[JDEV] AOL Corporate Teamwork
cjbehm at mail.com
Sun Aug 29 11:24:17 CDT 1999
On 08/29/1999 at 07:07 AM Jeremy Weatherford wrote:
>On Sun, 29 Aug 1999, Kemal 'disq' Hadimli wrote:
>> > On Sat Aug 28, Eliot Landrum wrote:
>> > > Sorry Jon, I personally would rather wait for the updates than to have to
>have an extra link in my client.
>> me too. aol sucks.
>Guys, think about what you're saying. You're saying "_I_ don't want AOL
>logos on my client. _I_ don't mind waiting." It's the developers who
>make those decisions. Think about whether you're going to be the same
>guys who complain because it's taking too long to implement a new feature.
>I'm not saying you will be, but just think about it.
>I think it's a good idea to cooperate with AOL. From what I've seen of
>existing open-source protocol libraries, the understanding of AIM's
>protocol is not perfect. Keeping in step with their client would be neat,
>I can't say that I agree with the logo idea right now, although I'm sure a
>fairly unobtrusive place for it can be found, and at that point, it should
>go before the 'Jabber community'.
I am strongly inclined to agree with Eliot and Kemal. I don't want Jabber to be
linked to corporate "interests". Why? Because what if I have a problem with AOL?
I can choose not to ever use AIM or talk to people on AOL through that
transport, but if Jabber is tied to AOL like this (at the transport/server
level) then all the clients would have to have the banner.
Consider that Jabber would also then be paying for the ability to talk to AIM
users. Granted its more like bartering than paying cash, but do we want to be
paying for the ability to talk to other transports? What if some other IM
"provider" decides that it would like to go that route?
Banner's suck and being tied to a company sucks just as much if not more,
especially when the end user ends up with no choice but to accept it.
More information about the JDev