[Members] Is this thing on?

Ulrich Staudinger us at activestocks.de
Wed Dec 22 08:43:51 CST 2004



Bart van Bragt schrieb:

>
> If we are going to put development time into something then we should 
> put this time into decent servers. There are a LOT of clients out 
> there but only a few half decent servers. There still is only one 
> (unfinished) pubsub implementation, etc, etc. IMO there is quite a bit 
> of work todo before we should start worrying about sub-optimal 
> libraries :) Besides that most platforms only have one mostly finished 
> library available.
>
I think / imo jabber.org should head the community way and not so much 
the implementation way. J.o should be a platform for developers and j.o 
should help those developers build better software, use that software 
and get some audience.


> Regarding the top-down (early adopting companies) vs the bottom-up 
> (home users) thing. IMO we shouldn't disregard the homeusers. The 
> needs of the companies and the endusers have a LOT of overlap. Both 
> want easy to use, fairly feature rich and stable clients. Both need 
> decent servers that they can use or deploy. Both need features that 
> set XMPP apart from 'the rest'.
>
agreed.

> Besides that XMPP's share in the corporate world is nice but IMO 
> Microsofts LCS is going to be a very tough competitor. Office 
> integration, anyone? :D
>
;-)

> So for me the endusers are the main target. I think that's the same 
> with most of the people in the JSF and especially in the larger Jabber 
> community. Otherwise we would have seen quite a bit more commercial 
> clients/servers and less open source projects.

Problem propably is, big commercial IM companys have their own legacy 
protocols already and untargeted end user IM can only be profitable with 
a very large user base. Of course targeted communitys (like this gay 
community) can be profitable since those companys have something to sell.

> IMO endusers are key, tackle this from the bottom up, IMO the 
> corporate battle is very hard to win with all these small commercial 
> XMPP companies that are all separately trying to win from companies 
> like MS.
>
> So Jabber should become the Firefox of Instant Messaging :) 

Let's engrave that sentence - i 100% agree and wanted to say that already.

> But before that can happen we need decent info for endusers (but 
> www.jabbercentral.org is getting in shape. BTW if someone could ask 
> Justin Mecham to set the nameservers for jabbercentral.com to the same 
> nameservers as jabbercentral.org I'd be VERY grateful. Can't get a 
> hold of Justin, have been trying for months now :( ). Then there is a need

> for decent/stable servers and good documentation and registration 
> procedures on the server side.

Agreed - end user sites are important - we noted that on the board list 
in a minor sentence already ...

>
> All this to get the early adopters in the enduser world started. Then 
> we'll need to get on par with the legacy networks. If I look at the 
> people that I know video/voice is starting to become more and more 
> important. Lots of people are buying webcams at the moment (ok, mostly 
> the 16 yo girls :D). But I'm also using Skype to stay in contact with 
> some people when it's too expensive to use the phone. Works perfectly, 
> should work perfectly with Jabber too IMO. But implementing this is 
> pretty hard so I think just integrating a library/application with the 
> already existing clients is the way to go. Client developers have too 
> much work to do as it is, adding voice/video would be a very large 
> extra burden if they all had to start from scratch.

Problem is audio and video with legacy librarys are not that easy to 
implement. The time factor is frightening and a nightmare without an 
piece-of-cake library.

> And then I'm going to stand on my soapbox again and say it once more: 
> WEBINTEGRATION. 

Am adding that to a target paper.


u

>


More information about the Members mailing list