4 ms·

You would think it would be a no-brainer that everyone expects to work as it basically works to reach "everyone" in the world with far older technologies like p

by catdog 10y ago

You would think it would be a no-brainer that everyone expects to work as it basically works to reach "everyone" in the world with far older technologies like physical mail, E-Mail and the telephone. We even have a standardized protocol (XMPP) to interoperate between IM services but it's largely unused because users mostly don't demand such a feature and big providers are better of locking everyone into a walled garden.

ssalazar 10y ago
An open protocol can also lead to an inconsistent user experience. In the year 2016 I still have no idea how to send an image from one XMPP client to another and be sure that the sending side will receive it. In modern closed-off systems this is braindead simple. Part of this is due to how fragmented XMPP is, which I would again argue is due to its openness.
- Razengan 10y ago
  > An open protocol can also lead to an inconsistent user experience. No more so than a proprietary protocol. All the IM clients and apps are different, just like all the email clients. What matters is that I should be able to just get anybody's IM address and message them with my client and service of choice.
  - ssalazar 10y ago
    > No more so than a proprietary protocol. All the IM clients and apps are different, just like all the email clients. What? No, if my colleagues and I all decide to use ${CLOSED_CHAT_SERVICE}, the user experience is generally going to be consistent. > What matters is that I should be able to just get anybody's IM address and message them with my client and service of choice. This is what matters to you. I don't care what client I use if I can't use it in a way that meets my business needs, like sharing screen shots.
    - Razengan 10y ago
      > What? No, if my colleagues and I all decide to use ${CLOSED_CHAT_SERVICE}, the user experience is generally going to be consistent. But even in email, if a group of people decide to use only Gmail web interface for example, the user experience is going to be consistent for them as well. The underlying detail about email being an open protocol will be transparent to them. In fact, an email client could be designed to implement instant messaging — by sending messages as emails — and if two people both use that same client, the experience would be indistinguishable from an IM service! You'd still have a conversation history, you'd still have offline delivery, you'd still be able to send graphics and animations and audio attachments and anything else that HTML can render. (I get that current email protocols may not be lightweight/efficient enough for rapid delivery of a large amount of short messages though.)

by catdog 10y ago

ssalazar 10y ago

An open protocol can also lead to an inconsistent user experience. In the year 2016 I still have no idea how to send an image from one XMPP client to another and be sure that the sending side will receive it. In modern closed-off systems this is braindead simple. Part of this is due to how fragmented XMPP is, which I would again argue is due to its openness.

Razengan 10y ago
> An open protocol can also lead to an inconsistent user experience. No more so than a proprietary protocol. All the IM clients and apps are different, just like all the email clients. What matters is that I should be able to just get anybody's IM address and message them with my client and service of choice.
- ssalazar 10y ago
  > No more so than a proprietary protocol. All the IM clients and apps are different, just like all the email clients. What? No, if my colleagues and I all decide to use ${CLOSED_CHAT_SERVICE}, the user experience is generally going to be consistent. > What matters is that I should be able to just get anybody's IM address and message them with my client and service of choice. This is what matters to you. I don't care what client I use if I can't use it in a way that meets my business needs, like sharing screen shots.
  - Razengan 10y ago
    > What? No, if my colleagues and I all decide to use ${CLOSED_CHAT_SERVICE}, the user experience is generally going to be consistent. But even in email, if a group of people decide to use only Gmail web interface for example, the user experience is going to be consistent for them as well. The underlying detail about email being an open protocol will be transparent to them. In fact, an email client could be designed to implement instant messaging — by sending messages as emails — and if two people both use that same client, the experience would be indistinguishable from an IM service! You'd still have a conversation history, you'd still have offline delivery, you'd still be able to send graphics and animations and audio attachments and anything else that HTML can render. (I get that current email protocols may not be lightweight/efficient enough for rapid delivery of a large amount of short messages though.)