Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Google Hangouts 4.0: now simpler, faster, more beautiful

googleblog.blogspot.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 110 posts

Re: Google Hangouts 4.0: now simpler, faster, more beautiful

#21

Post by feld »

Lx1oG-AWb6h_ZG0 wrote: post #10
Zikes wrote: post #5

The only features I want are setting availability status and getting online notifications for contacts. IMs have had those features for decades, and contrary to Google's narrow worldview not everybody is online and available 24/7.

This post is about the android app. How do you define "online" when you're on a phone with a data connection, an extremely common use case for this scenario? (Or rather, what makes someone "offline" here?) Maybe it's better to track whether the user is busy or free-to-interrupt, which I think is what Google is already doing. (I believe there is also an option to broadcast if you're on your phone or your desktop, alth…

Has the phone been sleeping / screen off / locked for a long time? Probably "offline" or something else describes this better.

Is user actively using their phone? "online"

It's simple. IM clients have figured this out years ago.

Re: Google Hangouts 4.0: now simpler, faster, more beautiful

#22

Post by Aldo_MX »

izacus wrote: post #7

Of course, I still have to run Chrome just for a slow and terrible browser interface on the desktop. Which was a major annoyance (especially since for some reason using Safari extends battery life for a huge amount) that caused me to switch to Telegram.

I don't mind a Chrome App for a first iteration, but I completely mind when it's the excuse to neglect development on the desktop platform.

Another example could be Authy.

Re: Google Hangouts 4.0: now simpler, faster, more beautiful

#23

Post by izacus »

StavrosK wrote: post #17
izacus wrote: post #7

Of course, I still have to run Chrome just for a slow and terrible browser interface on the desktop. Which was a major annoyance (especially since for some reason using Safari extends battery life for a huge amount) that caused me to switch to Telegram.

Why not use Pidgin or Adium?

The convenience of being able to use several devices (laptop, tablet, phone) to seamlessly continue conversations is pretty much the main reason I like these services.

Pidgin and Adium do not support (transferrable) chat history and do not show messages when I'm offline, which is a huge usability hit. Especially when people talking on the other side expect that the messages are visible to you even if you're not immediately online.

Re: Google Hangouts 4.0: now simpler, faster, more beautiful

#24

Post by Navarr »

endtime wrote: post #13
Osiris wrote: post #8

* It's about time. My wife complains about getting random SMS messages that turn out to be replies to group texts. She started giving out her direct cell number instead of her Google Voice number because of this problem. Hopefully with this she'll be able to use Voice exclusively.

I've been dogfooding this for a couple weeks, and I am very happy to be able to say that that feature (finally!) works, at least for me. Used to drive me nuts.

Downloaded the APK - won't let me create MMS when set to always send from my Google Voice, and when set to send from "Last number" group MMS is created with my actual #.

I'm praying that it's a server side flag and not a case of Google Apps Free users getting skewered somehow.

Re: Google Hangouts 4.0: now simpler, faster, more beautiful

#26

Post by cfallin »

izacus wrote: post #23
StavrosK wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why not use Pidgin or Adium?

The convenience of being able to use several devices (laptop, tablet, phone) to seamlessly continue conversations is pretty much the main reason I like these services. Pidgin and Adium do not support (transferrable) chat history and do not show messages when I'm offline, which is a huge usability hit. Especially when people talking on the other side expect that the messages are visible to you even if you're not immed…

FWIW, conversations originated from Pidgin do show up in chat history in the Hangouts interface. Or at least that's been my experience. I agree that sync in the other direction (to Pidgin), and support for offline messages, would be really useful.

I did see a reverse-engineered Hangouts client at some point; does anyone know if this works well enough?

Re: Google Hangouts 4.0: now simpler, faster, more beautiful

#28

Post by shmerl »

Does it support WebRTC phone calling from the browser?

Hangouts annoys me for a number of reasons however. And the biggest one is the fact that Google used it as a pretense to kill their federated XMPP service. This literally cut more than a half of my contacts off (i.e. those who use Google), because they don't accept bugs for enabling server to server encryption anymore.

I don't remember being upset about Google messing up things more than that.

UDPATE: Nah, still no WebRTC. Hangouts - fail.

    Hangouts needs the Google Talk plugin to make calls.

Re: Google Hangouts 4.0: now simpler, faster, more beautiful

#29

Post by zzleeper »

izacus wrote: post #7

Of course, I still have to run Chrome just for a slow and terrible browser interface on the desktop. Which was a major annoyance (especially since for some reason using Safari extends battery life for a huge amount) that caused me to switch to Telegram.

Are there any limitations I should be aware of before trying to switch to Telegram?

Re: Google Hangouts 4.0: now simpler, faster, more beautiful

#30

Post by buckbova »

feld wrote: post #21
Lx1oG-AWb6h_ZG0 wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This post is about the android app. How do you define "online" when you're on a phone with a data connection, an extremely common use case for this scenario? (Or rather, what makes someone "offline" here?) Maybe it's better to track whether the user is busy or free-to-interrupt, which I think is what Google is already doing. (I believe there is also an option to broadcast if you're on your phone or your desktop, alth…

Has the phone been sleeping / screen off / locked for a long time? Probably "offline" or something else describes this better. Is user actively using their phone? "online" It's simple. IM clients have figured this out years ago.

> Has the phone been sleeping / screen off / locked for a long time?

Mine has been sleeping for an hour, but I'm right next to it and would answer an IM if sent.

So no, not so simple.

Post reply on HN