[Members] Google and XMPP federation
fippo at goodadvice.pages.de
Sun May 26 07:37:41 UTC 2013
Am 26.05.2013 01:19, schrieb Ralph Meijer:
> On 2013-05-25 20:44, Mike Taylor wrote:
>> The only definitive article i've seen to date is the one I read this
>> morning and, IMO, it's a hack piece.
> I wrote a extensive rebuttal on all of the points raised in this article
> (on TechHive):
I just watched a whole hour of
can someone else go through the rest of the show please?
There are some interesting statements:
In the conversation starting at 11:00 chee chew seems to say that xmpp
is based on http. Am I getting that right? The arguments he's making
sounds more like he means TCP... even though that doesn't make them more
The conversation about presence starting at 28:45 is even more
interesting. The key quotes here are that "in the mobile world the idea
of presence is a bit more blurry" and "with the hangouts product you can
send a message whether they're online or offline".
First the presence part. For me, this describes a very naive notion of
presence, reducing it to online/offline. XMPP has a slightly more
elaborate model, allowing you to specify what you're currently doing in
your presence. For enterprise unified communications there are other
factors that influence your presence like being on a phone call or
having a meeting (i.e. calendar integration).
Now the delivery of offline messages... I think the notion that you can
only write to people who are online comes from aol instant messenger,
possibly from IRC. Again, this is not true for XMPP as a protocol and
the only major xmpp implementation that did not implement offline
message storage or allowed you to send messages to contacts who are not
online was... gtalk.
I'm still struggling to the see the technical argument in "the model of
xmpp did not work for us" given those... misinterpretations of how xmpp
More information about the Members