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)?"
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?
Thats the thing tho.. Trillian isn't fighting them with lawyers.... they're fighting with coders. Hacking their way around the problem. Aol to my knowledge hasn't told them to cut it out, just tried to prevent the whole thing.
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.
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?
You forgot one. It's a matter of revenue. AOL IM serves ads. Trillian doesn't serve ads for AOL. If you use Trillian, AOL doesn't get ad revenues. The only security they care about is investor security.
do not read this line twice.
Well Microsoft owns the servers that run Hotmail (and Passport, and MSN, and so on) so should they force everyone to use IE to check their Hotmail accounts?
Sure, they could if they wanted to. It's their choice.
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.
Those ads are what pay for the servers, the infrastructure, the maintenance and enhancement of the software, etc. If you are using the service without the ads, you're getting a free ride on all the people who do use the service as intended.
Why do you think TiVo doesn't let you completely strip away ads and watch programmes seamlessly? Because without ad revenue there are no programmes, at least not on non-PPV channels. The TV companies know this, and the enlightened consumer knows it too.
IMHO, this is all about a minority of users wanting free beer, and dressing it up in free speech rhetoric. Don't forget that ICQ was a small company once... if you really need IM functionality and don't want to use a commercial service... implement your own for internal use.
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.
After all these years of being "connected" to the Internet, it looks like they still don't "get it."
IMHO, this is all about a minority of users wanting free beer, and dressing it up in free speech rhetoric. Don't forget that ICQ was a small company once... if you really need IM functionality and don't want to use a commercial service... implement your own for internal use.
I disagree. For me, and I suspect this is true of the majority of Trillian users, it comes down to the number of clients running. I've got a pretty quick Windows box, but I tend to stress it pretty much every day. I also happen to have some old friends on ICQ, several cousins, friends, and my sister on AIM, and a college roommate on MSN. No one will switch, and I can't run three clients all day every day. Hence, Trillian. Now, I don't really care if it shows ads or not; that had nothing to do with my decision. If AOL will come out with a client that can talk to MSN and ICQ, fine, I'll probably go back (they need to work on their logging, too).
This isn't about free beer or free speech. It's about free RAM and free processor cycles.
-db
I agree. There was a guy a little way above who wanted to use one program to talk to friends using a variety of IM transports. This is a perfectly reasonable thing to want, but it's not a right: if AOL doesn't want AOL IM to be able to talk to other IM systems, that's its choice (however misguided).
Trillian is a very good work-around; but as this type of thing shows, it is (sadly) only a work-around. The only lasting solution to the IM kerfuffle is to get people to stop using closed systems and move onto some open, non-proprietary system.
Actually, that sounds like it could be a good thing in general. I'm surprised it hasn't occurred to anybody here before.
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.
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...
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
But you see, it's not solely about advertising after all.
Companies like AOL spend billions a year on getting their name out there. One of the ways to get your companies name out there is Branding. You want your name all over your product and you want you product to get in front of as many faces as often as you can and branding is gonna be a big part of this for them.
Let's say that Trillian (*yay Go Trillian*) stands unobstructed, it's a better client than aim, it's more useful to a LOT of people and has some really nice functionality not offered by AIM. So everyone starts using it. (except for AOL users) All of a sudden there's no more AIM on everyones boxes, no more AOL banners, AOL tracking, AOL propaganda. The most valuable feature to them of their IM client is the fact that they get to spatter their name on everyones desktops.
Most everyone I know, knows what AIM is even if they don't use it. AOL isn't about to gonna give up their userbase's clients to a third party that's gonna advertise them at the same level as icq, yahoo and msn. all of a sudden they're left holding the login bag without branding or advertisement sales.
they spent the money and devd the servers, they spent the $$ and devd the clients, they should have the right not to have outside programs connect to the server and use their resources for free if they choose not to.
but also notice that the aim client is very stale, no decent changes in years, they own aol and icq, you'd expect that it would not kill them to make a client that wraps aim and icq together if a user chooses to do so? If their product wasn't obviously lacking, Trillian would not be able to get a foothold as easily on the market.
I'll sit back and root for Trillian 'till the cows come home' but i expeect that they'll eventually get beat down. AOL is tough competition, and they take their rights seriously.
Wonder how long it will be until someone comes up with a client that attaches to oscar through the AIM client program itself to connect in?
You don't have to if you don't want to. Just configure your software to block all content from major advertisers (doubleclick, etc...) and you can make your browsing experience 90% + ad free.
By your reasoning, it is immoral to do this, since it circumvents the service provider's revenue source. As an extension, though, since no one advertises if the advertising does no good, it is immoral to view a site without purchasing products from any and all advertisers there.
Actually, for those actively annoyed by advertisement, AOL should thank them for circumventing their ad servers. Those annoyed by ads may be less likely to purchase products whose advertising has annoyed them. By not viewing the ads, these people are increasing the sponsor's profits by protecting themselves from negative commercial associations.