Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Google Adds Chat To Gmail

Posted by CmdrTaco on from the wouldn't-be-a-weekday-without-a-google-story dept.

Nathan Weinberg writes "Google has added a chat feature to Gmail. It brings Google Talk, minus voice calls, into your webmail client. Gmail now also logs your IMs, whether they originate in Gmail or Google Talk. In the commentary at InsideGoogle, I note that Google recommends you disable Firefox's AdBlock, which can block Google's ads, if you want Gmail Chat to function properly."

58 of 315 comments (clear)

  1. Logging by Silas+is+back · · Score: 5, Informative

    Just to mention, logging of chats is turned off by default. You have to turn it on manually.

    I think this thing is a good idea (not the logging, the chat-inside-mailapp). I wonder if you get marked as "online" whenever you check your Mail on mail.google.com...

    --
    this sig is useless
    1. Re:Logging by AKAImBatman · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I think this thing is a good idea (not the logging, the chat-inside-mailapp). I wonder if you get marked as "online" whenever you check your Mail on mail.google.com...

      I think both features are good. Logging can be incredibly useful when you're using IM for online meetings and collaboration. (Such as in OSS projects.) To date I've been using a ChatBot to collaborate and record the conversations. This would free me to just record all my conversations, then move the interesting parts to the wiki as necessary.

      Way to go Google!

      --
      Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade
    2. Re:Logging by zephos · · Score: 2, Informative

      IM logging is indeed a handy feature especially within the context of your example.

      I think people's concern might be that if Google is logging your chats then any conversation you have [even confidential conversations] are stored and controlled by Google, forever.

      In your business setting the logging is basically like having a stenographer in a meeting and you own and control the notes. I think you'd want that same control if using Google's technology. After all if you discuss something confidential you'd want it insure it remains that way.

    3. Re:Logging by AKAImBatman · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I just fear that google, without you knowing, would log what you chat about!

      What's to stop them from doing this now?

      --
      Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade
    4. Re:Logging by guildsolutions · · Score: 2, Insightful

      THAT my friend is my entire point and why everyone should be using encryption of some sort if they wish their chats read by only the parties invited!

    5. Re:Logging by Spy+Hunter · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Anyone who thinks logging in an IM client is not useful has never tried using it. The only problem I've had with it in the past is that logs are tied to one computer and one client, so they're not always available. Google's logs are of course online and searchable, and integrated with email as IM should have been from the start. And if you're already using GMail, you should have no problem with Google storing your messages.

      I haven't tried it yet, but if it works at all this could be the best development to come out of Google since Google maps. And dare I hope that they won't be able to block it at work without killing GMail too?

      --
      main(c,r){for(r=32;r;) printf(++c>31?c=!r--,"\n":c<r?" ":~c&r?" `":" #");}
    6. Re:Logging by j-cloth · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Google chat will allow you to be logged on multiple times (I often forget to log off at home then log on at the office).
      It seems to route messages to the most recently activated client (this is a problem for the situation above when a cat walks across the keyboard at home and makes the unattended client active). I have noticed that some jabber clients (PSI?) will let you select which instance to send a message to when a user is logged on more than once. How this ties into gmail/gtalk? I'm not sure.

    7. Re:Logging by quantum+bit · · Score: 3, Informative

      No, they definitely can. Jabber doesn't use direct connections for normal chat, and even with an encrypted connection to the server, the server still can read what you're sending.

      The only way to be sure is to use end-to-end encryption, which is usually client-specific.

  2. Chat sites and advertising by ModernGeek · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I submitted this story last night, and it didn't get posted. One thing I noted was the fact that in the past google would not let chat sites advertise because they could not parse the chat text and bring relevant ads to the page. I used to run an IRC Network that was big into web integration (think AJAX gateway to IRC), and I wanted to implement google ads, but they didn't seem content on any solution for us, no matter what we brought to the table. Maybe now that they have targeted advertising for their chat service, they will allow targeted advertising for other chat services. Either that, or they will want to keep a monopoly with their Gmail + Talk service.

    --
    Sig: I stole this sig.
  3. Use AdBlock Plus by Lawrence+Ho · · Score: 3, Informative

    I have AdBlock installed, and can't load Gmail
    http://mail.google.com/support/bin/answer.py?answe r=30926&topic=1523

    1. Re:Use AdBlock Plus by Surt · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Interesting, I wonder why it's not consistent. I use adblock and gmail works fine for me.

      --
      "Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
  4. I noticed by dtfinch · · Score: 2, Interesting

    This morning I came to my computer to find that Google Talk had popped up five identical dialogs asking if I wanted to send my logs to my gmail account.

  5. Excited by Donniedarkness · · Score: 2, Insightful
    Not to sound like a Google fanboy, but I absolutely LOVE GTalk for its nice clean interface and lack of smilies.

    Can't wait to see what this turns out to be like. Here at school, I can't install Gtalk, so my girlfriend (off at college) communicate through email. This will make this a lot easier.

    On a side note, I wonder if Adblock will really screw this up, or if they're just trying to get people to stop blocking their ads.

    --
    Earn a % of cash back from Newegg, Tiger Direct, Walmart.com, and more: http://www.mrrebates.com?refid=458505
    1. Re:Excited by garcia · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Not to sound like a Google fanboy, but I absolutely LOVE GTalk for its nice clean interface and lack of smilies.

      Yes, because that's the reason to use Google's client... The lack of emoticons! A feature that every client I have ever used allows you to disable anyway.

  6. Am I the only one? by faloi · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I'm sort of concerned about the logging of all my IM's. I suppose I know on a logical level that all that stuff is being stored, regardless of the IM client. But I prefer to live in the cloud that tells me my IMs are private and if I don't log 'em, they don't get logged.

    --
    "It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education." -Albert Einstein
    1. Re:Am I the only one? by skiman1979 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      well your IMs aren't really private unless you use some form of encryption. Even then, it would depend on the type of encryption you use.

      --
      Having a smoking section in a public restaurant is like having a peeing section in a public swimming pool.
    2. Re:Am I the only one? by MadMoses · · Score: 5, Informative

      RTFA.

      1. You can choose whether gmail logs your chats when you first use the feature, and you can change this option in the settings menu at any time.

      2. There is even a feature that let's you get "off the record" during a chat. So even if you're having logging enabled, you can go "off the record" during a chat, and what you type afterwards will neither be logged in your gmail account, nor in your chat partner's gmail account.

      Sounds good to me.

      --

      Do not be alarmed. This is only a test.
    3. Re:Am I the only one? by diegocgteleline.es · · Score: 4, Informative

      Surprise, IM networks are centralized (that is, all what you say goes through a central server, there're chances that IM networks have been grepping into conversations for ej: conversations about people trying to convince people to go to another IM network). In fact, even IRC is centralized. Do you want security? Use end-to-end encryption.

      Notice that unifying email and IM DOES have a lot of sense. IM and email are the SAME THING (send text and ocasinally some files), except that IM is instantaneous and email isn't. But there's no reason why you couldn't add a jabber extension which allows you to receive emails, your jabber client would just move them to a MUA. Email is just a particular case of the idea behind IM.

    4. Re:Am I the only one? by Kadin2048 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Of course, that mode is more a false sense of security than anything, since your buddy could be using some client other than the Google one, which would blithely ignore the instruction. (Unless this feature is part of the standard protocol, which would be news to me.)

      So unless you're absolutely sure what the person on the other end is using, you really can't trust such a thing. I wouldn't be too surprised if there are corporate IM clients developed (perhaps they're here already) that have logging that cannot be defeated.

      --
      "Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
    5. Re:Am I the only one? by TheLink · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "my IMs are private and if I don't log 'em, they don't get logged."

      Uh, if you don't just talk to yourself, the other party could log your IMs too.

      Anyway, anyone in between (ISPs, company, wireless provider, 3 letter agencies) can log the data.

      Practically all popular IM's send messages in plaintext. Even if you use encryption, the other party may wish to save it in plaintext...

      --
  7. I foresee.... by LnxAddct · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I foresee a web based api to embed GTalk into your site. This web based chat interface is exactly what I've been waiting for, in fact I personally think they should do away with their desktop counterpart and do voip through an open source plugin of sorts. Using a desktop app just doesn't feel googly, no matter how well ddesigned it may be. Now if only they'd throw in support for GPG signing and/or encrypting in GMail(yes I know it'd kill their compression ratios). If everything was done client side in javascript, I'd imagine the security concern would be fairly low, the only thing I can think of is maybe other programs crawling the browser's memory after you've decrypted your private key client side (does anyone know if this would be an issue?)
    Regards,
    Steve

    1. Re:I foresee.... by Kelbear · · Score: 2, Interesting

      You bring up a fascinating point. It's been discussed before, but since time has progressed, it seems we may be getting closer and closer to the implementation of such a thing. If only we had the resource/security/broad user base necessary:P

      It would be an amazing thing to see embedded chatrooms in webpages. It'd allow for "bumping into strangers" on the internet, vastly increasing social potential. Chatrooms already allow for those of similar interests to meet, and so do forums. However, by placing it directly on the same page, you lower the amount of initiative needed to go to these places to find those with common interests.

      Subject material could immediately be dissected amongst fellow readers. They may have access to information beyond the scope of the article itself, and can provide additional insight into the subject. Obviously, Slashdot provides a similar service through a threaded forum. It'd be fascinating to see a similar thing appear on other websites in a chat format(minus the inane beowulf references).

      Forums like slashdots do provide features that cannot be easily mimicked by a chat interface. Nevertheless, I wonder when(if ever) we'd be able to see something like this.

  8. Re:whatever! by sinucus · · Score: 5, Informative

    "AdBlock often interferes with Gmail's chat features, causing Firefox to crash. Our engineers are working hard to fix the problem, but in the meantime, disable AdBlock for testing purposes, and clear your browser's cache. Then, log back in to GmailAdBlock often interferes with Gmail's chat features, causing Firefox to crash. Our engineers are working hard to fix the problem, but in the meantime, disable AdBlock for testing purposes, and clear your browser's cache. Then, log back in to Gmail"

    Well, after I actually RTF, I found that quote. So it appears that the blurb of this article was just FUD and that Adblock is just a temporary glitch and the services will work just fine in the future! Now I can happily go back to google worshipping.

  9. How to Block Chat but not Mail by TrebLib · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I wonder if it is possible to block google talk within google mail.

  10. chat with people or advertisers? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    AC: Hey! What you been up to? :-D
    GCA: same old same old. workin 9-5 sux teh bawls :-\
    AC: tell me about it! i hardly have time to utorrent warez anymore :-P
    GCA: Hey, I've got a quick and easy site you can go to for warez if you want. 8-)
    AC: nah, that's okay, I've got to go make dinner.
    GCA: whatcha makin? ;-)
    AC: just some chicken and some veggies :-$
    GCA: you could spice up that chicken with some worchester sauce :-D
    AC: No... I'm good thanks. :-\
    AC: What's up with all the links, Allison?
    GCA: Allison?
    AC: Aren't you Grand Canyon Alli? From the spring break trip?
    GCA: ... yeeeeaaaah.. I just wanted to help you make dinner ;)
    AC: OMG You're a Google Chat Advertiser!! :-O

  11. Disable Adblock? by verloren · · Score: 3, Funny

    You can unblock my ads when you pry it from my cold...no, wait...I'll uninstall Adblock when I pry it from your...no, that's not it...I'll pry Adblock from...

    Ain't gonna happen.

  12. Way more than "partial excitement." by brian.glanz · · Score: 2, Interesting
    I don't see this as incremental, while it is a step in a longer path. I expect users to be more than partially excited.

    Time was when we debated whether IM would subsume email; think we called them "instant messaging" and "e-mail" at that point 8)

    IM and HTTP/HTTPS, different protocols, different Subnets, architecture which in classic Geek fashion precipitated different end user apps for each.

    Welcome again to 2006, some say "the year of user experience" in what is clearly, at least a minor era thereof. Different protowhats? Try explaining to users why IM and email have been kept apart until now.

    These apps had to change, had to merge, for users have been forced to keep vague, human mental track of what was said when and where and to whom. Until and even with Google Desktop, we had little hope of "keeping straight" what we had typed to each other through our machines. From a user's point of view, this is absurd! What should be simpler?

    Google's founders were 15 and 16 years old (Brin, Page respectively) when "Field of Dreams" introduced the iconic phrase "If you build it, they will come." In software, this mantra has never been more true than when "they" are users -- not clients in the B2B case, users. Maybe that film hit the Googlers at just the right, impressionable age.

    Let their corporate motto, "Don't be evil" extend to "don't be greedy." The greedy engineer, nee the greedy corporation, puts its own, short term interests first, followed closely by its clients' interests, followed somewhere after by its users' interests. We all know that happy B2B users lead to happy clients lead to happy software businesses and happy engineers. Under market pressures though, few of us software businessmen, middle managers, and engineers have the nads to invest in the idea. What could be worse than knowing better and still acting greedy, if not evil?

    The cliche's are irresistable, I'm sorry; let's try: "give, and ye shall receive." Or, how about a metaphor: The User King. A testy, unpredictable ruler when misunderstood and/or abused, when well treated he is a benevolent king who will stay with and guide you. You need only build for him a castle, provide him servants and society, influence in court, importance and so on.

    If the engineers and businessmen submit to their User King despite short term expenses, they will find themselves well cared for in return. "Leveraging" this, to "utilize" in your "solutions" of course, is only as difficult as letting go of your ego. Let the "participation age," the Web 2.0ness wash over you. Speak softly to yourself "I am not the user, I am not in control, The User is my King." Let go of your pet features, your opinions about graphics and cuteness. Let go of everything visible in the application.

    Make no assumptions about what King User wants or needs. Take some time and ask him, not your boss or your executive leadership or your shareholders or your clients, accept no substitutes. Ask your User, then include not one more feature than your users need: remember Google.com, circa 1999? One or two interesting touches, like a looser-than-most corporate logo policy and some casual, entertaining wording like "I'm feeling lucky," that's fine. Be Geeky, but whatever you do: "don't be difficult." Don't be a Geek. Don't be the Geek you know you are; rather, be only what King User wants you to be, not one thing more.

    I like the "coming soon" type announcements when we can believe the company saying it. Coming soon to free, minimalist, searchable, 3 Gig accounts near you: "IM and email, what's the difference? and could RSS be any easier?"

    Couldn't have come from a more usual suspect.

    1. Re:Way more than "partial excitement." by LittleLebowskiUrbanA · · Score: 3, Funny

      That was one of the most rambling posts I've ever tried to read. Pimping a blog or something? Get to the point already.

      --
      This guy is way out there
  13. The whole point of email is to avoid "instant" IMO by bbzzdd · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The whole reason I use email is that I don't want to talk (chat) with people realtime. I like to respond on my terms. Now my gmail contacts are going to want to up and chat with me all of the time?

    Hopefully this feature can be disabled. I love gmail for it's simplicity, but now they are encroaching on feature bloat.

  14. Re:Reimplementing AOL by Nevenmrgan · · Score: 3, Insightful

    In the course of this morning, I logged on to four different computers, three of which aren't mine. I visited just one page on each computer - google.com/ig. I logged in and was able to check my email, news, the weather, movies for tonight, comments on my Flickr photos, a few friends' blogs, some cool quotes, and now this story. And soon, IM.

    If AOL ever offered, currently offers, or is planning on ever offering this level of user-friendliness, content consolidation, and ease/speed of use, all for free, all without the need to install anything on the client computer, I will buy you a beer, sir.

  15. Logging where? by everphilski · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Logging can be incredibly useful when you're using IM for online meetings and collaboration.

    Logging on *my* computer is fine and useful. Logging on *their* server is not.

    1. Re:Logging where? by AKAImBatman · · Score: 4, Informative

      Logging on *my* computer is fine and useful. Logging on *their* server is not.

      1. It's optional. Turn it on as you see fit.
      2. You keep all your GMail on their servers. How does this differ?

      --
      Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade
    2. Re:Logging where? by AKAImBatman · · Score: 3, Insightful

      What's to stop Google from keeping the message in their archives? Just because the POP3 session says it's deleted, doesn't mean it actually is. That's just a false sense of security. By allowing your email to pass through Google's servers, you are effectively trusting Google. If you don't trust them, you shouldn't be using their servicess, not using POP3.

      --
      Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade
  16. Re:whatever! by kevin_conaway · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Stop being a leech. You're using their services for free. The least you could do (besides absolutely nothing) is look at their ads

  17. Whitelist Google in Adblock Plus? by guspasho · · Score: 3, Informative

    I'm using Adblock Plus which has the whitelist feature.

    1) Couldn't one just whitelist anything that comes from Google? I haven't been "rolled out" yet, I don't see any indication of Gtalk in my Gmail account, so I can't try this for myself.

    2) Can someone who does try it let us know what we need to add to the whitelist to make it work? Thanks.

  18. Google policies by alexmipego · · Score: 3, Insightful

    We must not forget google policies. If you let them to log your chats then you're giving them even more information about you.

    At first, all that information can, and will be used, to make target advertisement. No big deal since they already analyse our email.

    Second, all that information can, and will be used, in case of any "law" problems with them. The have in their policies that rules, so if you come to be from a rival company they will use all the information they get from your email, and not the chats too, to play dirty.

    Be carefull boys!

    1. Re:Google policies by brunson · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Not if use use a client like Psi to connect to GoogleTalk and enable GPG encryption.

      --
      09F911029D74E35BD84156C5635688C0
      Jesus loves you, I think you suck
    2. Re:Google policies by cashman73 · · Score: 5, Informative
      I just got a notice in my Google Talk account just now with updates to Google's Privacy Policy. This page actually has their privacy policy, with the old text they removed today in RED STRIKEOUT and the new stuff they added in GREEN UNDERLINE.

    3. Re:Google policies by baadger · · Score: 2, Insightful
      all that information can, and will be used, to make target advertisement. No big deal since they already analyse our email.

      Not necessarily, IMO email tends to be:
      1. More formal - There is a plethora of personal information brought up casually and spontaneously in live conversation you just wouldn't get in an email. I personally don't want what I talk about with friends being used to try and sell me crap... after all I probably use IM (and Skype) more than I do my land line. Sure this information is only processed by machine, but still Google more granular baadger metadata for analysis than I would like.
      2. More full of noise and not under my control - As a consumer analysing my work related mail or all the junk mail (not necessarily spam or unwanted) I receive is useless for them. The emails I receive aren't under my control or tailored to me to a great extent so why should assumptions based upon them be? Personally, I've noticed most of the ads I get while on Gmail are totally uninteresting


      I'm not paranoid about Google's systems learning my favourite colour or what I like to eat for tea, what irk's me is just how much detail and how many logs these systems have to make before the ad's start becoming interesting and relevent.

      For webmasters running a topical websites, I think text or near text only auto-tailored ads was a great idea. I'm just not convinced for those of us with ad blindness and like to think we have some consumer smarts, but might actually be interesed in good products and services, that it's yet useful to an extent worth everything _we_ give to the big G.
  19. Re:The whole point of email is to avoid "instant" by ClearlyPennsylvania · · Score: 5, Informative

    See bottom of screen - "Standard with Chat" vs "Standard without Chat". You can disable it entirely. Or, you can just sign off on the chat window.

  20. Re:whatever! by gkhan1 · · Score: 2, Informative

    You don't have to disable adblock completely , you could just whitelist the page. Don't be such a fuddy-duddy :P

  21. Re:too-much-contact-with-contacts by ClearlyPennsylvania · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Or... you can just disable the chat part at the bottom of the screen. Or... you can just sign off to the chat part. Seriously, relax. If you don't want the chat part, you don't have to use it.

  22. Re:Ugh - Already blocked on my machine by Snap+E+Tom · · Score: 2, Funny

    You must live in China!

  23. BCC by jaaronc · · Score: 5, Funny

    Actually, this was technology that google had to incorporate in order to get Google Talk into China...all chat logs are BCC'd to the chinese government...

  24. Re:Quite a good idea... by Bert64 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Well i communicate with gtalk users through jabber. I like the idea of having my own personalised domain, like i do with email, and it's much easier if people only have a single address with which to contact me. I wouldn't like to be known by blah432432432@yahoo, blah432423432@gmail and blah321321311@hotmail.

    Anything which gets more people using an open messaging system like jabber is a good thing. And if google can provide value-add features to their service while still maintaining compatibility with the rest of the network, just like they do with email, that's great!

    --
    http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
  25. Re:Using GTalk to Connect to other networks? by pyros · · Score: 2, Informative

    There was talk that Google would allow open server-to-server XMPP chat, and they have. You can add users from non-Google jabber servers to you contact list (provided they have the right DNS records and their server allows s2s). Integration with AIM should be coming soon. But I haven't heard anything about Yahoo or MSN.

  26. Re:What the world needs now... by digitaldc · · Score: 2, Funny

    "Yeah, like I need a whole in my head."

    That is a wholly flawed argument.

    --
    He who knows best knows how little he knows. - Thomas Jefferson
  27. Re:I forsee no more gmail access from work... by szembek · · Score: 2, Funny

    If protection of productivity was their motive, I think they'd block /.

    --
    nothing
  28. Works fine for me by Kadin2048 · · Score: 2, Informative

    I have AdBlock (vers. 0.5.2.055) and Filterset.G installed on Firefox 1.0.7, and it seems to work fine for me. Unfortunately I don't know the version of Filterset.G that I'm using, but it's not more than a few months old.

    I don't understand what exactly would break GMail -- AdBlock doesn't filter out Google's text ads (at least mine doesn't), and wouldn't do anything anyway unless Google was in the block list. So I'm not sure why they're recommending that people remove it, as opposed to warning people not to blacklist Google.

    I'll be interested to hear what the reasoning behind this is.

    --
    "Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
    1. Re:Works fine for me by kevmo · · Score: 2, Informative

      Many adBlock filters look for the phrase "ad" or "ads". GMail uses a version ID for some reason in many of their URLs. In recent versions, they have had "ad" be part of the hexadecimal version ID, probably to prevent people from using adBlock. However, I just added GMail to the whitelist.

  29. Re:Off the record nonsense by mopslik · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Am I missing something obvious here? A simple copy/paste will bypass this seemingly pointless feature.

    Well, since the chat logs are stored on Google's servers, I imagine that it would be awfully hard to "paste" your OTR text into said chat log.

    Sure, somebody can make a local copy of the chat log with the OTR text pasted into it, but if you were to compare it to the version stored on Google's servers, you'd see that the local copy was a "fake" -- as in, "I never said that".

    Or so I see it...

  30. It's all about the Lloyd Dobler attitude.... by Alpha_Traveller · · Score: 2, Funny

    I don't want to gtalk-advertise anything, buy anything, or process anything as a career. I don't want to gtalk-advertise anything bought or processed, or buy anything gtalk-advertized or processed, or process anything gtalk-advertized, bought, or processed, or repair anything gtalk-advertized, bought, or processed. You know, as a career, I don't want to do that.

    --
    "Love is like pi - natural, irrational, and very important." (Lisa Hoffman)
  31. Linky linky by Kadin2048 · · Score: 2, Informative

    http://allforces.com/2005/05/06/ichat-to-msn-throu gh-jabber/

    An article on how to set up iChat to interoperate with MSN and Yahoo Messenger, using a Jabber server as a gateway. Mac-centric, obviously, but it gives an overview of what you'd need to do. The MSN-Jabber translation is all done by the server -- there's nothing really interesting going on at the client end. I think the MSN stuff is handled by this piece of software.

    At one point I found a site which listed Jabber servers and showed what protocol-gatways they had running, but I can't find that list anymore. The examples used on the link above are in the Czech Republic, kind of a long haul for a US-originated and -bound packet.

    --
    "Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
  32. Re:Jabber bridges by jaseuk · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Grandparent was about the Google Talk system and not the Jabber Network in general. Originally Google Talk was Jabber compatible but closed to connections from other servers, they have now opened it up, but there is still no way to talk using a Google ID and the Google Client to users not on the Jabber Network.

    I'm well aware that there are ways to bridge the gap between Jabber and other networks.

  33. WHERE IS THE CALENDAR?! by Bushido+Hacks · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I've said this a million times already! G-mail needs a calendar application! Forget this chatting crap! I need help with time management!

    --
    The Rapture is NOT an exit strategy.
  34. adblock by wwmedia · · Score: 2, Insightful

    to all of u who dont want to uninstall ADBLOCK :)

    just right click on the adblock icon and select "whitelist this site"

    thats my 2c ;)

  35. Probably been said, but... by RomulusNR · · Score: 2, Funny

    Google recommends you disable Firefox's AdBlock,

    Oh, well fuck that then.

    --
    Terrorists can attack freedom, but only Congress can destroy it.
  36. Re:IM Banned by tftp · · Score: 2, Funny

    Where I work we have an internal Jabber server and Psi/Exodus/Kopete clients. When people want to ask a simple question they don't walk to the other person; even if the question is not simple and requires a meeting it's still easier to find out if the other guy is here and free to talk, and not on lunch or already in another meeting... saves time and stops this wasteful walking, which can lead to exercise :-)