3 ms·
Except this is just generic Google comment #4 and has nothing to do with the current situation. AFAIK Google Talk is nowhere near the most popular chat service,
by magicalist 13y ago
Except this is just generic Google comment #4 and has nothing to do with the current situation. AFAIK Google Talk is nowhere near the most popular chat service, there are a ton of competitors, and the problem here is the exact opposite of letting it rot: it's changing the communication format so completely that it's breaking the former adherence to XMPP.
Google Apps doesn't seem especially relevant, but it also has lots of competitors (including, just like chat, very active open source projects), hasn't been left to rot, and they've actually moved to only charging for it, instead of having an ad-supported version.
...so, are you really just talking about Reader?
- hcarvalhoalves 13y ago> AFAIK Google Talk is nowhere near the most popular chat service, there are a ton of competitors, and the problem here is the exact opposite of letting it rot: it's changing the communication format so completely that it's breaking the former adherence to XMPP. That's not how I see it at all. You make it look like they are improving the service and that requires breaking compatibility with XMPP, but it's yet another strategy to force users into Google+ by consolidating Google Talk under the "Hangouts" feature. Commitment to open standards is only skin deep.
- magicalist 13y agoThat's, again, something totally different from what you described in your original post. Letting a service rot generally means abandonment. I'm certainly not saying that the opposite of letting something rot means improvement, I'm saying that making a major change like this is not at all an example of letting that service rot.