4 ms·

I don't get it. XMPP already has everything IRC has. - Federation - Multiple (persistent) rooms (Look up XMPP Groupchat) - Permissions (think chanserv, /mode

I don't get it. XMPP already has everything IRC has. - Federation - Multiple (persistent) rooms (Look up XMPP Groupchat) - Permissions (think chanserv, /mode +ov etc.) - Private messages What am I missing? I'm hanging out on IRC every day, on multiple networks. No, I don't use XMPP groupchat so far - just to counter that argument. The reason for that is, that - XMPP clients usually suck in that area, in my opinion. So the protocol would be fine for me and I'd like to see IM tied in with groupchat/channels, but really.. Look at the clients and it's like really, really crappy IRC clients (to get back to your point: Yes, those UIs are usually following IRC designs, just with look like from a decade in the past) - Adoption. For company internal stuff XMPP is great. If someone with high profile (GTalk? Facebook Chat?) would build a product based on this protocol, it would boost the adoption tremendously. On the other hand, as I stated a couple of days earlier in another XMPP discussion: As long as Google or Facebook are not supporting federation, they are not really supporting the core feature of XMPP in my book. Did they reinvent IRC? No, XMPP did. Years ago, it's an XMPP standard. This is just an IRC client look-alike that doesn't suck completely.

hamidpalo 15y ago
FB and GTalk DO use XMPP. I also imagine that AIM, MSN, and Skype all have some sort of a XMPP implementation as well since they all can talk to FB.
- darklajid 15y ago
  You misread my post - or I was just not clear enough. I KNOW that they use XMPP. That's why I listed them. But both don't (as far as I know) support the multi user chat extension, the whole point of my answer. What I wanted to say was this: I don't use the MUC in XMPP (a lot) instead of IRC, because it's just not used anywhere. Google, Facebook, could hopefully "just" add it to their existing chat infrastructure. Better?
pyre 15y ago
IIRC Google does support federation. At least with Google Apps for Domains, you can add some records to your DNS that enable federation for your domain.
- darklajid 15y ago
  Are we talking about the same thing? XMPP federation? If I've got an account on jabber.org or run ejabberd on my domain, I can add you@yourGAppsDomain.com as buddy, see your presence and can message you, without caring about the server your account is local to? Edit: See elsewhere in the thread: You are correct, I am wrong. Federation is supported for GTalk since 2006: http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2006/01/open-federation-for-google-talk.html http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2006/01/open-federation-for-g...
there 15y ago
- XMPP clients usually suck in that area, in my opinion. what do you use for irc? at least irssi and adium do irc and xmpp, i'm sure others do too. If someone with high profile (GTalk? Facebook Chat?) would build a product based on this protocol, it would boost the adoption tremendously. On the other hand, as I stated a couple of days earlier in another XMPP discussion: As long as Google or Facebook are not supporting federation, they are not really supporting the core feature of XMPP in my book. huh? google chat does have xmpp federation. i run my own jabber server and talk to a bunch of people that use google chat through the web interface or a jabber client.
- darklajid 15y ago
  IRC: Well - irssi actually. But when I say that I think that the XMPP clients suck I'm talking about nice and clean GUI things. That I can force upon my non-technical peers. My 'presence' in this discussion should show that I'm a strong xmpp proponent, crappy clients (in the 'Not for my SO' sense) or not. pyre said the very same thing in this thread. Sorry for that - I'm clearly mistaken and need to figure out what the reason for this assessment was.. You (and pyre) are correct, federation was announced int 2006(!) here: http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2006/01/open-federation-for-google-talk.html http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2006/01/open-federation-for-g... Thanks a lot for the clarification.
a3_nm 15y ago
If you dislike existing XMPP clients, you can use bitlbee (which is an IRC-XMPP gateway you can run on your server) and use your favorite IRC client.
- darklajid 15y ago
  I actually only dislike the MUC presentation most of the time. It always feels bolted on to me. As I said elsewhere in this thread I'm not really having an issue for myself, but I've yet to find a decent client that I can hand to my peers. That's why I actually like the idea of this project, I guess.

hamidpalo 15y ago

FB and GTalk DO use XMPP. I also imagine that AIM, MSN, and Skype all have some sort of a XMPP implementation as well since they all can talk to FB.

darklajid 15y ago
You misread my post - or I was just not clear enough. I KNOW that they use XMPP. That's why I listed them. But both don't (as far as I know) support the multi user chat extension, the whole point of my answer. What I wanted to say was this: I don't use the MUC in XMPP (a lot) instead of IRC, because it's just not used anywhere. Google, Facebook, could hopefully "just" add it to their existing chat infrastructure. Better?

pyre 15y ago

IIRC Google does support federation. At least with Google Apps for Domains, you can add some records to your DNS that enable federation for your domain.

darklajid 15y ago
Are we talking about the same thing? XMPP federation? If I've got an account on jabber.org or run ejabberd on my domain, I can add you@yourGAppsDomain.com as buddy, see your presence and can message you, without caring about the server your account is local to? Edit: See elsewhere in the thread: You are correct, I am wrong. Federation is supported for GTalk since 2006: http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2006/01/open-federation-for-google-talk.html http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2006/01/open-federation-for-g...

there 15y ago

- XMPP clients usually suck in that area, in my opinion. what do you use for irc? at least irssi and adium do irc and xmpp, i'm sure others do too. If someone with high profile (GTalk? Facebook Chat?) would build a product based on this protocol, it would boost the adoption tremendously. On the other hand, as I stated a couple of days earlier in another XMPP discussion: As long as Google or Facebook are not supporting federation, they are not really supporting the core feature of XMPP in my book. huh? google chat does have xmpp federation. i run my own jabber server and talk to a bunch of people that use google chat through the web interface or a jabber client.

darklajid 15y ago
IRC: Well - irssi actually. But when I say that I think that the XMPP clients suck I'm talking about nice and clean GUI things. That I can force upon my non-technical peers. My 'presence' in this discussion should show that I'm a strong xmpp proponent, crappy clients (in the 'Not for my SO' sense) or not. pyre said the very same thing in this thread. Sorry for that - I'm clearly mistaken and need to figure out what the reason for this assessment was.. You (and pyre) are correct, federation was announced int 2006(!) here: http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2006/01/open-federation-for-google-talk.html http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2006/01/open-federation-for-g... Thanks a lot for the clarification.

a3_nm 15y ago

If you dislike existing XMPP clients, you can use bitlbee (which is an IRC-XMPP gateway you can run on your server) and use your favorite IRC client.

darklajid 15y ago
I actually only dislike the MUC presentation most of the time. It always feels bolted on to me. As I said elsewhere in this thread I'm not really having an issue for myself, but I've yet to find a decent client that I can hand to my peers. That's why I actually like the idea of this project, I guess.