Slashdot Mirror


Google Instant Messenger Coming Really (or Not?)

bach37 writes "Google is rumored to launch its own instant messenger tomorrow." Other sources are reporting that talk.google.com is running jabber. Of course we've also had stories about all this being rumors

12 of 577 comments (clear)

  1. Re:180 degrees? by the_mighty_$ · · Score: 5, Informative
    --
    VI VI VI - the editor of the beast!
  2. Re:Multiplatform? I think not. by lav-chan · · Score: 4, Informative

    (Assuming again that this is truly going to be a 'Google IM' and it's not just some bizarro misunderstanding,) talk.google.com is running Jabber. If they're going to launch the service tomorrow, that's what they're going to launch with. It's not like they're just running Jabber today and then tomorrow they're going to switch it all up on us with some crazy proprietary protocol.

    And... since Jabber is 'an open and published IM standard'... what have you got to worry about?


    Also, i don't know a whole ton about Jabber or how Google works internally, and i'm not suggesting that it's true or false, but what are the chances that maybe talk.google.com is just like a corporate Jabber server? Like for Google employees to talk to each other? :shrug:

  3. It's real: it's a Jabber server! by YA_Python_dev · · Score: 5, Informative

    This time is not a rumor!

    Try it for yourself. Send a string like:

    <stream:stream to='talk.google.com' xmlns='jabber:client' xmlns:stream='http://etherx.jabber.org/streams'>

    to talk.google.com, port 5222. It will respond with a valid RFC 3920 (Jabber) stream!

    --
    There's a hidden treasure in Python 3.x: __prepare__()
  4. In other News -- Google Cap Up $Bn! by shashark · · Score: 4, Informative

    http://biz.yahoo.com/rb/050823/markets_stocks_befo rethebell.html?.v=1 Google Inc. (GOOG) rose nearly 1 percent before the bell on Tuesday after the Los Angeles Times reported the Web search company will launch its own instant messaging system
    Shares of Google rose $2.54 to $276.55 on the Inet electronic brokerage system, from a $2.74.01 close on Nasdaq.


    Boy oh Boy, that's almost $1 BN ($0.767 BN to be exact) jump in market cap. Tin foil hats and Conspiracy theorists, jump right in.

  5. Jabber by PhYrE2k2 · · Score: 4, Informative

    Jabber has server modules that connect you to most major networks. That's the real push for Jabber is that it bridges the gap. Until M$ blocks Google's IPs (heh), Google could technically put a bridge in there and make connections to Microsoft's servers for every user.

    -M

    --

    when you see the word 'Linux', drink!
  6. Re:180 degrees? by TheRaven64 · · Score: 5, Informative
    I can confirm that talk.google.com is talking Jabber.

    telnet talk.google.com 5222
    Trying 64.233.167.125...
    Connected to talk.l.google.com.
    Escape character is '^]'.
    <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
    <stream:stream
    to="talk.google.com"
    xmlns="j abber:client"
    xmlns:stream="http://etherx.jabber. org/streams">
    <stream:stream from="talk.google.com" id="C12F7326" xmlns:stream="http://etherx.jabber.org/streams" xmlns="jabber:client">
    The last line of this is the standard response sent by a Jabber server prior to negotiating a login.
    --
    I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  7. Re:180 degrees? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    The Hello Instant Messaging client is included with Picasa which is owned by google.

    Cleverly it is used for picture sharing which avoids direct competition with the established IM clients.

    http://www.hello.com/

    Posting only because I dont have mod points to push the parent post all the way up to 5

  8. Re:Someone at google... by dragonman97 · · Score: 4, Informative

    Nearly all Google's services work in such a fashion, though. For instance, sms.google.com sends you to google.com/sms, and similarly for many of their other tools. I'll wait for a real announcement before I assume anything.

  9. Re:180 degrees? by 87C751 · · Score: 4, Informative
    I can confirm that talk.google.com is talking Jabber.
    Not anymore...
    $ telnet talk.google.com 5222
    Trying 64.233.167.125...
    Connected to talk.google.com.
    Escape character is '^]'.

    ?
    HTTP/1.1 302 Found
    Location: http://www.google.com/talk/
    Content-Type: text/html
    Content-Length: 151

    <HTML><HEAD><TITLE>302 Moved</TITLE></HEAD><BODY><H1>302 Moved</H1>The document has moved <A HREF="http://www.google.com/talk/">here</A>.</BODY ></HTML>Connection closed by foreign host.
    --
    Mail? Put "slashdot" in the subject to pass the spam filters.
  10. Re:180 degrees? by shokk · · Score: 3, Informative

    Remember the rumors about Google getting into VOIP? Eweek is reporting that it will be a text and voice chat.
    http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1851272,00.as p?kc=EWRSS03119TX1K0000594

    --
    "Beware of he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart, he dreams himself your master."
  11. Re:180 degrees? by YA_Python_dev · · Score: 5, Informative
    Not anymore...

    Yeah: it still works, you just need to send at least the start of a valid Jabber stream. Instead of "?" try sending:

    <stream:stream to='talk.google.com' xmlns='jabber:client' xmlns:stream='http://etherx.jabber.org/streams'>
    --
    There's a hidden treasure in Python 3.x: __prepare__()
  12. Re:Gabber? by vrza · · Score: 3, Informative

    If this rumor is true, and I run my own Jabber server, can my users connect through my server into Google's users?



    That's a good question. At this moment, talk.google.com doesn't seem to be listening on port tcp/5269 (which is the standard Jabber/XMPP port for server to server communication), and c2s seems to require some special type of SASL authentification (maybe to discourage users to try connecting with a non-google Jabber client when the service starts). Of course, maybe they will enable s2s (and thus syndication with the rest of the Jabber network) when they officially roll out the service.



    Speculations, speculations... Let's just wait till tomorrow and see, shall we?