Decentralizing Trillian

CrazedGeek wrote: post #4

chatmasta wrote: post #2

Who else is thinking "woah, Trillian still exists?!"

Not me. Trillian's iOS IM client is one of the few that's any good.

Indeed, especially if you use it in combination with their desktop applications (win or mac), because the "continuous client" functionality makes switching between devices fluid.

Re: Decentralizing Trillian

#6

Post by Edvik » Wed, Jun 12, 2013, 5:05 PM UTC

chatmasta wrote: post #2

Who else is thinking "woah, Trillian still exists?!"

the windows client is equally excellent, and it's still the only IM platform (to my knowledge) that supports inline image sending, which I've gotten very used to. Plus the windows version handles IRC elegantly enough.

Re: Decentralizing Trillian

#7

Post by Pwntastic » Wed, Jun 12, 2013, 5:07 PM UTC

chatmasta wrote: post #2

Who else is thinking "woah, Trillian still exists?!"

I use Trillian as my primary client, and have been for a while. Their newest builds sync all of my chats across protocols across clients, which is nice as I frequently switch between my Mac and PC for various things and it's nice to have my chats all sync'd

Re: Decentralizing Trillian

#8

Post by acomar » Wed, Jun 12, 2013, 5:08 PM UTC

I must be missing something, because it sounds like they're creating one more IM protocol and claiming it will solve protocol fragmentation. If they want an open and federated protocol, why not back XMPP?

Re: Decentralizing Trillian

#9

Post by frenchy » Wed, Jun 12, 2013, 5:10 PM UTC

acomar wrote: post #8

I must be missing something, because it sounds like they're creating one more IM protocol and claiming it will solve protocol fragmentation. If they want an open and federated protocol, why not back XMPP?

Indeed, I was expecting that they'd come up with a solid reason why XMPP couldn't do this. I don't see how IMPP is really any different.

Re: Decentralizing Trillian

#10

Post by JeffJenkins » Wed, Jun 12, 2013, 5:15 PM UTC

Obligatory: http://xkcd.com/927/