Slashdot Mirror
Yahoo and Microsoft to Merge Instant Messengers
Primotech writes "Betanews has word that Microsoft and Yahoo plan to link their respective IM clients again so that users of both can communicate with each other on one, shared network. Facing threats from third-party applications, like Trillian and Skype, the two tech giants will claim 44% of the instant messaging market, analysts predict. They will also go head to head together with the biggest competitor, AOL."
That's interesting, since they have waffled back and forth on the issue of compatibility with other messenger systems. First they complained because they didn't have access to AOL. Then they closed their systems and didn't let others in. Now they are sharing again...does this mean they will grant access to their closed network to all outside clients? Hmmmmmm?
Could this be a step towards a single IM protocol? Not XMPP, but good enough for me :-)
DxBlog - It's where you want to be
So now I can't use the excuse that "I don't use Yahoo!" anymore to avoid talking to those douchebags who are too dumb to use something else. Even though I use jabber, I'm not going to bother creating a yahoo! account for the 1% of chat users that use Yahoo! just so I can connect with the transit plugin for their protocol.
I could care less , whatever network things use , its all Transparent to me cause i use Gaim
...messengers?
When are they going to integrate with AIM?
I never liked Yahoo in the first place. Now this just helps enforce my feelings towards them.
Trillian isn't its own protocol, of course. This is what is somewhat odd about the article: it can't decide whether it's talking about the networks (MSN and YIM combining protocols and having interoperability) or whether they're jointly developing a multi-protocol client (like Trillian, although Trillian does a lot more than just those two).
More than Trillian, Skype and others, i bet that they are more against their common foe, Google/Gmail/GTalk/etc. Maybe against each separate component they can have a chance, but when you start to combine them the potential for growing and taking away their markets is probably too big.
Normally stuff like this from MS makes me shudder with dread. But the lack of a standard communication IM protocal has driven me crazy for years. Trillian and other programs are ways to get around that, of course. But, having a single standard would go a long way, and this is a nice step towards that.
Compete in features you offer in your IM clients, but for heavens sake unify the networks.
You are who you are, let no one tell you different. But, never close your mind to a new point of view.
It will definately be interesting how long it will take them to implement a shared network in their IM clients.
And now I can also choose which client to run Yahoo....or MSN?
Let's hope they don't just open up their networks to each other but also allow compatibility for webcams, audio, etc..
this.showSig(false)
This merger will only affect those browsing on the intarnet.
http://gaim-vv.sourceforge.net/
LATEST NEWS:
Oct 07, 2005 - Forward potr of gaim-vv 1.2.0 to gaim cvs head is working. I would like to clarify that gaim-vv isn't completely dead, we're working on merging with gaim. There will be no further gaim-vv releases, as code will be added to the main gaim program.
For those who don't know gaim-vv was a friendly fork to get stuff like webcams working - last release allowed users to view webcams from MSN, yahoo
The Singularity is closer than you think
Quant
I have no buddies on MSN. Most are on either AIM or Yahoo. But I hate the fact that Yahoo seems to not want to develop for Mac OS X anymore. The Mac MSN client is pretty darn good, though, so it would be great to be able to use the MSN client to chat with my Yahoo buddies.
There isn't much money to be made in instant messengers. Maybe a little revenue from advertising in the window corners, maybe a few bucks from premium games, but in all it's mostly a net loss. And you also have the problem that your users may be drawn away from your IM client to another one because of an established group of friends with the other one.
Bringing these two IM clients into compatibility isn't a way to make a stronger IM network, but rather to eliminate the drain that both companies must be feeling. It also helps that it marginalizes AIM and its premium services, which benefits both Yahoo and Microsoft.
I always thought Microsoft would get around to doing this one day. It just seemed the logical next step. Hopefully their next next step will be the ability to have different statuses for specific people in your contact list, and be able to contact people even though you appear offline. Back in the day (get off my lawn, you crazy kids) ICQ had this feature, but since ICQ has been dragged down into a hole by AOL, it's been on my IM wishlist.
Jesus saved me from my past. He can save you as well.
Microsoft and Yahoo are set to announce on Wednesday a blockbuster interoperability deal that will reshape the landscape of the fragmented instant messaging market.
I can't wait to message all my friends with gaim to tell them the good news.
I came here for a good argument
http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&ned=&ie=UTF-8&nc l=http://today.reuters.co.uk/news/newsArticle.aspx %3Ftype%3DtechnologyNews%26storyID%3D2005-10-12T01 3551Z_01_MUN205613_RTRIDST_0_TECH-MICROSOFT-YAHOO- DC.XML
Perhaps surprisingly, I've only really recently started using yahoo regularly, and I find that it's pretty nice. I would _really_ prefer a widespread jabber net, complete with client->server and client->client encryption, but that seems to be a pipe dream. I've used the transports and stability is somewhat lacking.
-- Who is the bigger fool? The fool or the fool who follows him? --
This is gonna put alot of pressure on Google and Jabber. I mean Google just entered the market, with MSN and Yahoo and Possibly AIM, there wont be a need for a new contender. I dont think its bad coz that will bring more ppl close together and save installed 100s of IM apps just to talk to all your friends. I do wonder how they will connect them all and whether you will use screennames or e-mail address or whatever.
I can't believe the editors let this one slip by. Yahoo and MS exchanging massages is big news. Maybe MS will finally get laid.
It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
But does that mean I'll have to read ads from both sides? I'd prefer Gaim for that. Besides, it's interesting to watch if Yahoo Messenger's share will be sucked by MSN.
We need just one internet chat client. And I find multi-protocol chat clients like Gaim to be annoying. Perhaps Google will win over all....
I use email. I look at it when I want, I delete it if I am not interested in answering it, I answer it when I want.
Of course no one ever wants to communicate with me anyway. Beer is my only friend and it doesn't do the 'net.
So.. MSN+Yahoo...+AOL.....great?
I don't know how to take this news.
It seems like Microsoft managed to gain a kinda big share of the IM market with this move (Because honestly, I don't believe the whole 'merger' thing. Microsoft is going to swallow Yahoo! on this deal) which is pretty bad. I don't want to see Microsoft gain monopoly over the IM market.. Their greed is well known.
But at the same time it's a pretty good move since more people will be able to communicate regardless of client.
Do the Google IM servers already know how to talk to other Jabber servers or is it still an open protocol in a closed environment?
bash$
Why? Because they're making a pact with the devil? That's bullshit. Judge the IM clients based on their capabilities and your needs, not based on whose making them.
Having said that, I have never liked the IM client for Yahoo, and have always wavered between like and dislike on the msn client.
The Microsoft-AOL talks? I mean, weren't they in some sort of limited merger discussions? And wasn't Google competing with MS for AOL? I mean, if there were to be MS-AOL collaboration anywhere, shouldn't one of the areas be IM? Or is MS trying to push Google and AOL together?
Could this lead to a total takeover of Yahoo by MS? I mean, they start with the IM service, then merge the email client somehow, then the next thing you know, the search stuff. Is this MS's reaction to a company they can't buy out? Buy out the company's competitor?
Not that I'm overly anti-MS, just that I don't understand the logic here. But then again, I am a liberal arts major, not a Commerce School major.
make this type of stuff completely irrelevent for techies anyway.
;-)
I own a copy of Trillian 3.1 Pro and I can say that it's the best thing since sliced bread
Why would this be better than all of them starting to use Jabber/XMPP (which is an IETF standard anyway), if interoperability is all they want? Google Talk already uses it.
...
Hmm, I wonder if Google is a competitor to either of them in other markets
That's AOL, I thought. Or is that different from the intardnet?
It's a version of the GAIM source designed to work within the framework of MacOSX. It will integrate with your address book, supports MSN/Yahoo/ICQ/Bonjour/AIM, and is generally pretty darn spiffy.
I haven't had any of the problems I've had with other clients. It's the closest I've come to Kopete on MacOSX, plus it has some of the problems of Kopete fixed.
--
Internet Explorer (n): Another bug -- that is, a feature that can't be turned off -- in Windows.
Wow. I'm impressed. That was such a smart decision on both of their parts (Yahoo and MS)! I didn't see that coming at all. That's gonna be it for AOL. It'll take a while, but that put the last nail in the coffin for those fuckers.
.Net. MS is going to really get some more consumer street cred by hooking up with Yahoo. I don't know where they're going with it, though, since MS isn't going to collect nickels and dimes like Yahoo and Google have to with their advertising revenue.
This is gonna give Yahoo a hell of a boost simply because Yahoo is the best in the industry with integration. No other web portal/brand integrates nearly as well as Yahoo. They're gonna turn that IM traffic into ad revenue, I guarantee it. They're gonna be around to give Google a run for it's money for a long time.
I'm surprised that MS did it, but it was smart. Their MSN properties have always been weak, even with the bonus of the first thing new users see. They've been hoping that that would do it for them, which is why they never really perfected Passport or the web versino of
its all Transparent to me cause i use Gaim
But, it's not.
Going to Yahoo!, creating an account, dealing with their spam emails and offers all the time in the future and then logging into Yahoo! with that special Yahoo! account is not transparent whatsoever. And not enough people use Yahoo! to justify creating a special account just to talk to them.
Yahoo! probably realized this and gave up the ship.
I hope when they merge code, they keep Yahoo's voice system which I've found to be easier to make connections with, and MSN's video, as Yahoo's video system crashes my Windows XP system. It hangs Y! Messenger and it won't End Task even.
Saskboy's blog is good. 9 out of 10 dentists agree.
Is that the _domestic_ market?
Since what I see here in China, who has the second largest internet user population in the world after the USA, the vast majority uses QQ, which is basically ICQ adapted to a full-fledged Chinese client (all Western IMs have questionable language support and transparency).
Is it april 1st already?
With Microsoft's long history of screwing their strategic partners, why would *anyone* want to do business with them?
There is chat, and then there is chat in a specific context. MSN is fine for chatting with my co-workers, but Yahoo is better for chatting if I am trying get a date. There is no one-purpose-serves-all protocal.. sorry. Bad Idea... I can't wait to see what picks up the slack.
Like Jabber? XMPP is an open specification IM protocol with support for all kinds of neat features (encryption, for one, network bridging for another). The problem isn't in having a protocol, but in convincing everyone to use it and support it. (Yeah, I know, the spec was only finalized more recently than the MSN and Yahoo! networks were created. The point stands, though.)
I wish they would make it compatible with AIM, so I can use ichat with Yahoo IDs.
...that started on Yahoo, added MSN a year later, and was so tired of running two different messenger systems that when he found Trillian he liked it so much he paid for it, this has been a long time coming for me. The feature sets are almost the same, so really it's not that surprising.
It'll be interesting to see if we have to add '@yahoo.com' to our YID's to sign in.
It's not that I'm asking the big questions, it's that I'm asking lots of small ones.
:D :-o ^o) *-) :o) :-P (&)
Any questions?
If they can get AOL in on this too, it could be very bad.
Everyone being able to talk to everyone else would be nice, but there are big downsides if it's a closed network. If it ends up that 9X% of users are on a single A/M/Y-IM network then it would be very hard for anyone else to break into the market.
Google is in very direct competition with Yahoo, and Microsoft sees Google as the biggest threat to their dominance. Now, a couple of months after GTalk's release, Yahoo and MS are ganging together. They aren't doing this because they want their users to benefit (if they really cared they would've done this a long time ago). This is MS and Yahoo trying to keep Google from gaining a foothold in IM.
I really hope Jabber will take off, but this move makes it less likely. With everyone split up over AIM, MSN and Yahoo, Jabber could at least offer a means of unification. Now it's looking like we could get stuck with a single closed network.
If a handful of players lock up the network, innovation will die.
A brief and largely incorrect summary of the current state of things:
MS Messenger: Ships standard on all Windows PC's. Pops up every five minutes asking you if you would like to sign up for service. Causes your computer to explode if you try to uninstall it, or indeed just try to get it to shut up. The fact that this still isn't the #1 instant messaging client should tell you something. I have the most luck with voice chat through firewalls on Messenger.
Aim: Comes automatically with AOL, or you can download it free from aol.com. Also comes free with LOTS and LOTS of ads. Ads pop up on your screen. Ads are built into your client. Smart a$$ movie executives send you ads directly. Sex chatbots try to lure you into filthyness before posting the transcript on Fark. Everyone's personal icon is loud, animated, and obnoxious. In short, AIM is a lot like the internet. And like the internet, nearly everyone uses AIM.
ICQ: Still the greatest communications medium of all time. Really. Greatest ever. (There, I said what you wanted Mr. 3098014563. Now give me my family back, like in the deal.)
Yahoo: No really, Yahoo has a chat medium. I was shocked too. Isn't Yahoo just adorable sometimes? On a side note, I've had better luck getting webcams through firewalls over Yahoo. This leads to great situations where I'm videoconferencing with someone over Yahoo, but the audio stream is in MSN and the chat is happening in Jabber.
Google Chat: Google chat is based on Jabber, the open source next-generation world dominating chat protocol of the fut-- hey, why are you laughing? No seriously, Jabber, which can communicate with AIM and MSN through... Yes it says so on the box. No, I don't care if almost never works. Ok, fine, Jabber, which can sometimes communicate with AIM and MSN through server-side plug ins, is the basis for Google Chat. Unlike all of the other protocols Jabber is an encrypted medium, meaning that even the server doesn't know what is being said. psi is the jabber client of choice, though there are a lot out there. It's also the only reason to buy Trillian Pro. What was that about Google Chat again?
Now if I remember correctly, AIM, as a condition of its merger with Time Warner was required to open its chat network to everyone. It then proceeded to shut out all 3rd party clients and other protocols that had the nerve to try and connect with it. MSN tried to connect to AOL without permission, but kept refusing 3rd party clients that tried to connect to it. We thought Yahoo was shutting out 3rd party clients as well, but it turns out they just broke their system a few times. Oops. Jabber will sleep with anyone, and Jabber servers will sleep with other Jabber servers. Jabber servers will even sleep with AOL and MSN, but only if they're really happy or really drunk. ICQ... I refuse to say anything about ICQ on the grounds that ICQ users are even more insane than Apple users.
All of this is very close to e-mail, circa 1992... Back when AOL, Compuserve, and all of the rest of the providers thought that locking their users into their system would keep the most people. Then AOL bought them all, and the whole thing seemed kind of moot.
The ______ Agenda
Is there a server that can IM with this new merged network *and* the others, like Jabber? One happy result of this merger is that it will take MS/Yahoo longer to switch protocols to lock out reverse engineers, and might be too complex to switch without cutting off one or another of MSN or Yahoo's clients. Are we looking at a day soon when these IM nets will compete on client features and app integration, rather than just jealously guarding partitioned access to their own little kingdom?
--
make install -not war
What I would like to see is active adoption of Jabber by the big players. Jabber for the most part is still like Ogg Vorbis: "interesting, but who's using it?". Google using it is certainly helping push its adoption, but at this point in time I haven't heard of any ISPs, or Fortune 500 companies, actively taking it up and connecting. Apple has also chipped into the effort, by providing a Jabber server as part of MacOS X, but how long before we see that rub off I am not sure.
Voice chat and video chat are the next two aspects that need to become part of the Jabber portfolio and adopted.
Looking at the road ahead voice chat is going to be migrate into telephony, but before it does certain things must happen first. Telephony needs to support emergency services, until then players like Google will state 'this is not a telephony service', in order to avoid FTC type regulations. The steps I see are:
We can't predict what the future will hold, but we can influence the journey getting there.
Jumpstart the tartan drive.
If they tried, too few would stay on their side of the divide. Microsoft is too predatory this way; looks like a coy maneuver to get Yahoo out of the way of MSN messenger. Maybe Yahoo thought that their messanger was doomed anyway and Redmond made it worth their while?
One solution i can hear certain executives talking about/(rubbing their hands together) is monitoring your chat and then inserting ads into your conversation based on what you are talking about to "more closely target" their ads... and i'm not talking google ("Do no harm")
...Yahoo's suckage. I still can't believe that anyone ever gave Yahoo any credence. What exactly is it that they do again? It certainly was never a decent search engine to being with. I was an Altavista fan in the early days of search engines and then I moved to the current and permanent king of searches: Google. I find it interesting that Yahoo has been so anti-Google for so long and has yet to offer anything that surpasses Googles new entries into various web apps. People money hummed around Yahoo during the dot bomb bubble. Again... why? Their search engine sucked then and it still sucks now. Their "portal" was pretty much next to useless. Face it Yahoo, About.com does it better. So go join in Microsoft in a unified war against Google (because that's what this really is). Let's see you both come up with something that is actually new and different. I'll bet you can't.
-"...bad old ideas look confusingly fresh when they are packaged as technology" - Jaron Lanier (Digital Maoism on Edge.o
There are plenty of third party clients, like Adium mentioned previously or Fire. When the official messenger client, for the given messenger system, on your platform only supports text chat, then you have nothing to lose by going with multi-messenger client.
Jumpstart the tartan drive.
... MSN Messenger will gain offline messages and the ability to logon in invisible mode? Two features of Yahoo Messenger I find extremely useful. The only reason I use MSN Messenger is because it seems standard at the office. I have to keep my status set to away though to make it easier to screen my messages and to avoid the dreaded "hey dude" and "waaaasup" messages one seems to get as soon as one's status goes to available. The interruptions caused by IM can be so bloody annoying, but Yahoo makes them easier to manage.
Wow, just what we need now days. I realize that it was popular in the past, but really... we have VOIP and did that like 3 or 4 years ago, so whats the great deal about IM? (at least for me it sucks) I generally gab with my bro via a cell phone and there ya go. Painless, free (if you have a decent plan) and that's about it.
Life was hell, then I discovered Linux...
anymore?
So, how many people outside of the USA and over 15 actually use AIM ?
I'd like to see the market statistics not including Americans.
eXemplary Abstract
Yahoo's webcam support isn't stable on Mac OS X either (or perhaps it's the macam drivers that aren't stable, I'm not entirely sure), but it's the only IM client I've found that actually works cross-platform for video. Of course they haven't released a new version in over two years, and that was only a minor update....
$x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
$x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
These guys don't seem to get it, or they don't want to. A standardized 'open' IM system (similar to how email is open and standardized) would explode the IM possibilities. It doesn't matter how big your network is, if it's centralized and controlled by one company then certain users will never use it.
An open, de-centralized IM network where anyone can run their own identity node is what jabber has been focusing on. Google really missed the boat big time by not embracing it with their client. Now it's just business as usual: centralized IM networks fighting with each over for the same lowly slice of pie. All while ignoring the giant tasty cake that surrounds them.
A Multiplayer Strategy Game for Mac OS X, Windows, and Linux
...and so did a few others. Remember all the footsie with AOL in weeks past? Methinks the price for merging AIM might have been a tad high, so they've gone the other route with yahoo. The point of all this isn't to attack AOL, it's Google they're worried about. They've no doubt settled on a no-compete deal with AOL, so it's a sort-off united front.
insecurity asks the wrong question irritation gives the wrong answer
Doesn't the title seem to suggest that there is going to be one YahooMSN messenger? This is different from having MS and Yahoo just allowing interoperability between their own clients
So you are saying that although you use Gaim exclusivly, you still care about the MSN / Yahoo situation? Please explaine...
"Who are in control, they are not in control of anything - they don't even control themselves!" - Glen Beck
[to the company known as microsoft] Who are and what have you done with my ne'er-do-well, soulless big brother?
Really now. An MS two-fer: first they agree to help real networks distribution, and now they're doing the same for yahoo. Now you can't even trust the back-stabber to do his job properly. What's next--is the mob going to start threatening to ruin credit scores if you fail to pay your debts?
Just so you know, Drunkenbatman had this pegged.
Within the last few weeks, there appears to have been a meeting between MSN, Yahoo and AOL. They'd all been talking amongst themselves -- and sparsely with each other -- about how to respond to Google, but were still trying to make up their minds...
The Cow Abides
Okay, so a philosopher, a philologist, and a philatelist walk into a bar...
.....and to think I had to download GAIM tonight because my MSN messenger wasn't working right. Does this mean that when one service gets screwed up, they will both go down?
Today's show is brought to you by the number 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0: 25
...without a monopoly?
What about the most recent update (for trillian pro) that had aim/icq update together, is the next one going to be 'aim/msn/icq'
Disclaimer: I run the ursine.ca Jabber server.
The yahoo transport sucks donkeyballs. It's unreliable and crashes for no reason, usually while I'm trying to get other work done. As evil as Microsoft typically is, they're doing us a favor: Now Jabber only has to maintain two or three transports and none of them involving some bletcherous hack from jabberd's transports if you're using the otherwise far easier to deal with ejabberd. Microsoft has to have their way, so you can pretty much kiss the YIM protocol good bye and everybody with a YIM ID suddenly having @yahoo.com Passports instead, and good riddance. Now there's only two proprietary protocols left: Oscar (AIM/ICQ) and MSN.
The 80 gajillion Google fanboys are suddenly able to access the rest of the IM landscape that isn't stuck in the last millennium with their Google Talk JID. Google users and the rest of the Jabber network rejoice, AOL shits itself seeing headlights coming from both directions.
Microsoft and Time Warner are going to strike a deal that will be kind of like AOL announcing that October 1993 would effectively follow January 2005 on the Usenet calendar. Except instead of AOL continuing to exist, Time Warner flushes AOL like an unwanted fetus on prom night, selling it out to Microsoft. Microsoft has to have their way, so you can pretty much kiss the Oscar protocol goodbye. Everybody with AIM IDs suddenly get @aim.com passports. Everybody at ICQ gets @icq.com passports.
And then there was one. MSN Messenger fights to the bitter death, losing mindshare bit by bit until 10 years from now, Microsoft's holding an empty bag and wondering how the hell they missed the boat on IM. Everybody loves Google, and many will switch to Google Talk on basis of name recognition alone. Thank God that they don't abuse that power.
(And in other news, the Portland Winterhawks probably won't make the playoffs this year. Again. Dammit.)
Help us build a better map!
Hurry, While Supplies Last!
I'm Rick James with mod points biatch!
44% of the instant messaging market
Typical microsoftish pr talk, one of those that makes me puke this time early in the morning. My point is that e.g. among all my friends and other people I know only quite a limited number of them uses yahoo's or microsoft's im applications for messaging. Even if they have msn and/or yahoo ids. Quite a lot of people (fortunately) know alternative, lightveight, less obtrusive, nicer, faster, etc. applications which they can use instead, and quite a lot of them support many different im networks simultaneously
At the end, I don't think that merging the two im clients would necessarily mean increased client-using userbase, unless they think the users do not use anything else besides msn or yahoo, and their respective clients.
I am putting myself to the fullest possible use, which is all I can think that any conscious entity can ever hope to do.
I have a Yahoo account, and I've never received spam from Yahoo.
The other steps you mention (creating an account and having to log in) are standard for any service. How is Yahoo different?
Comment removed based on user account deletion
..through yahoo.
So even if gaim can't access msn directly it will work through yahoo.
There: Something at a specific location.
Their: Owned by someone.
Please make sure your english compiles.
MS Messenger: Ships standard on all Windows PC's. Pops up every five minutes asking you if you would like to sign up for service. Causes your computer to explode if you try to uninstall it, or indeed just try to get it to shut up. The fact that this still isn't the #1 instant messaging client should tell you something. I have the most luck with voice chat through firewalls on Messenger.
Wrong. Windows Messenger comes standard on Windows XP computers. It is the Corporate edition of the Messenger protocol. Very lean, nice on the eyes, but rarely updated. MSN Messenger is another program, currently at version 7.5 with many more bloated features.
Aim: Comes automatically with AOL, or you can download it free from aol.com. Also comes free with LOTS and LOTS of ads. Ads pop up on your screen. Ads are built into your client. Smart a$$ movie executives send you ads directly. Sex chatbots try to lure you into filthyness before posting the transcript on Fark. Everyone's personal icon is loud, animated, and obnoxious. In short, AIM is a lot like the internet. And like the internet, nearly everyone uses AIM.
Doesn't pop up ads on your screen, only shows ads on the buddy list. These ads used to include movie trailers to those with broadband, but there are hacks to remove it and you can always use a third party product like GAIM. Comparitively, the client for AIM is less capable than the others, but the protocol is very nice, allowing things like underline in the middle of a message unlike MSN Messenger. You can use animated buddy icons, but you are not forced to use an "obnoxious" one, and you can obviously hide them. Only 56% of IM users use AIM. RTFA.
ICQ: Still the greatest communications medium of all time. Really. Greatest ever. (There, I said what you wanted Mr. 3098014563. Now give me my family back, like in the deal.)
ICQ is an abandoned program that used numbers instead of usernames. Bought out by AOL you can now send messages to ICQ users from AIM. I don't know of anyone who uses ICQ, so I don't know how popular this pioneering IM service is.
Yahoo: No really, Yahoo has a chat medium. I was shocked too. Isn't Yahoo just adorable sometimes? On a side note, I've had better luck getting webcams through firewalls over Yahoo. This leads to great situations where I'm videoconferencing with someone over Yahoo, but the audio stream is in MSN and the chat is happening in Jabber.
Is this really worth responding to? Yahoo! uses some strange webcam sharing thing so you can share your webcam with more than one person. Other than that the client is pretty standard, much like AIM as it uses yahoo! email addresses.
Google Chat: Google chat is based on Jabber, the open source next-generation world dominating chat protocol of the fut-- [...]What was that about Google Chat again?
Google Talk is like a stripped down MSN Messenger with voice and very uncustomizable text. It obstensibly uses jabber, but Google hasn't set it up for others to connect server to server, so you need a gmail account.
I wont bother responding to the last two paragraphs where you start going on a tangent about jabber's sex life. +5 Insightful? Hah.
I hope this will lead to a better Mac client, since both of them suck on Mac. Recently what features were there stopped working properly because a new version was required (Yahoo) but they haven't yet bothered to update the Mac version. MSN looks better, but still lacks lots of features that Windows version has. To be honest, it's all a pile of s**t - what we need is an open, widely adopted protocol that anybody can write a client for... oh, wait. Yeah, well, "widely adopted" is the thing....
When you set up a Yahoo! account for IM, you can give them a "spammy" email account that you only check whenever you need to supply an email address for something.
I did that when I linked my Trillian into Yahoo! and it's worked great. Except for very recently when Yahoo upgraded it's file sharing and now Trillian needs to play catch-up or something.
-David
Thank God that they don't abuse that power.
Oh ye of too much faith. Google is a company. Wait till their share price starts dropping and then we'll see if we thank them for not abusing their power.
how many of u actually think this is true. and just in case if it is, how many feel itz really gonna work out between these two?
Considering that QQ messenger has almost the entire current overseas market (at this point nearly 400 million vs AIM's 100 million) I'd say that claiming 44% of the market may be over-reaching.
Recent usage statistics actually look a bit like this:
Of course, there is also Jabber which was 10 million at last count which was a couple of years ago but more than likely growing. There is also QQ messenger, which supposedly has over 100 million users, but every news story like this conveniently ignores.
Karma: It's all a bunch of tree-huggin' hippy crap!
(*) when combined with :
- Messenger Plus http://www.msgplus.net/
- Mess.be thingo http://www.mess.be/
Actually, now that I have tabbed MSN chats, it's very good indeed.
However, I do run Trillian also, but only because I need to run several accounts at one time (work/personal etc.).
The problem with trillian is I lose messages from time to time, check the trillian forums, this has always been their weakness.
Yahoo, just plain ugly but has always been the most reliable in terms of files/webcam getting through firewalls.
ICQ, they have finally succeeded... in making the client as bloated and ugly as their website, I credit AOL for this amazing effort.
Google Talk - excuse me?, are you kidding, I haven't seen such a feature-less messenger since 1997.
So, I am quite happy with my MSN(*) these days.
only if you want to send basic text messages. I don't know how many times I've been annoyed at Gaim because it has super flacky file transfer support, font support, etc. Oh not to mention it uses 16.6Mb of memory on my windows machine.
But... at least it's better than seeing those stupid ads on MSN messenger.
I think you're mixing topics a bit here:
Karma: It's all a bunch of tree-huggin' hippy crap!
I wouldn't mind knowing how running Trillian makes it possible for me to invite an MSN and an AIM user into the same chat...
Karma: It's all a bunch of tree-huggin' hippy crap!
Back in the days, I used to connect to Internet Relay Chat networks to talk to my buddies and I still use IRC by now...
Yeah maybe IRC clients aren't supporting video or voice chats but can you tell me any better place to have multi-users public discussions? MSN and Yahoo public chats sucks! And I dont think google will do better on this side...
BitchX anyone ?
I wonder what they'll do about user IDs for transporting between the two services. What I mean is, from MSN's side, you want to add a Yahoo user, say he's called "Bob" on Yahoo.
Maybe they'll let you add him just as "Bob" on MSN, which would be a significant problem for MSN because they assume that all IDs are emails for various purposes.
They can't let you add him as "bob@yahoo.com", because Bob might actually be using that Yahoo email address as his username on MSN.
Maybe they'll have to go about it to the extreme and add to both the IDs. So you would add Bob as "bob@Yahoo", but you would add your fellow MSN contact as "jane@example.com@MSN".
Karma: It's all a bunch of tree-huggin' hippy crap!
You mod him off, but that's exactly what I thought. It's the cam. Especially with the Philipino crowd. I've even seen a wedding come out of Philipino camming on Yahoo!.(should there be a period after that?)
Funny, I am on my Mac running Adium, which uses GAIM as a base, and it works fine with MSN.
I can't understand why Americans say "I could care less" - the sentence makes no sense... what does it mean? I could care less if I tried? If I wanted to? It always seems to be used in the context of "I could NOT care less" or, "It doesn't bother me", "I'm not interested." It means the exact opposite though! Are you just too lazy to type the extra 3 characters? (n't)?
Any there American Etymologists around who can explain this?
And the people shall be oppressed, every one by another, and every one by his neighbour Isaiah 3:5
Keep it coming microsoft, I love you! Stupid kids will bitch and still use your shit, but I embrace it all. Theres plenty of freeware out there, but it doesn't compete. You'd think they could make it free for Windows just as easy, but it ain't that simple. It takes a company motivated by reward to make something work, not these commie bastards!
Have a look about half way down this page
http://www.word-detective.com/061405.html
Basically, the sarcasm that the "could care less" form uses, implies the missing negative - probably shouldn't be used online given sarcasm is harder to do in written text.
No it's not. With things like Gaim you need logins for all the different services. If services merge, that's less logins you need.
..since i am researching for my project i was really embarased about microsoft because there is NO ability to broadcast video from a mac , i was looking for other solutions found jmeeting.com , there is also no mac support at least yahoo worked some times. Its like they are cutting the world in two pices......see what happens. just my 2 cents
The phrase supposedly started in America a few decades ago, but it's spread to the rest of the world by now. The etymology isn't entirely clear (some people think it could've been intended to be sarcastic, or that it was misread in print), but it's probably the simplest one -- it's the same reason people say 'case and point' and 'for all intensive purposes' and 'supposively'. People say it so often that eventually some of them become ignorant of the actual meaning and just repeat it however.
I don't think most people actually intend to say it incorrectly but, in my experience, they also refuse to change when they are told that it's wrong. I guess they just... couldn't... care less....
you couldn't care less
COULDN'T CARE LESS
Godamn it. I hope you fall down some stairs.
you only have to create the account once, and gaim logs you in. it's fucking easy. i have people on both and it never bothers me.
If you mod me down, I will become more powerful than you can imagine....
Just wondering if that might be a likely outcome of the 2 services merging.
I chatted occasionally on MSN chat in the Computers/Programming rooms, but dropped it after they went pay. I could afford it, just not enough value for me to spend cash for.
I recall Yahoo having some trouble with user-created chat room topics recently..someone bringing some of the more sensational ones to the attention of advertisers, which pressured Yahoo to drop user-created rooms.
I'm thinking that the MSN pay-chat model might be adopted by Yahoo either on their own, or with pressure from MSN in order to both be consistent between the 2, and to also cover their butts legally and with advertisers.
Anyone see this as likely?
Strat
Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
MSN and yahoo! to allow cross-border messages, good. But what was the last time somebody in the IM biz actually added something new to their clients? Been using IM applications since 1998 or so, but I still have to live with the fact that my home IM logs/history are not available to me when I use my IM application (currently Miranda) at work. Or when I take my laptop with me. Or when I use ICQ with my PDA. Etc.
Now, why can't someone finally make an app that would allow true roaming for instant messaging logs, user data, etc? If, due privacy stuff, not on vendor's server, allow it on your own server? Its 2005, for god sakes and Netscape 3.x had roaming for user profiles and everybody has been touting the "you dont need computer, you need Net" ideology for years, but apart from IMAP4 and/or web-based emails, I still fail to see this materialize. Firefox removed roaming for profiles, none of the open source IM projects have managed to do remote profile/history roaming (that wouldn't just export XML to FTP server, but truly keep your IM history in synch, no matter where you launch it).
Tired of backing up four different IM logs and when I need to search them, to export them to four XML files and copy them to one location and go through all of them for the one goddamn message I need to retrieve...
Am I the only person on the planet who doesn't use instant messaging? I find that it allows my online life to intrude into my real life just enough to be annoying. If you have something important to say to me, call me on my cell phone. If it's not that urgernt, or you don't know me well enough to have my cell phone number, email me.
If you don't know me well enough to have my phone number, and you still think that what you have to say is so important that you have to get in touch with me right now, then you're probably mistaken.
well it all depends on your circle of friends, i personally know dozens of people who use Yahoo every day. and don't use anything else, which is the way with non-geek users i think.
I've always wanted to install Yahoo Messenger because I don't want to limit my contact list to MSN Messenger only. However, till now, I still haven't install it. (Probably because most of my friends are using MSN, only few of them active in Yahoo IM)
Anyhow, it's always a good thing to merge both networks.
http://blog.enrii.com - a web tech blog
slash.. who?
WTF?
Dammit. Why do I never have mod points to push up posts like the above when I really need it! :-D
Or at the very least, fix your webcams streaming and audio, guys. Audio's generally fine (minus Yahoo's sudden stopping if it detects a period of constant volume level, so sometimes I'm playing my guitar with hands-free on and the damned program stops streaming my audio,) but when I want to videochat with my mother, I don't want super mode dropping out on me, suddenly, without any reason or cause, and we both know we've touched nothing that would make it stop.
MSN fares no better with it's astonishingly fast 3-6 fps. Screw that. Camfrog does this better. IM, voice, video, and even has some pretty awesome video chat rooms. It's good enough for deaf people to speak using sign language on cam. Does that tell you how good it is? You two should strive to be more like that program, Yahoo and Microsoft. It's small, (compared to Yahoo's 10 meg install size and MSN's 11.5 meg install,) it's fast, and it WORKS. Camfrog's only downside is it's 2k/XP only, though I understand there may be an OSX version in development.
MSN's audio sucks even more. MSN needs to be like Yahoo, and add a PUSH TO TALK BUTTON. Nothing is more annoying than feedback in my headphones, thanks to my Logitech's mic/webcam combo (quickcam messenger) having an uber-sensitive microphone. It's almost at it's lowest possible level and it's still getting feedback off of my headphones, with me sitting about 4 feet from the microphone.
Can we fix our programs first, guys?
Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
Suppose it would be really great to have a single generic protocol for instant messaging, but if there will be no dictator like Microsoft behind it. This system should be distributed and with opened specifications (as Jabber/XMPP). Clients for it's network should be exist for various platforms, not only for win32 and mac. The ability for running own server is also important.
igor
The yahoo transport sucks donkeyballs.
And how much did you fucking pay for it? I seriously don't know why everyone here is so down on yahoo. Besides overcommercialising everything, they provide absoloutely great services for free, the best of which is their yahoo messenger. Its the only place where the relatively uninitiated can log in and chat to complete strangers a planet away. MSN won't let you do it without paying them. And don't talk to me about the IRC channels; yahoo is to them what a concorde is to a guy jumping off his house.
Trillian, jabber, all of these might be technically slightly better under the hood, but in terms of end user experience, the slick and FREE package offered by yahoo is so far ahead that these chat clients will in all probability never catch up.
I have met some fascinating people and turned up a great deal of commercial opportunity by the use of yahoo. Where else can you click a button and chat to people from Vietnam to Africa to Brazil to the US? I was talking to an Iranian woman there the last day. She astounded me with her quick witted and very together responses. Not at all what I expected from what I assumed would be a trampled-upon muslim female. Then again, she was astounded to hear the US was threatening to invade her country, so you live and learn, eh...
Yahoo isn't sharp enough to be google, and its not evil enough to be microsoft. Its like the bumbling uncle of the internet. Yahoo mail is solid as a rock, and so simple to use that it beats most client side interfaces hands down. And did I mention free? Honestly, most of the crying about yahoo comes back to their use of advertising. If you don't like advertising, give back your TV. Because its not much use without any programming. And you may as well return your DVD collection too. And polish up your credit cards for slashdot's coffers, because you can bet Taco and co aren't going to fork over the fees for bandwidth so you can whine publicly about advertising and its evils. And google, everyone's favourite, would not be here tomorrow if you turned off the advertising (unlike M$).
What he can't kill, he has sex on. Trent.
Unfortunately Google implements lesser that 10% of Jabber/XMPP features (excluding their proprietary voip), even offline storage is not realised at this time, not even speaking about s2s, the ability to communicate with people from other servers.
Anyway Google promised to implement s2s one nice day and describe their voice feature specification.
igor
Hello.
Is it possible to make camera working between to Jabber/XMPP endpoints in gaim-vv?
igor
Now you look like an ass-hat.
you cant predict the future, nobody can. i like firefox jabber and other oss software but u have to hand it to microsoft, their software is much more easy to use then any body else's, and lately firefox has been pissing me off too and ie is again my default browser. ff wont show many pages, swf java wont show for some pages and then there are times that it is like a hog. ie might be un secure but hey i'm not an idiot and i dont visit crap sites. google talk ? i am not sure about that, but msn msngr is my choice of im
Both of these would require an agreement with the legacy network owners.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
And I could NOT care less, because I don't use instant messaging at all. Honestly, what's the point? It combines all the worst points of phone (intrusive, no time to compose your thoughts) and email (have to type = slow, only works when online).
The illegal we do immediately. The unconstitutional takes a little longer.
--Henry Kissinger
I could care less as well...
But 99% of my friends would trash Gaim as soon as they opened it.
It's missing the features that makes msn messenger special, all those neat winks, backgrounds, packages and more. It's what makes it fun for them.
I understand Gaim will soon have video but that was a requirement more than a year ago, messengers have continued advancing and now there is much more catchup to do.
Now you look like an ass-hat.
Grow some balls and sign in, son. Then maybe we can talk.
What he can't kill, he has sex on. Trent.
What after the wedding?
Why can't they just release all the protocols?
I mean the web, ftp, email, news and the core stack (TCP/IP) are all open and pretty much free to use by anyone.
Can you imagine the mess the net and LANs would be in if all of these had been proprietary? you'd have WindowsLAN, MacLAN, SunLAN, IBMLAN etc... yes I know Apple had AppleTalk, but that will die.
Couldn't care less!
Maybe it's time for goverment regulation. By using closed protocols large companies are stiffling innovation in the IM-market. In order to be successful upstart in the IM-market you need to reverse-engineer those closed protocols and tap into their user base. In order to be successful in the e-mail or telephony market one would only be required to implement well documented protocols.
Maybe there should be a law that any communications protocol whatsoever used by a large number has to be opened.
You mean there are really people who don't Yahoo!???
I thought they were just figments of peoples imaginations, except of course for AIM users. But then AIM users don't realy count (no one who needs Computers for Dummies really counts as a computer user).
"...head to head with... AOL"
What is this, incompatability in the name of compatability? Y!IM is the only IM system that I DON'T need to be compatable with, sounds like a publicity stunt to me.
- Singpolyma
Trillian works because of its simplicity, these companies need a standard IM protocol and then let the best interface win!
I prefer the stripped down versions like 'DeadAim' where only the most basic features work. I have no need for stock updates, sports scores and directed advertising. Is this too much to ask?
He who knows best knows how little he knows. - Thomas Jefferson
Is this the worlds first example of a British person not understanding
American sarcasm?
I knew our education system was getting worse but...
Could this be a harbinger of a more 'intimate' relationship amongst MSN, Yahoo!, and AOL? Perhaps a 'merger' of the three (or at least a very tight alliance) is what each one feels it needs to contend with the oncoming Google juggernaut.
'He who has to break a thing to find out what it is, has left the path of wisdom.' -- Gandalf to Saruman
Isn't Microsoft in talks to purchase AOL? I think they know what they are doing. I think it really pits them head to head against Google.
If its link, sure that might be ok.
If its merge, this will be the beginning of the end of yahoo. Next will be yahoomail/hotmail.. then more an more until they are absorbed by microsoft.
Is google really hurting yahoo that much to want to sell out to the antichrist?
---- Booth was a patriot ----
Can you imagine something with more ads and "features" than MSN? the file will probably be about 100mb.
Well, load up all the "official" clients and log on with them all and then add togeather all the memory and CPU time they use up?
I'm guessing it's going to be more than gaim. (It was for me, at least)
My email addy? should be easy enough.
When will AOL merge AIM and ICQ so people on both networks can talk to each other?
AP - Microsoft today agreed to align with, then destroy, competitor Yahoo!
A Microsoft spokesman said that the company would follow its traditional formula
1. Select one of two competitors to align with
2. Use its illegal OS monopoly to destroy both new ally and competitor
3. Laugh while the new ally says "???????"
4. Profit
Microsoft spokesmen, responding to questions, said that the company welcomes praise for this move and hopes that customers will continue to frame discussion of this move in terms of product features and communications glitches between different clients.
...One MSN to rule them all...
people say 'case and point' and 'for all intensive purposes' and 'supposively'
.000 today.[/EnglishNazi]
Um, that would be
"Case IN point" (Make my whole case IN 1 point)
"For all INTENTS AND PURPOSES" (It's my INTENT/PURPOSE)
"SupposEDLY" (It is supposED)
Congratulations on batting
Windows isn't the answer... it's the question. NO is the answer!
Ouf! msn with Yahoo!
,Just maybe it will disapear from firefox?
what next? Yahoo search is already in mozilla, are we to think that maybe
you dumbfuck moron.
That was incredibly silly. What you are saying was exactly his point.
I'm sure Yahoo! would be much better off without this marriage. They provide better IM services, rarely gobble up your contact list or give you a "User doesn't exist" message. I see no reason why they should be willing to integrate with Microsoft except through a jabber server (or equivalent.) MSNger's hook to OE and the underlying Network interface (is normally irritating) and they have never bothered to consider other desktops for clients. Yahoo does provide (though limited in features) a client for GNU/Linux users too. They took Hotmail and made a mess out of it. Now they want to merge with Yahoo! Sometimes I log onto a Yahoo account just to make sure people on my MSN account ain't seeing me online, most people using multiple chat accounts may frequently alternate - even if they use Gaim or a Jabber client or kopete.
Another way of putting this is that Americans just can't read, and refuse to be corrected even when the errors of there ways have been pointed out in great detail...
[rereads the post] Dang it.
Windows isn't the answer... it's the question. NO is the answer!
At my workplace, we're using the Microsoft Office Communicator (MOC) as an internal IM client primarily to prevent company confidential info from being sent across the 'Net in the clear and stored on someone else's (AOL, Yahoo!, MSN, etc) server.
/.'rs, the only drawback I see if that it's a little too automatic... I cannot specify what I want my AOL screenname to be... it simply uses my company email address.
The fun thing is, there's an optional module that we can elect to install which allows it to contact AOL, Yahoo!, and MSN users directly. Even better, it does not require you to first establish accounts on those services... merely enter in your AOL buddy's name and it will establish an AOL account for you.
For us
Anyway, the point is it appears that MS has already merged with their IM tech with AOL, Yahoo!, and of course, MSN.
--
Break the rules. Keep the faith. Fight for love.
Hasn't anyone learned: You get in bed with Microsoft, you end up being killed no less than three years down the road. That's one hell of a STD.
One of my friends' id in my yahoo buddy list is . When I asked, he (who is working for Microsoft) said that he could do this with the help of Microsoft Outlook.
- srid
Their income comes from not being evil -- given that being evil will lose them money, why would they do it?
I mod down anyone who says "I will be modded down for this", regardless of the rest of their comment
As far as I know, MSN is more popular in Europe and AIM/Yahoo more popular in the states
Gotta love the great language debates on /. All you word-wardens can take that suppositorily. :P
Eloi are stupid, throw morlocks at them!
Anybody remember Me Head? This was discussed there. Hilarity ensues:
Problems with Common Expressions
My turnips listen for the soft cry of your love
The 80 gajillion Google fanboys are suddenly able to access the rest of the IM landscape that isn't stuck in the last millennium with their Google Talk JID. Google users and the rest of the Jabber network rejoice
Except I didn't think that GoogleTalk was on the Jabber network?
And then there was one. MSN Messenger fights to the bitter death, losing mindshare bit by bit until 10 years from now, Microsoft's holding an empty bag and wondering how the hell they missed the boat on IM. Everybody loves Google, and many will switch to Google Talk on basis of name recognition alone. Thank God that they don't abuse that power.
Google may seem a nice company, and it may be convenient not to have several different networks, but a single network controlled by one company is not a good thing. The better solution by far is an open network that anyone can add their servers (ie, exactly what the Jabber network is, but it's not clear whether GoogleTalk will be part of this).
Umm...isn't that what he was saying? that people use these incorrect terms without thinking about it?
...they provide absoloutely great services for free, the best of which is their yahoo messenger. Its the only place where the relatively uninitiated can log in and chat to complete strangers a planet away. MSN won't let you do it without paying them. And don't talk to me about the IRC channels; yahoo is to them what a concorde is to a guy jumping off his house.
Um, check again, I've never had to pay for access to hotmail or MSN Messenger. I think you are thinking of the MSN Network (similar to AOL) where the "good bits" of the internet (as chosen by MS) get spoon fed to the masses. Yahoo Messenger, MSN Messenger and AIM/ICQ are all free (ad supported) services, and they'll all stay that way until ad revenues disappear, then more than likely the client will disappear with them.
When was the last time jabber.org had transports installed?
Help us build a better map!
On the contrary, I think this merger is a bad thing, because the fragmentation illustrates the clear advantage of Jabber. If the market consolidates to MSN IM as you suggest, what makes you think that it won't become the standard instead of Jabber, rather than the other way around?
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
First, I was talking about the transport, not the company (though it does work both ways now that you mention it). Second, "because it's free" is no excuse when the free competition does it better already.
*snip a bunch of irrelevant crap*
Help us build a better map!
I'm reading the future on this one, since they're already working on it, and at this point we're talking sometime around now or soon rather than sooner or later.
Google may seem a nice company, and it may be convenient not to have several different networks, but a single network controlled by one company is not a good thing.
Google would control Jabber in about as much sense Microsoft controls email: They don't.
The better solution by far is an open network that anyone can add their servers (ie, exactly what the Jabber network is, but it's not clear whether GoogleTalk will be part of this).
You're only missing what they've been saying on their website about this for weeks now.
Help us build a better map!
Their income comes from not being evil
No, it doesn't.
It comes from the companies that pay them for ads.
They get those ad contracts because they are effective.
They are effective because they are targeted well, and because Google has a ton of users.
Google has a ton of users for many reasons, of which "name-recognition" and "technically-superior features" are at the top, and "not evil" is in the niche frequented by a minority even amongst hardcore geeks.
It's good that they are good, and it helps them court users, but as it starts to slide away, they'll still do fine. They don't need to be good, they just need to be better than their competition.
Some time after the last time I used the jabber.org server, which was about three years ago.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
Could this be a step towards a single IM protocol? Not XMPP, but good enough for me :-)
It's not about protocol, it's about networks. Even if MSN, Yahoo, and AIM all switched to XMPP, that wouldn't really help the users, only the developers of software like GAIM and Trillian.
Users would still have to sign up for accounts at all the different providers, and would have to keep track of which of their friends had which user IDs on which networks. As long as a user has to download a third-party application and enter all their different user IDs and buddies from all the different networks so it can connect to several different services at the same time, the user doesn't care what protocols those services are running.
Network peering is far more important here than protocol.
That is supposed to be (44%)% of the total marketshare.
-- I was raised on the command line, bitch
Google maps print fine, so long as you don't use the print button they provide. Just print the regular page and it's great. Use their print button and it comes out crap. (At least, that's my experience with Firefox and Safari, maybe it works with IE?)
GCHQ Quantum Insert installed. If only our tongues were made of glass, how much more careful we would be when we speak
Your just testing people, write?
We'll have to name it "GIMP Isn't a Messaging Protocol" to prevent confusion. :)
"Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
Yes, because they are idiots.
Seriously, just because a bunch of people do something, doesn't make it acceptable or even defensible if you want to be taken seriously.
Any of the examples that you mentioned would be unacceptable for an 8th grader; any adult who uses them ought to be subject to whatever amount of public ridicule is required to keep them from doing it again.
"Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
I don't think any of those are quite as bad as "same difference." I hate that usage, since it really ought to be "no difference," given the actual intent of meaning.
You need to restart your computer. Hold down the Power button for several seconds or press the Restart button.
I used to live in Portland. Loved going to those Hawks games. Probably the most fun I remember having at any sporting events. Go Hawks!
Someone speaking last night in regards to something completly differant but today I think it works here: "And we say that we are not a monopoly".....
(wh)YMSN!?!
> ... Time Warner flushes AOL like an unwanted fetus on prom night, ...
<snort> Dude, there's something so totally wrong with you.
Oh ye of too much faith. Google is a company. Wait till their share price starts dropping and then we'll see if we thank them for not abusing their power.
And what...? Google Talk is based on the open source Jabber protocol .. anyone can use it/make a client.
...which btw is a great reason to get others to use it.
Actually, I believe Google's reputation is definitely bordering on the "evil". I have tried many many times to get friends on Gmail and all but one of them said NO, for fear of giving too much information to the internet giant. Its probably already too late to save Google from this rep. They are a for-profit advertising company that has several boatloads of money. That kind of description usually engenders skepticism rather than faith that they will do the right thing.
Yeah, the Jabber.org guys got tired of whipping the transport developers and told all their users to use the transports on other servers a couple years back, they haven't run transports in a couple Moore generations now.
Help us build a better map!
Same difference
Perfectly acceptable use
And digitalsurgeon demonstrates the apparent intelligence of a 4th grader failing English while writing his post. No wonder he's on MSN...
Help us build a better map!
I've always taken "I could care less" to mean "As little as I care, you are lucky for the amount of caring that I have because it is possible for me to care even less". I don't know if that's correct, but at least I have the luxury of not getting bothered by that particular phrasing.
will M$ force yahoo not to support messenger on Linux? And the Linux users will have to give up their IM contacts? .. how can M$ tolerate linux users chatting with MSN users?
If not
MSN Messenger supports SIP for text messaging. While it is admittedly not fully supported (ie. no voice or video), it is supported and Google will soon support SIP in addition to Jabber.
According to Wikipedia, Session Intiation Protocol is an IETF standard, although it was not originally intended for instant messaging, which is what I remember as well.
http://www.iptel.org/ietf55/use_msn.html -- instructions for setting up SIP with MSN (or SIMPLE, the instant messaging subset)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SIMPLE
And digitalsurgeon demonstrates the apparent intelligence of a 4th grader failing English while writing his post. No wonder he's on MSN...
Don't insult the 4th graders, it takes several more years of schooling in America to get that bad at English.
"Giving money and power to government is like giving whiskey and car keys to teenage boys" P. J. O'Rourke
may be Baloo Ursidae can show the iq of a 5th grader by replying with a response that is more about the topic at hand and less about me. So you are using jabber eeh, good for you. Is it better then msn messenger ? simple answer please.
Swing.. and a miss.
That was the point. That all those phrases, like "could care less", are incorrect.
But 99% of my friends would trash Gaim as soon as they opened it.
It's missing the features that makes msn messenger special, all those neat winks, backgrounds, packages and more. It's what makes it fun for them.
You know, you probably don't want to let on that all your "friends" are 14 year old girls. The FBI usually doesn't look too kindly upon that.
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum sonatur.
The epitome of slashdot. You didn't read my the page I linked to did you?
Summary: It says that MSN's IM uses non-standard encryption now and there is a certain future date where it will be required.
It is not known if gaim will work with msn after that date.
There: Something at a specific location.
Their: Owned by someone.
Please make sure your english compiles.
Come on, I know you've been saving some bad-taste one-liners for lower forms of network life...
Help us build a better map!
Hey dude, i can see you like Yahoo's IM. You tell us, over and over, how great it is, how nothing will ever beat it, and, if i can quote you, "And did I mention free?" It's free, you boast. Free!
;)
Free, eh? Tell me, what software besides Yahoo IM are you running? Is it Windows? Is Windows free? If so, please be quiet, and listen to was the Free Software guys are talking about, when they talk about open protocols, and Free (really) software.
Additionally, "...you may as well return your DVD collection too." DVDs are not sponsored by advertising, which is why they aren't free. Compare with your TV example. (Strangely, most people pay for TV, though...
No shit, Sherlock. RTF Thread. Only 3 other people beat you to the punch... and he already acknowledged that he missed it.
Email, TCP/IP, and HTTP won over everything else because they were an open standard. There is no evidence supporting the theory that anybody can win against an open standard.
Help us build a better map!
All right, then I'll talk to you in his place. That guy just pwned your argument.
You're right, I wouldn't steal a car. But if it were possible, I sure as hell would download one!
Glad I got my education in Oregon instead. Now if Canada would call the fraud in the election at Champoeg already and demand the US cede Oregon, Idaho and Washington to proper Canadian rule now that the US has not the manpower to stop them...
Help us build a better map!
For me it is. It allows for several concurrent logins and distinguishes between the clients - so you can say that all IMs should be received by your desktop unless your laptop is connected, in which case IMs should go there. It also offers access to other IM networks like ICQ/AIM and, of course, Jabber.
Audio/Video chat is not supported, depending on whether you need that Jabber might or might not be suitable for you. I'm not sure if it's possible to use a video chat capable client via an MSN transport.
Note that I've discussed the protocol here. There are multi-protocol clients that support video chats via MSN/ICQ/whatever already (for example Trillian or a modified version of Gaim). They also tend to shove less flashy candy-colored graphics in your face, thus integrating with the rest of the desktop better than the MSN Messenger does... I prefer the plainness of Gaim (or Psi, now that I do everything via Jabber), but YMMV, of course.
USE HOT GRITS WITH STATUE OF NATALIE PORTMAN (NAKED AND PETRIFIED)
Email, TCP/IP, and HTTP also all came about when the majority of Internet users were still bearded geeks who understood and cared about these issues, and also before commercial interests discovered it. There's a vast difference between then and today.
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
You know, you probably don't want to let on that all your "friends" are 14 year old girls. The FBI usually doesn't look too kindly upon that.
It's cool if "he" is also a 14 year old girl. But in that case, what is "he" doing reading Slashdot? Everyone knows Slashdot is entirely peopled with ugly nerdy dudes.
-- Dave
Making fun of dumb people since 2009
Um, check again, I've never had to pay for access to hotmail or MSN Messenger.
Well unless you have friends or contacts already using MSN, lets just say its relatively worthless.
What he can't kill, he has sex on. Trent.
Better like the code is better commented, or better like the user has more fun and can use it more easily?
Second, "because it's free" is no excuse when the free competition does it better already.
Couldn't have said it better myself...
What he can't kill, he has sex on. Trent.
Free, eh? Tell me, what software besides Yahoo IM are you running? Is it Windows? Is Windows free? If so, please be quiet, and listen to was the Free Software guys are talking about, when they talk about open protocols, and Free (really) software.
Sense you are making not, young jedi...
And Jedi you will not be, until sense you make!
What he can't kill, he has sex on. Trent.
Unfortunately I do have friends using it. ...and a handful that still use Yahoo too.
Luckily Gaim and Trillian (and other clients based on Gaim like Adium) exist.
I personally can't stand either Yahoo or MSN's clients. They are loaded with more useless features than I can deal with. (backgrounds, animated backgrounds, nudges, etc. )
I don't mind if you like using a gaudy purple flower skin with red text, but don't make me look at it on my end.
That was more of a rant really, and you can't pwn a rant. You can 0wnz0r a rant, but pwning is just not an option.
All right, then I'll talk to you in his place.
That looks really suspicious, you know.
What he can't kill, he has sex on. Trent.
Whoa that was quick. Well I've used both gaim and trillian, and they just don't hold a candle to yahoo, IMHO. I'd rather have the option to use features and not use them, than not have them at all. If you want to use yahoo as a bare chat client, its as easy as 1-2-3, no need to use any other features. Besides neither gaim nor trillian have their own servers, and believe me thats a useful option. Besides its got lil animated yeller faces. How can you not love the lil yeller faces?
What he can't kill, he has sex on. Trent.
MS Messenger: Ships standard on all Windows PC's. Pops up every five minutes asking you if you would like to sign up for service. Causes your computer to explode if you try to uninstall it, or indeed just try to get it to shut up.
Actually, this is a misstatement. Windows Messenger is part of the Microsoft Operating System. I do not know of any OEM that ships their desktops with MSN Messenger installed. This is a separate 11mb download from messenger.msn.com. Because of this, I can uninstall MSN Messenger, continue using Windows Messenger (like on my PC here), or I can uninstall them both (windows components in Control Panel).
Everything else I agree with.
Sorry man... the Internet pooped on me.
You're only missing what they've been saying on their website about this for weeks now.
Do you have a link?
All I've found is http://www.google.co.uk/talk/developer.html , which suggests that whilst they will choose to connect to some other servers, they won't be connecting to all Jabber servers. So it will still be their separate network, albeit with some overlap with the Jabber network. An open network means we shouldn't need to have Google's permission to join the IM network.
Useless to you, perhaps, but useful for others.
As with any other new technology, people like to be unique, or at least feel unique.
An IM client with avatars, rich text, voice and webcam supports allows them to do so.
The same applies to message boards, where a user can choose an avatar, signature, etc.
The same applies to cell phone. Wallpapers, ringtones, and other goodies allow a person to be unique.
Annoying, but unique.
It's all about the user experience.
You might want to speak to someone about your clinical paranoia.
You're right, I wouldn't steal a car. But if it were possible, I sure as hell would download one!
OK, well, there's two ways you can handle this situation, and you always have a choice:
Now which did you choose, hmm?
Help us build a better map!
http://www.google.com/talk/
Still needs a lot of work but the way google is spending money it will get the attention it needs soon.
I wouldn't be surprised if google talk spawns itself from gaim since it refrences gaim on its homepage. Anyone know how the legalities would work out of google talk kidnapped all of its code from gaim? lol
No, if I tell anyone, it might get back to Them. At least thats what the voices tell me.
What he can't kill, he has sex on. Trent.
Typical slashbot.. read your own link. That was from *2003*, and the change has already taken place - with no ill effect.
Sigh.
GPL'd web-based tradewars themed space game
I picked #1. I only whine, piss and complain to fellow techies. ; )
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
Maybe Yahoo already knows that, in the end, Jabber/XMPP will be the only messaging protocol on the net (not even the email will survive), so they just don't care who their partner their IM service with... even if it's Micro$hit.
Maybe not so much. How about the prospected merger of AOL and Microsoft's Internet divisions? Once MSN and AOL Internet are one, won't that effectively bring ICQ in the same boat that MSN and Yahoo Messengers are getting into?
Next step would be a tight lock on the protocols, so those Linux bastards can't follow it anymore. Not that any of the major players (MSN, ICQ, Y!) has tried to keep Linux clients up to date recently, but at least they had stopped the "break it, fix it" chase with Gaim and Trillian.
You could say that this will throw people into the arms of Google Talk, just like lack of Internet Explorer on Linux lead to the rise of Mozilla & Firefox. But these aren't browsers, they're messengers. I reckon a much more realistic reaction would be "What, Linux doesn't have ANY of the cool messengers? Screw that."
i ate crayons when i was a kid and now i have two braincells and the blue ones taste nicer
it was a heady time, back in 1998 or so--i thought something like Trillian would be amazing since i would have ONE im client running rather than 3-4. Trillian said it 'worked' with ICQ. I get it all set up. ICQ contact list looks hunky dory. several days later i discover that my girlfriend had been sending real-time chat requests and they *simply did not appear* in trillian. not only did it lack a basic feature of ICQ (i used real-time mode almost exclusively), but it blocked it *silently*, which can have all sorts of unintended social connotations.
i have not gone back to multi-platform clients since. do they support MSN handwriting on my tablet? yahoo game plug-ins? gretting cards in ICQ? remote assistance in MSN real-time chat in ICQ? voice chat in google talk? how do they translate emoticons? i choose a specific emoticon graphic for subtle expressive reasons, i don't want GAIM or Trillian putting words in my mouth and maping emoticons etc. and the bottom-line is that, if you don't support EVERY feature of the 'canonical' client, claiming interoperability, without qualification is a LIE. the truth is that these all-in-ones are POS versions of the various canonical clients.
Glad I got my education in Oregon instead.
As a fellow Oregonian, I laughed when I read this.
Now if Canada would call the fraud in the election at Champoeg already and demand the US cede Oregon, Idaho and Washington to proper Canadian rule
Canada can call the election at Champoeg whatever the hell they want, the US isn't going to be cedeing nothing to 'em (besides the fact that Oregon, Idaho, and Washington were ceded to the US by Briton).
"Giving money and power to government is like giving whiskey and car keys to teenage boys" P. J. O'Rourke
I stand corrected. Though I remember having to go to that page only a few months ago to sign up for MSN IM without the native client.
:(
That was the first hit for "gaim msn" on google too.
There: Something at a specific location.
Their: Owned by someone.
Please make sure your english compiles.
the question is .. what smileys are they going to use ?????
RUPERT! I TOLD YOU TO WATCH THE BAGS! You were looking at the boys again, WEREN'T YOU.
OS X has been out for five years now, so I think Yahoo's had plenty of time to find someone to write an up-to-date Cocoa client
Amen. I will never use that piece of crap software until they rewrite it for OS X. The OS9 port they're trying to pass of as an OS X version of their IM client is pathetic and just freakishly ugly.
(for the record, I can't stand the MSN Mac client either, and I use Adium)
I could care less if he fell down those stairs.
check out the best blog ever:
http://oehlberg.com
And Jedi you will not be, until sense you make!"
What's going through his head:
I don't understand his argument....Make a star wars joke. That's it! A star wars joke will get me modded up. That way I don't have to understand what the free software movement is about. God I am so smart. They should hand out prizes for responding to posts on slashdot cause I'd totally win.