[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: ICQ

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

First off, thanks.   You brought up a lot of points my limited knowlege did not
allow me to see.


On 31-Jul-97 Riku Saikkonen wrote:
>Travis Cole wrote:
>>On 30-Jul-97 Riku Saikkonen wrote:
>>>To tell if someone is online:
>>> - finger
>>> - rwho (but rwhod isn't installed in most places)
>>> - talk (try to talk...)
>>Now if my friend runs Win95 and his ISP doesn't support shell accounts or
>>finger, then how is finger going to do any good?  You defeated your own point
>
>Have him run a finger daemon on the Win95. I think those already exist; at
>least I've heard of one. (I don't use Win95, so I don't know for sure... But
>fingerd is easy to write.)
>

I will have to look for that.  But I will run into that dynamic IP problem. 
Once I start school I will have a static IP so  any one can contact me whenver
they want, I will just have to figure out how to contact them on their dynamic
IP, WinNT, no finger, ISPs

>>of rwho.  And I think there are some Win95 talk clients but you need to know
>>your friends IP which can present a problem.
>>
>>And I fully realize that ICQ at this point is only good if all parties
>involved
>>are running Windows.  I am trying to defent my point that ICQ for Linux would
>>be good.  Well unless I had to pay $10 a month for it.
>
>What I'm trying to say is that ICQ for Linux would be no better than
>fingerd+talkd+... for Win95. ICQ has nothing new; it's just MS's proprietary
>implementation of things that finger, talk, IRC, and friends have done for
>years.
>
>And ICQ is not free, and likely never will be. The client may be free of
>charge right now, but an ICQ server isn't. Not all want to use MS's
>centralised server; for example, if you're on a network not connected to the
>Internet (or MS's ICQ server has crashed, or MS has shut it down in favour
>of some newer, cooler, and more expensive "invention"), ICQ doesn't work at
>all, but finger and friends do. And it looks like even the (use of the) ICQ
>client won't be free for long...
>
>(Not to even speak of the other, usually more important, meaning of "free":
>free with source code that anyone can modify and distribute.)
>

My initial point in starting this thread so many (years, months?)days ago was
that I liked ICQ enought to pay for it as long as I didn't have to pay to much.
 And I was looking for other Linux users to support me in getting a version for
Linux or at least Java.

>>>To message:
>>> - rwrite / rmsg, if installed (it's not in most places)
>>> - e-mail
>>> - perhaps ytalk (I seem to remember that ytalkd had a feature for this,
>>>   but I'm not sure)
>>> - IRC, if he's on there (tell him to be [1])
>>>To chat:
>>> - talk (ytalk for more than two people at a time)
>>> - IRC
>>> - one of the voice chat programs for voice
>>Once again same points.  Most of these are not supported for someone with
>Win95
>>and a dynamic IP.  The IRC networks are terribly unreliable and who whants to
>>keep an IRC clent open all day just to receive messages that you may not see
>>unless you can setup your IRC client to give you some kind of notification
>when
>>you are send a message.  I will admit I don't fully understand the feasablity
>>of your IRC suggestion, that may very well be possible.
>
>Unreliable IRC networks are solved by running your own reliable IRC
>"network" (one or two servers are enough for quite a few people), or finding
>a reliable IRC network (EFnet probably isn't a good choice :)). (But I think
>(y)talk would be better than IRC for this kind of thing, at least if you can
>find out the IP somehow (see below).)
>

See above, about my plans to do this.

>>And the problem with email is how many people check their email every 2
>>minutes.  With ICQ the message when you send someone a message they are made
>>immediatly aware of it.  The also have the option of turning that
>notification
>>off.
>
>If you run an e-mail notifier such as xbiff (I'm pretty sure those exist for
>Win95 too), you get the same thing with e-mail. If you write a procmail (or
>equivalent) script, you can do much more, for example playing a tune on the
>sound card when a certain friend mails you.
>
>>>The major problem with these is that they're not installed everywhere. But
>>>neither is ICQ. And if we're going to get a system that's in common use, I'd
>>>much rather have it be something free, decentralised and tried-and-true
>>>(like IRC or fingerd+talkd+smtpd) than something proprietary like ICQ.
>>I also would much rather have something like IRC, finger, talk, or email but
>>finger and talk do not work well if at all with non Unix computers.  In light
>>of this a multiplatform program like ICQ may be better.
>
>finger, talk, and e-mail are _much_ more multiplatform than ICQ. And a major
>point: It is much easier to write a fingerd, (y)talkd, and IRC client for
>Win95 than to port ICQ to Linux. (Actually, a fingerd, some form of talkd,
>and IRC clients for Win95 already exist. Tell your friends to use them!)
>
>(It seems to me that ICQ isn't multiplatform at all, but supports only
>Windows on Intel. Am I missing something?)
>

You are correct and as I said before the reason this thread stated was because
I wanted to try and change that.  Get them to make a Linux version or hurry up
with the Java version.

But yes all the excepted Internet protocals will run on about any
computer/software and are not owened by any one who could turn them off on a
whim or only 1 or 2 servers which could crash.  

About writing a fingerd, I am not a prgramer but I am starting to learn.  I do
think that writing my own working useful programs is a way off.

>>You still seem to be assuming that every one has a static IP or that I can
>>easily find my friends dynamic IP and this is usualy not the case.  For email
>>notification if you are not directly on the network your email goes to (dial
>up
>>connection) then that may be a little to slow for what I would like. 
>
>E-mail can be just as fast as any other kind of connection, if set up
>properly. (You probably need to run an SMTP daemon on your machine; but
>those exist for both Linux and Win95.) SMTP does work with dynamic IPs too;
>just route it through the ISP's mail server (most ISPs do this). (If you
>know the IP of the receiver (and he runs an open smtpd), you can also send
>mail directly, bypassing mail relays.)
>

I know all of this.  I use smail and all the mail I send or receive is first
routed through my own computer.  But I use fetchmail to check my mail from my
ISP so sending a message to me only gets my attention every 10 minutes (a often
as fetchmail checks it)  I can't see a way to ovoid this on a dynamic IP unless
every one knows my IP.

>Dynamic IPs are somewhat problematic, though; to figure out the IP, either
>the ISP has to have a service for finding online customer's IPs (finger
>would be good for this, e.g., so that fingering the mail address gives the
>IP if the user is online; I think some ISPs have this), or you need a system
>like the ICQ server (or an IRC network, or you could even use (automatic)
>mail to transport IP addresses). The problem, I guess, is that there simply
>isn't a general way to find dynamic IPs. ICQ tries to offer a way; but it's
>not general, and it's proprietary...
>

I have looked at all these options and there isn't really anything I can do
other than use something like the dynamic domain servece from http://www.ml.org
which could be a viable option for the dynamic IP issue.

>>As for privacy and security I am not really too concerned, but probably
>should
>>be.
>
>Probably. Just think of the number of security holes found in MSIE and
>Netscape...
>

Well I mean't about my Linux box being the subject of a Cracker attack.  On a
dynamic IP it shouldn't be much of a problem and as for someone eves droping on
my messages when using ICQ or some other sevice.   Well I don't use those for
anything I care if other people find out about.  PGP is for that :)

>>Also AOL just released a beta version of AIM, an ICQ like program.  There is
>a
>>java version out that works well in Linux.  Take a look at AOLs web page.
>
>It's not free either, I would assume...
>
>--
>-=- Rjs -=- rjs@spider.compart.fi, rjs@lloke.dna.fi
>
>

AIM is in free beta testing now.  I am sure there will be some fee in the fuure.

- -------------------------
E-Mail: Travis Cole <tcole@iname.com> -- <tcole@methow.com>
http://www.methow.com/~tcole -- Get my Public Key here
Date: 01-Aug-97
Time: 22:32:44
640Kb should be enough for anybody
                Bill Gates
- -------------------------
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3a
Charset: noconv

iQCVAwUBM+LKNGgYC2+RaorhAQGkWgQAjFTNF318saLWG3nhZiXsbbLHOcHIdFrR
fM1b1DXm/RJ+f2616Ss5G8mel4yJ1ActE1B6rbSr7uYvEL3CJhA0Oqv4lVB9vvSV
nghQQYt4Ji2XbJS/HFWPDB5lAKRUBrxxCfAFhwLrpxLujb11PNDhfGhcauLwn/ZO
/hzH7uQSXEg=
=nS7W
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-user-request@lists.debian.org . 
Trouble?  e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .
Reply to: