[webteam] welcome

[Adam Nemeth]

Hi all,

I promise everyone that this is my last post on defending jabber.org's
end user profile :)

On 7/10/07, Sander Devrieze <s.devrieze at pandora.be> wrote:
> End users don't care about this. Only geek end users do. That's also

End users - who are geeks or aren't as much, does not matter -  type
jabber into google. jabber.org is the first result, and we want them
to have something relevant.

In fact, I believe they're "second-hand geeks" - persons with at least
one geek in their area, who impressed them enough to type in this
keyword. They typed in this address in the hope that they'll find a
"Download Jabber Here for Windows" link and a "Register Jabber here"
link, and we shall not let them leave confused. Probably the client
page is so popular because our main audience is really them, and this
is the closest thing to what they expect.

Of course Jabber.org isn't to become an "xmpp-compatible" service
provider with an own client, and we should tell them that GTalk is as
much Jabber as LiveJournal is, and Coccinella is as much Jabber as
Psi, as Jeti, as Bombus or basically anything else.

If, and only if Jabber would be only a technical solution for client
and / or system interoperabilty, we could, most probably would and
probably should call it XMPP, because it's a "techie" name and does
express exactly such. But most of us in this list I think believe in
something we'd like to call open networks, and with much or less
success, we built a small one in years. Probably we communicated this
badly, I hope then that we'll communicate this better on our new
website, or probably our current methods are bad (implementing XEPs is
difficult!) or it's simply a bad idea.

> why this information is hidden on the Google Talk website:
> http://code.google.com/apis/talk/open_communications.html (btw: one of

Google does mistakes. Sometimes their reasons are considerable,
sometimes aren't. This time they decided they don't want to make an
advertisenment for Jabber Inc, and that's a purely business decision
which is rational in that world.

Google already expressed that they're willing to use an umbrella name,
but for them, "jabber" is unacceptable unfortunately. If XSF were to
remain JSF, and Jabber Inc would became "jabber technologies 2000
limited" or something less "we are jabber" thing, we wouldn't have to
talk about brand but really unfortunately for us the world decided to
move another way, and every party's reasons were - and ara -
plausible.

But fortunately we have the largest online company ever behind us,
with our largest userbase, who expressed their interest in the problem
by recommending "talk" as a name. Even if the political message was
probably unclear for most of us, and / or unacceptable because of our
feelings to "our" brand, and google is controversal as any other
multinational company, it did happen.

In a perfect world for me, Google would make a deal with Jabber Inc,
Jabber Inc would change somehow their name or google would accept it,
or I don't know, and Google Talk would be renamed Google Jabber
tomorrow, and XMPP would be the protocol, the open network where
everyone "loves" everyone would be called jabber network, and not
xmpp.net or anything similiar. But I won't think it'll happen tomorrow
:/

These are my points. I hope they're less flamy, and stand their ground
in the current state of Jabber, by any viewpoints. But I think the
list agrees mostly on this. So, what about... well, if not a beer, but
to continue on Jabber?;)


-- 
Aadaam <aadaam at gmail.com>