Yahoo's encouraging words for IM standards
For more than a decade, the Internet has suffered from multiple incompatible communication standards for instant messaging. Now it looks like Yahoo, one of the major IM players, is open to breaking the logjam.
I'm a power user of IM who struggles to find software that supports chatting with people on the four main IM networks: AOL, Yahoo, Microsoft, and Google. Today's situation, for me at least, is like having to own four e-mail programs for different networks or four telephones for incompatible phone systems.
So I was encouraged by words from Scott Dietzen, Yahoo's new head of communications products including Yahoo Messenger and Yahoo Mail. That promotion expanded his turf from his previous position at the helm of the Zimbra online e-mail software start-up that Yahoo acquired last year.
Zimbra, like Google and some other non-incumbent powers in the world of instant messaging, has used the open XMPP (Extensible Messaging and Presence Protocol) standard for instant messaging. It's this standard that Dietzen apparently sees playing a broader role at Yahoo.
"I believe XMPP is the right platform through which to deliver interoperability with at least some of our partners," Dietzen said in an interview.
No doubt one of those partners would be Google. Generally, it's one of Yahoo's biggest rivals, but Google became a major partner in a search-ad deal with Yahoo announced in June. A sidelight to the deal was one line saying the companies would make their IM services interoperable. It's hard to say at this stage, though, how far Yahoo or others might go.
One-time deals or standards?
As I see it, there are two basic paths to IM interoperability. The first, which we've been on for some time, consists of one-off technology partnerships between various networks. For example, Microsoft and Yahoo's IM services now can link together, and the Google Web-based IM service built into Gmail works with AIM.
But that approach only truly works as long as all networks set up partnerships with all other networks--a combinatorics nightmare given the arrival of new IM services from companies such as MySpace, Facebook, and eBay's Skype. That's where the second approach--using a standard--comes in handy.
E-mail previously had assorted closed communities including America Online, CompuServe, Prodigy, and the Internet itself. The standard prevalent on the latter network, SMTP (Simple Mail Transfer Protocol) won out in the long run. It's got shortcomings--for example identity authentication issues that contribute to the spam and security problems--but those problems arguably are easier to fix with one standard than many.
Standards move notoriously slowly, of course, especially when compared with the rest of the technology industry. But the Internet has reached a scale where IM incompatibilities have major consequences that retard innovation, too. Standards might hamper the development of new IM features, but I believe interoperability problems are denying us a broader, richer world of real-time online communication.
XMPP or SIP?
So if the IM powers want to move to IM standards, the next question is which standard to use.
Here, too, Dietzen has an opinion. When I asked him what's been holding back IM interoperability, he had this to offer: "There are two competing potential standards, XMPP and...SIP. If I were betting, I'd bet on XMPP emerging as the likely framework for adoption."
SIP, or Session Initiation Protocol, grew out of the world of telephony and is more oriented toward multimedia than straight text.
But XMPP looks to have an inside track among the incumbent IM powers. For one thing, Yahoo's Zimbra software framework supports it, Dietzen said.
For another, Yahoo opted to use XMPP in its Yahoo Live experimental video service, according to Process One, a Parisian company that sells XMPP-based IM server software using the open-source ejabberd software.
And there are signs others might be interested, too. Earlier this year, AOL began experimenting with an XMPP interface to its AIM and ICQ networks for instant messaging.
So perhaps there's an end in sight for this particular Tower of Babel. Adopting a standard means the IM networks will have to let go of some control, but if done right, it also could mean instant messaging could become a more popular, active, and useful part of the Internet.
Stephen Shankland writes about a wide range of technology and products, but has a particular focus on browsers and digital photography. He joined CNET News in 1998 and since then also has covered Google, Yahoo, servers, supercomputing, Linux and open-source software, and science. E-mail Stephen, or follow him on Twitter at http://www.twitter.com/stshank. 
With one federation network of IM, you only NEED one account (though you might want more, as it is with email).
And multi protocol clients usally does many protocol bad (or not very good), as a singel protocol client usally does that protocol good. Pidgin does XMPP (and thus Gtalk) badly...
My favorite part, though, is that you can combine multiple IM presences into a single contact point. So my brother Jeff might be online in three places, it only shows one online icon. When I click on him, I can decide which IM service I want to use to contact him.
If they were to add Grand Central and Skype, it would become more important to me than iTunes and Firefox.
I use transports in Jabber to talk to my friends in other IM networks. I still need to have an account in each network, but the transport loggs me in on those. Then I have access to all my friends from one Jabber client (I use Gajim, but there are other populare clients, like Bombus for mobiles with Java). I can also be logged into my Jabber account from many places at the same time. My MSN account will not be logged out, as it is the transport that is logged in to MSN. This can not be done with a multi protocol IM client.
Beside GTalk, Yahoo might worry about GMail taking market share from Yahoo's eternal BETA of a new "YMail" which is the most highly spammed mail service we've ever seen from Yahoo. So, Google could help Yahoo cut to the chase and license GMail's configuation to them as well as GTalk. I know it's against Yahoo's rules to take market share and to make money, but maybe this once they might consider Google as a partner (if Google's even willing to license their mail and talk).
Now, Yahoo must decide to put their money where their mouth is and adopt Firefox as their default browser, and Mozilla doesn't pay brib ..erm.. *injections of capital* like Microsoft's been doing with Yahoo for years - $$ to use IE-based products.
Here's a fun experiment - chat with or email to Yahoo Support, telling them you *LOVE their IM and webmail but it doesn't really work well with Firefox?* Then start crying and through your tears ask them how you can start using their INCREDIBLY wonderful services? *Do their IM and email better with IE or OPERA or FIREFOX or SAFARI?*
Don't believe me. Try it for yourself and see. I hope this policy has changed - last I did it three months ago, the answer was *wellll.. actually.. YIM works by far the best with IE, Yahoo Mail too but IE's not really required for our email.*
But you could download Bombus (bombus-im.org or http://bombus-im.org/builds/06/midp2.0z/Bombus.jad) to have it run on your mobile. Then you connect to transports, to have your MSN, ICQ etc friends in your phone. Works greate. Would work better if MSN and AOL start federate with others (GTalk already works).
1st is QQ (in China). Wether, you like it or not, wether you consider it or not, wether you see it or not in western coutries, QQ is number one, worldwide!
Google is not a network, it is just a service in the network. The network is XMPP, or Jabber, and the only one that is an open standard, it is an IETF standard like TCP, IP, HTTP, SMTP, POP, IMAP, TLS/SSL, etc.
> For example, Microsoft and Yahoo's IM services now can link together, and the Google Web-based IM service built into Gmail works with AIM.
The difference is :
- you can use your local, centralized, walled-garden account in MSN/WLM to talk to Y!M users, and/or use your local, centralized, walled-garden account in Y!M to talk to MSN/WLM users
- in GTalk, you have to enter your AIM account to be logged into the AIM walled-garden IM system : it is only an XMPP transport (or "gateway")
- AIM users can't log into XMPP network
- XMPP networkd users can log into any proprietary, legacy IM system, through transports (gateways)
SIP is not an equivalent of XMPP, SIMPLE is. SIP is for multimedia, SIMPLE is its extension to text and presence. Jingle extension to XMPP is more comparable to SIP, but far from it.
SIMPLE is difficult to federate, XMPP has already done it, worldwide. SIMPLE has 2 widely known implementations... that have embraced and extended it, thus becoming incompatible/non-interoperable : Microsoft Communications Server and IBM Lotus SameTime.
IM is one of the most fragmented electronic technologies is the world, w got to solve that problem.
Like there is one e-mail, there is only one IM, and it is XMPP. Now.
All the proprietary walled-garden networks (QQ, ICQ, AIM, MSN/WLM, Y!M, NateOn, Gadu-Gadu, MySpaceIM, Baidu Hi, C6, etc.) have to join the federated, worldwide network of XMPP, and add all their users to the open internet.
All businesses, administrations, associations have to adopt XMPP as their default server, like they have their own e-mail server.
http://nyco.wordpress.com
Nÿco
Phone numbers are dead with the coming generation. It's just a matter of time.
Steve Larson
UC consultant
And you can have same name in SIMPLE/SIP and in XMPP. But SIMPLE/SIP and XMPP has different goals, and solving slightly different problems. Knowing the differences, I will vote on XMPP for solving this problem.
- by onejackk September 5, 2008 11:29 AM PDT
- I am user of Yahoo messenger , I want to use multiple ID to chat communicate but do not want to merge all my friends list inot one, is this possible? Trilliam merges al lthe friends list into one, that is unacceptable to me
- Reply to this comment
-
(19 Comments)