Live data from Hacker News

Windows Live Messenger supports XMPP

windowsteamblog.com

1–10 of 41 posts

Re: Windows Live Messenger supports XMPP

#2
10 i = i + 15

20 PRINT "Bible, Line:", i

30 IF i > 99999 THEN i = 0: GOTO 10

40 IF INKEY$ = "" THEN 10

50 PRINT "Bible, Line:", i

God says... Line 16755

destroy them with a mighty destruction, until they be destroyed.

7:24 And he shall deliver their kings into thine hand, and thou shalt destroy their name from under heaven: there shall no man be able to stand before thee, until thou have destroyed them.

7:25 The graven images of their gods shall ye burn with fire: thou shalt not desire the silver or gold that is on them, nor take it unto thee, lest thou be snared therin: for it is an abomination to the LORD thy God.

7:26 Neither shalt thou bring an abomination into thine house, lest thou be a cursed thing like it: but thou shalt utterly detest it, and thou shalt utterly abhor it; for it is a cursed thing.

Re: Windows Live Messenger supports XMPP

#3
I wonder if this is because Microsoft is becoming better and better at embracing open source when it sees a business advantage to do so, or if it's simply a last-ditch effort to keep Messenger alive as more and more people use it less frequently or not at all because the likes of smartphones, apps, and Facebook (Chat) are becoming more widely adopted.

Re: Windows Live Messenger supports XMPP

#4
It still looks a bit rough, e.g "Roster management is not supported".

I wish it would not end up being just a client concern but also impact server-side at some point thanks to XMPP federation. Google Talk does federation but last time I checked Facebook Chat did not. Such a shame.

Re: Windows Live Messenger supports XMPP

#6
post #3

I wonder if this is because Microsoft is becoming better and better at embracing open source when it sees a business advantage to do so, or if it's simply a last-ditch effort to keep Messenger alive as more and more people use it less frequently or not at all because the likes of smartphones, apps, and Facebook (Chat) are becoming more widely adopted.

Doesn't this basically summarize Microsoft's entire business strategy these days? Wait until some piece of tech is firmly entrenched, then move to implement your own instance, more often than not with an enterprise angle. More often than not infuriatingly incompatible unless your entire stack is Microsoft.

This happened with iPhone, cloud hosting, touch/tablet OS's; the list is endless. The only surprising thing is it took them this long to realize that Live Messenger needed to get onboard with Jabber if it's going to survive.

Re: Windows Live Messenger supports XMPP

#7
I was involved with the effort [to avoid] standardizing instant messaging back in 1999-2000. One of the products the company I was with at the time was offering was an instant messenger (with a twist that is not important for this story), so we tried to support all the prevailing protocols of the time (AIM, ICQ, MSN Messenger, Yahoo Messenger, PowWow, IRC, ... I don't even remember). And I was eagerly following the instant messaging standardisation effort at the IETF.

What became painfully clear to me after a while was that the big guys (AOL=AIM+ICQ, MS, YAHOO) who were running the show were all actively making sure that no standard would be decided upon. It was all dressed up in technical arguments, so it didn't look that way, but it was. Perhaps the engineers participating in the discussion weren't even aware -- it's easy to miss the big picture -- but as an outsider it was painfully obvious that the effective mandate that was given by the respective companies to their representative was to NOT standardize anything.

What ended up being the IETF standard was Jabber -- which was way too complicated and wasteful. And the reason it ended up that way was that while the big guys were avoiding standardisation, someone just put out an open source / open spec product which -- with all its deficiencies -- eventually worked well enough to gain non-trivial adoption, including by the IETF. And all of that happened awhile after the instant messaging working group was disbanded because of "irreconcilable differences" -- those differences being that every participant would only accept a standard that forced others to concede defeat and implement that participant's existing system (always in a way that limited everyone except said participant, of course)

Watching those discussions was an eye opener about how things supposedly work (and even look that way on the surface), and how they really work.

EDIT: REMOVED claim that Jabber/XMPP is still too complicated. I'm sure it still has 90% bandwidth and parsing overhead compared to comparable protocols (unless it's become backward incompatible), but standards have changed, and I guess that's no longer considered wasteful or bad engineering practice.

EDIT: ADDED: Just to be clear, this is an anecdote about the distant past (as in, 12 years ago now!). I have not been following Jabber/XMPP closely since 2004 and not at all since 2006 or so. Back in the day it was ill-and-under specified, ridiculously chatty (as in >90% overhead before you count TCP headers, both in bandwidth and parsing). What is acceptable has changed since then (no one cares about 95% overhead anymore), and for all I know all the kinks have been worked out.

And for the good parts - it is out there, there are multiple server and client implementation, and it works. That's a thousand times better than the product I was working on at the time, which was proprietary closed source, and though it was super efficient in every way, was discontinued and is no longer available.

Re: Windows Live Messenger supports XMPP

#8
post #3

I wonder if this is because Microsoft is becoming better and better at embracing open source when it sees a business advantage to do so, or if it's simply a last-ditch effort to keep Messenger alive as more and more people use it less frequently or not at all because the likes of smartphones, apps, and Facebook (Chat) are becoming more widely adopted.

I'm guessing it's the former. In the past 2 weeks I've heard MS submit a patch to Redis, they've helped bring Node.js to Windows, Phil Haack joined GitHub primarily to bring C# into that open source community's limelight,...

and now this. Seems to me like someone's been pushing the open source agenda within Microsoft.

Re: Windows Live Messenger supports XMPP

#9
post #7

I was involved with the effort [to avoid] standardizing instant messaging back in 1999-2000. One of the products the company I was with at the time was offering was an instant messenger (with a twist that is not important for this story), so we tried to support all the prevailing protocols of the time (AIM, ICQ, MSN Messenger, Yahoo Messenger, PowWow, IRC, ... I don't even remember). And I was eagerly following the i…

Interesting insights you give here. Do you still think XMPP/Jabber is too complicated?

Re: Windows Live Messenger supports XMPP

#10
post #4

It still looks a bit rough, e.g "Roster management is not supported" . I wish it would not end up being just a client concern but also impact server-side at some point thanks to XMPP federation. Google Talk does federation but last time I checked Facebook Chat did not. Such a shame.

Apparently Messenger does link with Facebook and Yahoo, but I don't see anything indicating a general federation.

It occurs to me that IM services have established a twisted, mutant, incompletely-routed version of an IRC network amongst themselves. And as far as I can tell, they still haven't gotten group chat right...

Post reply on HN