I don't have a dog in this hunt, but some of the characterizations here
were a bit off so I thought I should point out some misconceptions.
Wouter Verhelst wrote:
> On Tue, May 02, 2006 at 03:52:33PM -0700, Paul Johnson wrote:
>> Jabber prevents this by providing a real presence system.
> IRC has a real presence system, too.
Hardly. It has "away", yes, but that's hardly a real/full presense system.
Jabber, being a real presence system, allows someone's presence to be
unobtrusively signaled (ie, not in channel, but still proactively
shown). IRC has no such capability, either its reactive (when I send a
message or do a whois or related, I get indication of it) or it spams
the channel. (Yes, I use IRC regularly, the presense capabilities in
Jabber are tremendously better than those found in IRC)
>> Nicknames changes, joins and parts aren't spammed to the channel
>> unless your client adds them in for you (but changes are still
>> reflected in the listing of who is in the chat).
> Joins and parts you already mentioned. Nickname changes? I wouldn't know
> why the fsck you *wouldn't* want to be informed of those.
I don't want them spammed into the channel, but they should be reflected
in a visible way, ie, out of band of the channel.
>> Jabber networks don't go on begging sprees for funding.
> Hell yes they do. My Jabber server administrator has sent me some
> "please support my bandwidth" request in the past.
Then switch servers. Because of open federation, its unlikely you'll
lose access to any of the resources (ie, chatrooms and other stuff) that
you had access to previously.
None of the annoying silo's that you get with IRC networks (unless you
consider AIM vs Yahoo! vs MSN, but I don't think that's much of an issue
here).
>> IRC was a good early effort, but 20 years have passed and IRC is still
>> plagued by the same problems it started with and shows no signs of
>> improvement over time, just like Windows. Isn't it time the world
>> moved on already?
> Move on to what? A protocol that broadcasts whether I'm online to
> everyone I've ever chatted with?
1) you can remove subscription presence from a user
2) in some clients you can log in without announcing presence as well,
though I will acknowledge that its less useful that way
> Thanks, but no thanks. Jabber has its place as an IM protocol, but not
> as a group chat thing; IRC is way better there.
Suffice it to say, I strongly disagree. Jabber has *much* better
mechanisms for supporting group chat scenarios. Perhaps there aren't
any clients that you like for group chatting in IRC, I won't argue
that...but please don't say that the protocol isn't as adapted to it
because Jabber has much better capabilities, they just need to be
exposed in the clients if they aren't there already.
--
Jeff McAdams
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a
little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
-- Benjamin Franklin
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature