Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Google, Skype and the Future of IM

Posted by CmdrTaco on from the nothing-like-a-little-theory dept.

Matt Veenstra sent in a nice little piece of rumor mongering about how Google's new Talk/Jabber/IM thing is just a stepping stone, but it's really just a foreshadowing of their future buyout of Skype. Worth some thought anyway.

20 of 315 comments (clear)

  1. Another Google buyout? by PureCreditor · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Doesn't anyone concern that Google now can archive your email, your IMs, your web search (thus your personal interests), and your phone calls?

    whatever happened to privacy

  2. GoogleOS? YahooOS? MozillaOS? WebOS? by huphtur · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Check out Kottke's article GoogleOS? YahooOS? MozillaOS? WebOS?. In which he speculates about the future of the WebOS.

    1. Re:GoogleOS? YahooOS? MozillaOS? WebOS? by jasongetsdown · · Score: 2, Interesting

      IMHO his post was a classic "nothing new, move along" with the execption of "next killer app: desktop web servers."
      the rest has been chewed over so many times in other venues that it was hard to read. The guy really doesn't have that much to offer.

      --
      useless sig advice - Read Nabokov.
  3. More speculation... by el_womble · · Score: 3, Interesting

    ...so I guess I'll join in. This could be really cool. Skype and Google could be a marriage made in heaven. Skype is a good product, but to be great I think a few google phds could really iron out some of its potential flaws. Also, the google brand could make the product less scary to companies who see 'from the company that bought you kazaa' as a bad thing (quite rightly). It would also increase the number of people on the system. Even though its been out for months, I know very few people that use it.

    The biggest problem I see with Skype at the moment is hardware. I set my girlfriend up with it and it caused no end of problems. Its one thing learning to use the interface (which is good) its another thing to learn about feedback, line in/out and buying a headphone set specifically for the purpose of VoIP (even if it is only $15). Still it was easier than trying to get AIM to work with iChat for a video chat.

    --
    Scared of flying, pointy things snce 1979!
  4. Re:Rumor? by Silvrmane · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Computerworld seems, to me at least, to be rife with lots of sensationalized articles about dubious tech issues. The Air Force article was vague and over-generalized, and didn't explain what security flaw had been exploited by the attacker.

    In another article on their site they describe employees intentionally releasing viruses into the workplace network as "workplace violence". Vandalism was probably the word they were looking for, but violence sounds so much more dangerous. Its not much of a suprise that your submission got rejected. I didn't even check out your second URL - it sounded silly.

    Better luck next time.

    --
    planet texture maps and more
  5. Well, yeah. by Ieshan · · Score: 5, Interesting

    If you send email to someone on gmail, or you IM someone who's using Google-Talk, sure, Google could have a copy of that.

    But lets be realistic. Google probably doesn't want any information about *you*, they probably want to *aggregate information*, which is what they've been doing all along.

    This is all an extension of search. Through all the "omg", "lol", and "haha"s in Instant Messenger, there's thousands of words that can be associated with both each other and with other links. There's thousands of white-listed and black-listed participants, because people naturally filter their conversations. They don't want a database about *you*, they want a relational database about *communication*, to make it easier to find out what someone means when they type something like "river bank" or "white house".

    It's all about relationships between language. Conversation is a natural extension. They provide a service, they get tons of data.

    At least, this is what I would be doing with the data. Google might not be doing that.

  6. Re:Do we actually need this? by Azzmodan · · Score: 2, Interesting

    They did infact "rigged something up" except that instead of IRC they used the nice and open standard Jabbar protocol. They also have information on their site how to access it from various other clients.

    And you could just use any of the various IM clients that intergrates all the seperate ones, like GAIM, Trillian, etc.

    Wouldn't have hurt if you at least pretended to look at it before whining about it.

  7. Yes we do by 10Ghz · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Open-source (it uses Jabber!) IM that is backed by Google? Yes please!

    I don't know about you, but I want to have "one IM to rule them all" that is also open source. Jabber was the prime candidate, but it was rather minor when compared to MSN, AIM and the like. Not anymore. Google is about to increase the number of people using Jabber by order of magnitude!

    With Google's help, we just might get an IM-infrastructure that is based on open source and open standards. No need to mess around with MSN and the like, just use Jabber. No need to work around proprietary protocols.

    If Google manages to put VOIP in there as well, more power to them! Once system for all your IM'ing and VOIPping. Based on open standards. Based on open source. With millions of users. Yes please! No longer would we have to rely on Skype for clients and service. No longer would we have to worry when MS or AOL breaks our IM-clients with "updated" versions of their protocol.

    --
    Lesbian Nazi Hookers Abducted by UFOs and Forced Into Weight Loss Programs - -all next week on Town Talk.
    1. Re:Yes we do by earthbound+kid · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I wish I had saved mod points today.

      You're exactly right. IM today is like email in 1993. You can use FidoNet, AOL, CompuServe, Prodigy, or this new fangled "internetwork" of Al Gore's, but there is no universal service. The difference is that the current blockade inter-service is fully self-imposed. In fact, AOL was order by the FTC to open up its service before offering voice or video chat as a condition for merge with Time-Warner, but then the government remembered that AOL is a big corporation, and rules don't apply to them. The only reason that we don't have interservice compatibility is because everyone is trying to hog the market to themselves. The loser here is the consumer. But, maybe, just maybe Google will help usher in a new age of IM interservice standards. Let's hope.

  8. Well if that doesn't toast it all... by thatedeguy · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I said the same darn thing yesterday on my blog http://thatedeguy.blogspot.com/ this article is a little more technical about it but what the heck...

    --
    A Linux flavor for every Month!
  9. Google Will Never Buy Skype by popo · · Score: 3, Interesting


    This whole piece is full of half-baked speculation. Google is perfectly happy with their current client which has been in development for months.

    Its not as if Google is in the business of investing time, money and press exposure on "interim, stepping stones".

    Google wanted Jabber. And that's what they used. The current client supports VOIP, and uses open standards. Anyone who knows Google knows that Jabber and Google's own VOIP are the platform for the next 5 years at least.

    The only question should be: Will Google buy Webb Interactive (46% owner of Jabber)

    --
    ------ The best brain training is now totally free : )
  10. Re:Why would they buyout Skype? by TheRaven64 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    From what I have read, the Skype system works by using non-NAT'd people as relays for conversations where both end-points are NAT'd. This, unfortunately, is placing a lot of strain on their system as NAT'd people start to greatly outnumber non-NAT'd people. Of course, if we all had IPv6, this wouldn't be a problem.

    --
    I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  11. Re:Google vs. Skype by djg1977 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I can't imagine Google acquiring Skype. They seem to have way too different cultures. Why Google didn't buy Flickr, on the other hand, is a mystery to me. Flickr would have been a perfect match to Google Picasa, not to mention Google Maps - imagine clicking on a location on the map and seeing user-submitted images from there. Anyway, it's too late now, let's see how Yahoo! screws! this! one! up!.

  12. Google's Portal Play by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    What do I need a Google messaging client for? I've been using Yahoo Mail for eight years. It's the best in the business. I've been using Yahoo Messenger and AIM thru Apple iChat since I began using IM several years ago. My contacts are all set up with Yahoo.

    What do I need Google's customized news page for? I have My Yahoo, which is far more powerful and resourceful than Google's upstart customizable news page.

    Heck, what do I even need Google search for? Yahoo's search engine seems to bring up just as relevant or better results. It's nice to have the competition, but my greater point is...

    Why all this hype about Google? Sure, their stock is at $350 or whatever, but who cares? Does anybody actually believe Google is worth that? No. It's just like the dot-com days and stock valuations. People buy it just because they believe it'll go higher, not because they believe in the ratios.

    I'm sick and tired of hearing about Google supposedly doing this and supposedly doing that. And even when they come out with something new, it's not a big deal and usually not something I'm going to regularly use.

    Google is old news. Their search engine works great. Yeah, I know.

    1. Re:Google's Portal Play by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      In total disagreement.

      I've had a Gmail account for at least a year. I actively used it as a secondary account for about four months. It is not the least bit comparable to Yahoo Mail. There is far more spam that appears in the Gmail inbox. No false positives with Gmail, but then again I can't stand all that spam in my inbox. Yahoo Mail rarely lets in spam, at least for me. Factor in the address book and calendar functionaliy, and there isn't a comparison.

      I guess it's a matter of preference as for My Yahoo. My Yahoo is so refined and has so many available options for customization. I don't know where to begin.

      If all you want is a plain screen with nothing but text, then fine. As far as My Yahoo goes, I don't know what you're talking about. The only ads that are really noticeable is the one banner ad atop the page. that's not overly intrustive as far as i'm concerned, considering how much they give me for free.

      Yahoo is more cluttered because it has far more to offer. What do you want them to do? Have five links per page linking to another page with five more links and another and so on and on and on? That's what they'd have to do. As for Google, well, if all they have to offer is an incredibly generic news page and Google Groups, then I guess they only need two links.

      Google pales in comparison to the wealth of content available at Yahoo. I don't see how you can debate this.

      And as for the IM client, I'll agree that Yahoo Messenger is bulky. But it's free and Yahoo is trying to make a profit. Now I haven't see Google's IM client yet but if it's anything like their homepage, they won't be making any money off it.

      Eventually, Google will answer to shareholders. And eventually, you will see Google become more commercial.

  13. Skype's reaction?!! by vijaya_chandra · · Score: 2, Interesting

    http://share.skype.com/
    http://www.macworld.com/news/2005/08/24/skype/inde x.php

  14. Re:"News" implies some basis in fact... by Programmer_In_Traini · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I agree with what you say but by doing that, you're only part of the wave :)

    We've seen it all to often that this or that article is

    1. not new
    or
    2. not backed up by facts
    or
    3. not news worthy

    Then there are these types of people using slashdot:

    1. Karma ph4rm3rz : will do any easy empty comment to get a rating. Any easy jokes with star wars / matrix / LoTR reference often works for a +5 rating in funny.

    2. Genuinely good commenters : Those that actually make good research on the web to talk about the articel. They dont always end up with good ratings tho but life is unfair.

    3. The users that logoff just to post an insignificant/bitchy comment about someone for no apparent reason.

    4. The arguers : Those that dont necessarily add up to the discussion and please themselves in contracdicting every single thing you've said but without really trying to prove a point.

    5. The disgruntled : That would be where you classify :-p (im putting a smiley here so that you see im not trying to be bitchy). The disgruntled are those surfing /. for good articles and seek good debates and end up frustrated what type of "empty" articles gets posted.

    6. The passives : This would be where I classify. They consider /. as a massive community where you have to give some and take some. Just smile and wave when they see a crappy article then go right up to the next article hoping it will be better.

    We've seen it before, we'll see it again. As "passive" member, i encourage you to just wave, smile and go to the next article when we get something like this :P

    --
    If you look like your passport photo, you're too ill to travel. - Will Kommen
  15. Not Skype - Vonage by canolecaptain · · Score: 2, Interesting

    As has been posted in other messages on this thread, Google has publicly claimed to be moving toward SIP. There are only 2 standards that are really being used by telephone companies (both ILEC and CLEC) for their VoIP -> SIP and MGCP. By leveraging SIP, Google can plugin to this network if they so choose. Skype is out of the question since it's a closed protocol that's going nowhere but between people already on the net.

    However, the money isn't made in SIP connections, it's in the connection between SIP and POTS (plain old telephone service) phones, and phone features. Current phone companies make money in 2 ways: phone connection services, and phone features. Internet phone services remove option 1 since the bandwidth on the net can use a little as 64k for decent quality phone 128k+ for high quality (ala Vonage, et.al.), and it's paid for as a monthly pipe instead of a per minute charge. Phone features come primarily from big class 5 switches that are notoriously hard to upgrade and add new features to. They are being replaced with Open Source IPTel and other SIP servers, and the features become trivial to add / upgrade, besides the cost is 1/100th of a class 5 switch.

    The real money maker is in the transitionary connection charges between SIP / MGCP and the POTS network. Since Google has been buying lots of dark fiber (presumeably to light it for massive internal bandwidth increases and -no- connection charges), they will soon have their own internal bandwidth to route free VoIP calls through. The beauty is that they could then begin selling SIP POTS services for far less than Vonage, and this service will make oodles of cash. If they were to purchase Vonage, they could get a jump on the subscriber base and local phone connectivity could then be move to Google's new high speed internal network.

    So, Google buying Skype? Not a chance. Google buying Vonage? I've wondered about that for over a year. :-)
  16. Wow...Hmmm by riversky · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Google is turning into pure corporate evil. They are attempting to emulate Microsoft's behavior only with some tweaks by extending into everyones market and crushing them and making one NEED Google. Here in Europe where I am visiting there is a very strong feeling that Google is a American cultural danger to Europe and that MS and Google want to dominate the desktop and the internet. It looks in some ways that the fears are founded.

  17. Skype's in the crosshairs, but not for a buyout by DanEsparza · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I don't think Google has any intention of aquiring Skype. Skype isn't SIP compliant, and while Skype might be more well known right now, SIP is a standard, and Google's own developer page highlights a desire to integrate with one of Skype's competitors, the Gizmo Project: http://www.google.com/talk/developer.html