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

What's next Google? Dropping SMTP support?

eschnou.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 263 posts

Re: What's next Google? Dropping SMTP support?

#71

Post by capo »

CloudNine wrote: post #66
capo wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

GTalk is still as is. As for YouTube it is and always have been available on the web for windows phone. Microsoft in clear violation of Google's TOS used undocumented APIs and stripped ads from YouTube and now they have the audacity to say that they would have complied by the TOS if it suited them better. Please take your anti-Google (probably Microsoft sponsored astroturf) elsewhere: https://news.ycombinator.com/sub…

Can we comment on the stories and not the commenters themselves? What is this? A witch hunt?

You don't think it's relevant? Microsoft is paying millions to run anti-Google attack ads and smear campaigns everywhere, it's not unthinkable that they would hire astroturf to roam sites like HN, so for the sake of the health of this community they ought to be pointed out.

Re: What's next Google? Dropping SMTP support?

#72

Post by recoiledsnake »

codeka wrote: post #67
recoiledsnake wrote: post #47

Wait, so Google is dropping XMPP support because Outlook.com is supporting it to allow Gtalk users to chat on Outlook.com, so in order to perpetuate the GMail/GTalk lock-in by caging the Gtalk chat users to GMail, they're dropping standards support and killing access to all XMPP clients in existence including non-Microsoft ones? And they announce this right when Microsoft spent all the time and effort to allow Outloo…

> That sounds unbelievable It's unbelievable because it's not true. They're dropping XMPP federation , which outlook.com never used anyway. What outlook.com has done is they've added an XMPP client that lets you connect to Google's servers in order to send chat messages to GTalk users. That's still going to work. Also note that what Microsoft have done is allow outlook.com users to communicate with GTalk users, but n…

This thread says otherwise.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5714681

Re: What's next Google? Dropping SMTP support?

#73

Post by capo »

donalmacc wrote: post #70
capo wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

GTalk is still as is. As for YouTube it is and always have been available on the web for windows phone. Microsoft in clear violation of Google's TOS used undocumented APIs and stripped ads from YouTube and now they have the audacity to say that they would have complied by the TOS if it suited them better. Please take your anti-Google (probably Microsoft sponsored astroturf) elsewhere: https://news.ycombinator.com/sub…

Eh... https://news.ycombinator.com/threads?id=capo Something about the pot calling the kettle black? You don't work for google by any chance do you?

Nope. You just joined to ask me that?

Re: What's next Google? Dropping SMTP support?

#74

Post by jfb »

UnoriginalGuy wrote: post #28
laumars wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

SMTP is worse than plain text. It's plain text and base64 (which increases file sizes by ~30%). It's a horrid protocol, but sadly it's what we're currently stuck with. But this is all moot as the article is about XMPP, WebDav and RSS. The SMTP headline is nothing more than clickbait.

People keep banging on about "plain text, plain text" what is wrong with plain text? And what is wrong with SMTP? Also email attachments can be binary encoded, base64 is just one option. People are free to say that SMTP is "bad" or "broken" but they have to say exactly why that is the case. And "there are multiple different implementations" is a pretty poor justification, as a SMTP replacement would likely have the s…

I'm interested in djb's IM2000 [1] proposal. Change the underlying model from a postal service one; adapt the infrastructure to the use cases. "Plain text" is not the problem with SMTP.

[1] http://cr.yp.to/im2000.html

Re: What's next Google? Dropping SMTP support?

#75

Post by wslh »

recoiledsnake wrote: post #47

Wait, so Google is dropping XMPP support because Outlook.com is supporting it to allow Gtalk users to chat on Outlook.com, so in order to perpetuate the GMail/GTalk lock-in by caging the Gtalk chat users to GMail, they're dropping standards support and killing access to all XMPP clients in existence including non-Microsoft ones? And they announce this right when Microsoft spent all the time and effort to allow Outloo…

> I guess open standards don't work when you're the guy trying to lock in users.

That's obvious for Google too. They don't open source their search engine (or even Google Reader!). They open source a browser and an operating system to sell other stuff. For Google open source is a weapon.

Re: What's next Google? Dropping SMTP support?

#76

Post by reidrac »

Shooti wrote: post #54
reidrac wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's for the new Hangouts service. If you can keep using XMPP with your Gmail account, then it's not that terrible. I don't know if it's a forced replacement. We may need to wait for Google's announcement.

"Not federated support, but supports interop with XMPP clients. Meaning you can continue to use XMPP clients to log in to Google Talk and those messages will interop with folks on Hangouts." https://plus.google.com/107968525907303243288/posts/HFe3W7A9... So Google Talk will continue to live on (which allows them to implement some sort of server side functionality which converts a Gtalk message to a Hangout message wh…

Thanks for the info!

EDIT: well, not really good news as they kill the federated support.

Re: What's next Google? Dropping SMTP support?

#77

Post by recoiledsnake »

capo wrote: post #73
donalmacc wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Eh... https://news.ycombinator.com/threads?id=capo Something about the pot calling the kettle black? You don't work for google by any chance do you?

Nope. You just joined to ask me that?

And I don't work for Microsoft, never worked for them or any affiliates nor own their stock or ever owned it and the closest that I know I was ever to any MS employee was when I was interviewing in Seattle at Amazon for a C++/Linux position.

Now, can we get on with the discussion instead of trying to derail it by ad hominem attacks?

Re: What's next Google? Dropping SMTP support?

#78

Post by iamshs »

capo wrote: post #60
recoiledsnake wrote: post #47

Wait, so Google is dropping XMPP support because Outlook.com is supporting it to allow Gtalk users to chat on Outlook.com, so in order to perpetuate the GMail/GTalk lock-in by caging the Gtalk chat users to GMail, they're dropping standards support and killing access to all XMPP clients in existence including non-Microsoft ones? And they announce this right when Microsoft spent all the time and effort to allow Outloo…

GTalk is still as is. As for YouTube it is and always have been available on the web for windows phone. Microsoft in clear violation of Google's TOS used undocumented APIs and stripped ads from YouTube and now they have the audacity to say that they would have complied by the TOS if it suited them better. Please take your anti-Google (probably Microsoft sponsored astroturf) elsewhere: https://news.ycombinator.com/sub…

Except, Microsoft did not strip ads from the videos. They said yesterday that they will be happy to serve ads if Google lets them access. And please, let the legal departments decide if it is a clear violation or not. Do not take a decision on your own.

I think you are the one who is astro-turfing here, if i apply the finger pointing criteria to you too. It is better if you reply to the argument leaving your personal preferences neatly tucked in.

Re: What's next Google? Dropping SMTP support?

#79

Post by thoughtcriminal »

Stop relying on Google for everything. Stop building things on Google. No company should have such a big impact on your life and society as a whole.

Several months ago I moved everything to the Microsoft ecosystem. In some ways its trading one taskmaster for another, but if we don't exercise our freedom of choice in the marketplace we soon won't have a choice.

Re: What's next Google? Dropping SMTP support?

#80

Post by UnoriginalGuy »

laumars wrote: post #64
UnoriginalGuy wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Well it's not exactly secure, for one thing. No more or less secure than HTTP/HTTPS. In fact exactly as secure as... >base64 is a method for encoding binary. You cannot send raw binary other ASCII - which is why base64 is used in SMTP. http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3030 http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2045 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MIME#Content-Transfer-Encoding >Actually I have given a long list of reasons every t…

> No more or less secure than HTTP/HTTPS. In fact exactly as secure as... HTTPS is end to end encryption. In the instances that SMTP traffic is encrypted, it's only node to node. So SMTPS is less secure than HTTPS. > http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3030 It's still not /the/ standard though, just /a/ standard; and one that's not particularly well supported in my experience. Most of the SMTP servers I've dealt with have…

> HTTPS is end to end encryption. In the instances that SMTP traffic is encrypted, it's only node to node. So in this instance SMTPS is less secure than HTTPS.

Sorry, not following you. HTTPS and SMTPS are both end to end encryption schemes. In fact they both use SSL in a similar way to secure traffic.

> It's still not /the/ standard though, just /a/ standard; and one that's not particularly well supported in my experience.

Really? Strange. I transmit binary data every day over email and I've never had an issue with a recipient not receiving it.

Which mail server and version in particular are you having issues with?

In general almost all of the "big names" in mail servers support more than just base64 as standard.

> yes, but those response codes are rarely transmitted back up the stack

I'm looking in my mail server logs right now, and am seeing a response code from a third party server for every email we forward. Our mail server then determines what to do with each code, and I can manually add additional handlers (e.g. code XXX do THIS, code YYY do THAT).

> I know SMTP isn't designed to be real time. But there's absolutely no reason why e-mails shouldn't be real time in the modern world.

Cost is a reason. Delivery assurance is another (e.g. if it fails to deliver the first time, do you retry for hours or just give up?). The fact that some clients are still on slow/off-line connections is a very good reason (e.g. phones that come in and out of cellular range, people on dial-up, people out in the middle of nowhere who get internet for an hour once a week, etc).

Post reply on HN