[Members] Re: s/JSF/XSF/g

Sean Egan seanegan at google.com
Mon Nov 20 13:24:23 CST 2006

Hi Jean-Louis. I understand your concerns that I'm trying to
manipulate the JSF to further Google's own interest at the cost of
everything else. :)

Please believe me that, although my views are obviously biased by my
experiences (as are everyone's on this list), my intentions here are
entirely to benefit the XMPP community, not Google's (with the obvious
exception being that their interests largely overlap). :)

On 11/19/06, Jean-Louis Seguineau <jean-louis.seguineau at laposte.net> wrote:
> A few months ago statistics have been published regarding consumer IM
> community users. These were saying that the Google Talk service only
> amounted to a mere 4 millions downloaded clients. Although I am not agreeing
> with the way these numbers were computed, there was nonetheless a definite
> gap between Google Talk and other incumbent IM users' numbers.

The 44,000 active client user number was greatly understated. Further,
that figure only accounts for the Google Talk download client, not the
Gmail feature, which is also very popular. Google doesn't give out
numbers, but I can tell you that it is firmly in the multi-millions

> With all due respect, the Jabber/XMPP users' community is much larger than 4
> million. I am not sure that using something like "talk" would have the
> result you suggest. I am just questioning who between Google and the
> Jabber/XMPP community at large will benefit the most in using the name
> "Talk".

My perspectives on IM (coming from the Gaim project) are entirely
focused on public networks intended for use by normal people at home.
In the XMPP world, Google Talk seems to be the largest such service,
and it makes sense to me that we ride that wave.

I'm not sure people---even current XMPP users---understand the
interoperability aspect of XMPP. I picture a lot of them tucked away
in offices, convinced their office IM system is specifically designed
to *prevent* them from interoperating with their friends on other,
public, networks.

If people use talk clients and talk servers, I see it being easier to
relate their private IM world to the public IM world.

> Maybe the foundation could enter a poll on the subject to gather external
> suggestions in its coming year agenda?

That would be great. I started this thread mostly just to gauge
interest in choosing such a term to use to describe us, not to
necessarily pick one (although I obviously think Talk has merits).
Whatever we choose, I will get at least Google and Gaim behind it.


More information about the Members mailing list