Assuming they have accounts and use the GAIM client, they can talk and chat with each other with no problems.
Plus it's not vulnerable to that nice security hole, has a outgoing spellcheck, perl scripting, is written by starving UC students, AND has got to the mat against AOL before.
mod parent up
Why used a closed source client(I htink Trillian is closed)? Use GPL gaim instead. And if gaim isn't availible on your platform, good news, they segregated the UI and protocols code. I'm surprised that there isn't a Windows port of gaim and a carbonized version yet.
ROFL pointing at AOL
If you can't get a programming job, do what you can to eat.
AOL and Microsoft are the enemies to anyone trying to do a job on their own.
I say piggyback them for all their worth and if you can drive em into the ground, better still!
God spoke to me
after it kept inexplicably erasing my buddy list. After the 3rd or 4th time, I ditched it. All my friends also use MSN or Yahoo anyways.
Hey, if AOL wants to stick it to people trying to make a universal client - just make a firewall-like program that blocks AIM transmissions on a network.
Fight fire with fire - make AIM not work anywhere.
For those who do not know, there is an alternative AIM client for MacOSX which has a nice standard set of features, some cool stuff all its own, friendly support, and so on. It's called "Adium" and it can be found at this address. One of the major upsides? AOL doesn't block it.
I think, therefore, I'm smarter than our president.
In my thinking, and my understanding of law, to say that the AIM service is a monopoly is akin to saying that Blizzard has a monopoly on Starcraft. AIM is just a program, meant to chat with other people who use the same program. Sure, they added TOC which, as I seem to understand it from reading comments, allows third party software to use AIM. However, i'm thinking that maybe this is not so much a gesture towards "Open Messaging" (ever notice how slashdot readers get a hardon over the word "open") as allowing people who work on unsupported platforms to hack together their own AIM client. That would explain why TOC has only a fraction of the features oscar does.
There are also those that claim that AOL, in controlling something like 80+% of the messaging market, is a monopoly. However, this is a case of flawed understanding of the legal nature of monopoly. For one, its not as if AOL is preventing other parties from writing their own messaging clients and hosting their own servers. Secondly, it's not as if AOL has built an infrastructure, the construction of which makes it prohibitive for competition (a natural monopoly, such as the electric company). Anyone can host a server and write a program.
Thus, AOL isn't really doing anything legally wrong. I don't even think they're doing anything morally wrong. I myself use a third party AIM client (Adium), but I wouldn't object if they prevented my client from working. They're providing a free service. If you really want to object, then host your own server, write your own program, compile it for a bunch of platforms, send it to everyone you want to message, and maybe, if you're lucky, you can get money from advertisers too.
"It has long been our very public policy that when a service unleashes software that hacks into our system, and endangers the security of our system, we stop it," AOL spokeswoman Kathy McKiernan said. Trillian does not "hack" into their system; they use the protocols and "standards" used by the AOL service to legitimately access their systems. This is not about security; it's about market share.
The race isn't always to the swift... but that's the way to bet!
Trillian can connect to multiple IM networks so the people who use trillian might be more apt to switch to the competition such as MSN or yahoo as it is not a big deal. AOL could be shooting themselves in the foot so to speak.
If it's anything like ICQ (I've never used AIM because, well, it's AOL.), it has to connect to a server somewhere. Even if it doesn't, the following bears relevance to the many many ICQ clones for Linux that could possibly be shut down at any given moment.
By using an alternative client, you are trespassing on their server. You are using resources that they do not want you using - they have the right to say, "No, hoser, you won't be chatting tonight."
Think - you are bypassing their forced advertisement, yet still using their processing time and bandwidth.
How can you possibly complain when you are stopped? When you cheer the idea that e-mail spammers are guilty of 'theft', but you are guilty of no better?
In the end, the creators of messenging software and those who pay for the central servers/bandwidth *do* have the right to boot your sorry arses off their network if you don't use their client.
So, enjoy it while you can - and hope other companies remain friendly. Or, design something better.
Please remember that the user interface is only a part of the job of messaging. A large, perhaps the largest, part of the job is running the servers that store and forward the messages. And that part ?isn't?? (I've never run Trillian, so I don't know for sure) addressed by a new GUI.
So Trillian may have a dynamite interface, but it doesn't pay for the infrastructure. Seems like AOL is in the right this time.
.
I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
Flamebait Disclaimer: I am trying to be insightful, if i come through as flamebait, eh, oops.
/subscribers/ alone(remember, it is AOL/Time Warner.) These people make an obscene amount of cash every month!
Trillian is a better AIM client. It has so much AIM doesnt, for example Secure IM (128kbit encryption on both ends), and those things that it does (direct connect aka IM Images). You can make Trillian look nice. You can give your friends aliases so screen names have meaning. You can use AIM, IRC, ICQ, Y! and MSN. There are no advertisements. It is free.
As of November 2001, AOL had more than 32 million subscribers. Each pays $21.95 a month for full service. (Yes, i know there are cheaper plans, but the majority of the people are stuck using AOL dialup). Thats an estimated 704 million dollars a month ($22*32000000), just from AOL
An even better point: AOL owns ICQ. I can still log into ICQ via Trillian. Why do they let it go with ICQ? Why does AOL let people send mail outside of their network? It's the same principle, and a sad one at that
//pcable
AOL has the right to do whatever the hell they want to do to their system to keep people out. If you don't like that, then DO NOT USE IT.
The only people from AOL that I chat with who could not talk to me any other way are too dumb for me to really ever need to communicate with them anyhow. This is maybe 16 of the 33 people on my buddy list. The other 17 could find me on IRC or some other chat medium.
If people refused to use AIM, and instead used other systems, dropping them each time they were forced into the same sort of situation that AOL is trying to stick people into now, then eventually the corporations would realize that they have to come up with a different pricing plan, a different way to pay for it all than advertising, and forcing you to install their own software.
I hate the advertising model, given that it makes social pressure a sales tool. "Oh it's free! Just install this and we can chat."
When people realize that time and irritation are not FREE - they waste your life, they might start to hate ads as much as I do. Enough to actually stop using a system no matter who it means I can't talk to.
I use it now because I can, but I'll stop without complaint if Fire at some point can't connect to their servers. No problem.
That's how this country works. Sometimes to get your way you actually have to do something, or not do something, as it were.
When the slashdot ads become unbearable, I'll be out of here too.
Would I PAY for access to systems and web sites if I never had to see an ad - absolutely. Would I refuse to pay if they then started showing me "fewer" ads, instead of "NO" ads? Absolutely.
Are people really too dumb to figure out what to do to enjoy their online experience? Does nobody else pick browsers that allow you to disable window.open() and such? Why do people have to bitch that they aren't getting a service for free anymore. Don't use it, and they'll figure out how to sell it in a way that you'll be satisfied. Maybe all the chat mediums will merge. Who the hell knows?
Since we're on the subject of SecureIM:
My friends and I are developing an AIM-like client built from the ground up to be secure and easy to use, for our CS software project. We're trying to add a variety of features (secure file transfer, encrypted configuration on disk, secure chatrooms, session integrity). What features would you guys like to see in a secure IM client/server? Which ones are most important? Would you use it?
Thanks in advance for any comments; you can post here or send to .
Mikhail
Sorry, the last line of that should read:
...post here or send to secureim@hotmail.com.
phak aol! if they want to shut us out, then they can go live in their glass house. and i for one will be happy to be gone with them, i have no need to interact with anyone having any busniess with aol, so i don't need to IM anyone using aol and if ever i do i suggest trillian and then that brainwashed aolite becomes enlightened and leaves the herd to start his/her road down proper geekdom, but much lke the sage wisdom in teh movie "The Matrix", "I can only show you the door, you have to open it", i cannot force anyone away form aol, some people cannot stand on their own out in the real internet and need that aol cruch, much like some people need relgion inorder to bring meaning to their lives, some people need aol to bring meaning and understanding of the internet to them, their feeble minds cannot grasp the concept of "there's more to the internet than aol", but some will, and do, an those are brainwashed few that need our help on their road to recovery, those are the few have the ability to grasp the concpets, but unfortunately fell into the trap of aol when the first came into "net" world, but it up to them to take that first step, for if they do not want to leave the world of lies, corruption, and evil, forcing them will only strengthen theirresolve to stay in dark. So show these people the light, but let them take the first step into it, and after that we can assist them in their long journy to a proper and respectable geekhood. So let AOL shut off IM to the outside world, let them starve themselves, let them implod on their own fat bloated selves i say.
wow that wasn't long winded at all was it
I use it everyday, work forces us to use ICQ and friends love MSN so I use both through trillian, works great.
Chris Lee
lee@mediawaveonline.com
I bet this I-can-match-your-protocol game is going to eventually result in protocols where advertisement display is a part of the protocol itself. As others have mentioned, that seems to be AOL's main motivation: keep pushing out those ads that pay for the service.
Of course clever protocol-matching clients will just download the ads and send them to /dev/null, but that will just escalate the competition. Within ten years or so, computers will come with hardware that detects where your eye is looking at the screen, and verifying that yes, you've seen the ad. Of course you could hack a a system like that too, but things like the DMCA will make sure you can't get away with it for long if you wish to continue doing business outside a jail cell.
The technology for enforcing micro-payments through ad-pushing may be behind the curve, but there is very heavy incentive to catch up, and I'm sure they will. If not through technical genius, then through legislation.
what about gaim? even though its probably not as widely used as trillian, aol still has a version of aim available for linux. so does this mean that aol could potentially go after gaim?
I've always had issues with AOL, but their recent attempts to block Trillian users from communicating with AIM users has gone too far. This is equivalent to AOL blocking their users from receiving email from non-AOL accounts (Yahoo, Hotmail, Earthlink, etc). Sure AOL can do it since they own the servers, but it ends up hurting the consumer by limiting peoples' ability to communicate with each other.
IF AOL continues this short-sighted, restrictive practice, I will make it my lifelong mission to take a proactive effort in converting any AOL ISP subscribers to other ISPs (Earthlink.net, ATT.net, etc). Additionally, my new personal policy will be that I will not offer any computer help to people who pay money to AOL. If a friend/acquaintance is an AOL subscriber who insists on staying with AOL, I will not give them any technical help. However, if that person agrees to renounce AOL, cancel the service, and uninstall the AOL software, then I will give them all the computer help they need.
My suggestion to AOL: have two types of AIM acounts: AIM Free and AIM Pro. AIM Free accounts will have text advertisements attached to every 10 instant messages they send. AIM Pro accounts will not have these text ads. AOL ISP subscribers will automatically get AIM Pro accounts. Everyone else has the choice of an AIM Free account, or paying $2/month for an AIM Pro account.
Between AOL shutting Trillian from accessing their IM structure, and MS putting IE into windows? At least with MS you can install another browser, with AOL they are trying to MAKE you use AIM.
I use Gaim on my Linux box with no problem.
AOL owns ICQ.
Despite how much you may wish AOL should play nice here, they aren't. Some posts mentioned how programmers are wasting their time reverse-engineering when they could be adding features to an AIM client. How about just not making an AIM client?
Jabber is an open instant messaging system. You may have heard of "Jabber Transports" which allow you to talk to other services. Please remember that these are only extension to the system, with the same possible flaws as Trillian. More importantly, Jabber is an IM system of its own, and works just fine. Our standard IM system is here, guys, and no one can stop us from using it. Not only is development of clients and other software encouraged, but you are given full protocol documentation. This is what co-operation is about. Making an IM client should not be a war. So quit wasting your time with these closed systems, and come join us!
Just stop using AIM, and tell your friends too also. I expected more Jabber related posts on this board, considering all the open source advocation that goes on here. If you were confused and thought that Jabber was "just another multi-IM" and nothing more, well... you have now been learned.
As for the other comment - unlike me, most of my family does use AOL. It's amazing the amount of SPAM they get in their inboxes from other AOL users. The worm/virii comment was directed at the statement by AOL that they block 3rd party clients due to "security" reasons. This just seems like complete B.S. when they don't do much to increase the security of AOL users. They could use virus scanning software on their mail servers to prevent the propogation of MS exploits. Perhaps they do now, but they didn't always.
I AM, therefore I THINK!
There is also a client called Imici which combines AIM, MSN, Yahoo!, and ICQ. I wonder if AOL is blocking it as well?
proton != antielectron
The problem only occurs if you have Secure IM enabled in the preferances, which was a new feature in 0.71
My guess, is that AOL spotted this, saw some security problem it was causing and patched it on their servers, breaking trillian. If that patch was applied in two stages, then that would explain why trillian needed to be updated twice.
AOL themselves haven't even commented on this, apart from re-issuing their policy. If AOL were trying to block trillian, I'm sure they would have implemented better blocking than they have.
Ian
Trillian has been updated twice in the past 24 hours to work around the blocks AOL is throwing up to prevent the popular IM client from interoperating with the AOL Instant Messenger service.
Isn't this inflating things a bit? All you had to do to fix it in the first place was turn off secure IM. They fixed it so that you could once again use secure IM. At no point did I really see AOL 'blocking' Trillian.
Yeah, they *really* did block it. I suspect the SecureIM exchange was what AOL was using to sniff out Trillian users first, that's why shutting it off worked. But, I really *was* disconnected from AOL IM for some time. Older versions of the program (v.721) don't work anymore. But, .721 is sitll functional! Whee! Go Trillian!
AOL has a java client which, as you may notice, lacks such "features" as advertisements. Your claim that the advertising pays for the bandwidth used is refuted by this fact. I would suspect that the ads are intended to recoup the costs for developing the client in the first place, though they probably play a small part in subsidizing the bandwidth costs.
Also, saying that the ads are justified by the fact that the native clients offer more features ignores the fact that the additional features have a negligible impact on the bandwidth.
I can't see their job being too hard, if these updates that the Trillian team are making are modular.
I'd never had a problem with Trillian auto-downloading a small 4kb .DLL update a couple of times a day. :)
slainfu
"I can't be a terrorist if you're sucking my bum."
Trillian is GREAT!!!! They had better not fail!! I sure hope not..
From playing with Jabber, I learnt a little bit about how AOL tries to block it. It does this by first of all requiring the client to send in a CRC of its own binary. To combat this, the transport was rewritten to allow for a client binary to be placed with it, and it checksummed that. When AOL cottoned on, they started blocking by IP address. As the AIM and ICQ servers now appear to be the same server, ICQ also has problems. Those who were using older ICQ clients or something like LICQ when ICQ changed protocol will know how all of a sudden the messages stopped going through. The nice thing about Jabber when this happened, was that the transport upgrades were mostly transparent to the user (excepting that it didn't work for a little while). Now the ICQ transport is quite good (where it works), except for a few minor issues.
Check out AOL --basically these folks keep these company alive by getting special immigration legislation. If you don't like this, speak out.
This whole AIM VS Trillian is a lot like phone companies... both offering a very similar service and both being forced to open up their lines to competing internet service providers... (Oftel VS BT) This also has been taking place in the US.
http://www.aim.aol.com/cgi-bin/bugs.cgi?ver=beta&p lat=nl
Just tell them that the service isn't working with other clients. heh.Oscar is more-or-less implemented as a library called libfaim. I have no idea where the project is homed, but I know there is a copy in Jabber's CVS at www.jabber.org.
because their AIM client for me has always given me a headache. I've had constant disconnections and sometimes I cannot even connect to Oscar half the damn time. Hell, just recently my girlfriend and I couldn't log onto AIM with the actual AIM client. So we downloaded Trillian and it was working great. Just to make sure we just didn't catch the server at the right time, we both tried logging on with the AIM clients, and to no avail, yet Trillian was working just fine for us.
So AOL, go die. Thanks.
...reminds me of the ShowEQ project, months ago, feverishly releasing fixes for changes made by Verant. Not all of those (if any) were intentional, though.
1) digest authentication only works on plaintext, so the best the server could do is store passwords with some symetric cipher (=minor delay for an attacker at best) anyway.
2) root on a jabber server can do as she pleases with your communications. just like email or any other client/server IM system, you are trusting your communications with whomever runs that server. of course since anyone can have jabber servers, you could have your own jabber server and not worry about having to trust the administrator of another server (just like with email). jabber can also be concidered/used as a peer to peer system.
or are you scared that someone seeing your password will give a clue to your other passwords? if so, rethink how you make your passwords.
What if Trillian supported the Jabber protocol?...
--arcades
... they include an auto-update notification. Would be handy..
Michel
Michel
Fedora Project Contribut
I wonder if big shots from AOL Time Warner read /. If they did, they'd know we all hate them. Hrmm.... I know it's shady and script-kiddyish, but if we get all the /. readers to DoS AOL we could make quite a mess.
It is not true that the only thing that can topple big companies is other big companies. What was Microsoft when it began? a couple of guys with computers in a garage. Look what they became and who they've squashed in their climb to the top.
You have been disconnected from the AOL Instant Message Service (SM) for accessing the AOL network using unauthorized software. You can download a FREE, fully featured, and authorized client, here http://www.aol.com/aim/download2.html .
Coincidently, I think it's only being done to a handful of users, some of my friends who use Trillian have no problems.
Is this legal? I know aol has been doing this covertly for a long time, but now they are telling you explicitly use AIM or else.