Coffeehouse Thread

19 posts

Forum Read Only

This forum has been made read only by the site admins. No new threads or comments can be added.

The state of IM in Windows

Back to Forum: Coffeehouse
  • User profile image
    W3bbo

    I hear that Windows Messenger is being replaced with Office Communicator and MSN Messenger for Corporate and Consumers respectivly.

    Slight catch though:

    MSN Messenger is obviously aimed at consumers, home users, and teenagers who've forgotten their latest dosage of ritalin. The rest of us don't like adverts forced in our faces.

    And Office Communicator requires Live Communications Server, which costs a bomb.

    Well I've got a question... what are the "power users" much like myself meant to use? (Since the EULA does say we're not allowed to use Trillian)

    Are there any plans to release Office Communicator as a standalone product that doesn't require LCS yet at the same time doesn't force cras consumerisation?

    Or would I have to "illegitimately" use Trillian? Wink

    And one more thing... I trust things like Remote Assistance won't require a host process like msmsgs.exe in Longhorn?

  • User profile image
    Tyler Brown

    Yes, I would like to see a more professional Instant Messaging application coming from Microsoft. One that is much more like Office Communicator but without requiring Live Communications Server (which I still haven't found out how to install - I've got a version for testing Office Communicator). I don't care for the advertisements, nudges, winks, and all the other things to try and grab the attention of your contacts, much like a photographer trying to take a picture of a young toddler. Give me something professional looking with some real presence awareness and power user features!!!

  • User profile image
    Cider

    Do you actually need LCS for Office Communicator?  I was under the impression that it, and any post-4.7 version of Windows Messenger, just had the ability to link to LCS as one of the protocols built in.  I haven't got round to trying it yet, mind.

    I do think, though, that LCS is a brilliant product and I'm desperately trying to persuade my boss to let me pilot a project to get this installed on a 20K-25K users installation.  I think it could be a bigger impact than e-mail.

  • User profile image
    Tyler Brown

    I believe that LCS is required for Office Communicator. I installed Office Communicator on a computer before I had attempted to install LCS, and it asked me for the location of the server.

  • User profile image
    msemack

    Let me get this straight...

    You don't want advertisements in your IM client, but you don't want to pay for an IM service/server?

  • User profile image
    manickernel

    I would love to pay for LCS, if it was reasonably priced. Or I had the negotiating clout that Cider does to get it reasonalbly priced.

  • User profile image
    tobias

    Microsoft should buy Trillian and incorporate the client into Windows!
    MSN, ICQ, Yahoo, AIM, all in one software which works great by the way!

  • User profile image
    pikatung

    tobias wrote:
    Microsoft should buy Trillian and incorporate the client into Windows!
    MSN, ICQ, Yahoo, AIM, all in one software which works great by the way!

    If I'm not mistaken, Microsoft originally did include AIM support in MSN Messenger, but AOL threw such a fuss they eventually backed down.

  • User profile image
    Tyler Brown

    And if I am not mistaken, you can add AIM contacts to Office Communicator.

    I would just like a professional instant messaging application that has no advertisements, and that has a set of features that power-users are looking for. I don't believe in having to purchase Live Communications Server, even if it was reasonably prices, just to be able to use this piece of software. I can understand how LCS is required for Office Communicator, as it's targeted at corporate users, however a version for power users would be greatly appreciated by many.

    As for expecting it for free. There are many things that Microsoft provides for free, with support, and which they could technically charge for but don't. The .NET framework is a big one. And I'm sure that Avalon and Indigo will most likely be free of charge.

  • User profile image
    W3bbo

    msemack wrote:
    You don't want advertisements in your IM client, but you don't want to pay for an IM service/server?


    Windows Messenger is a freeware IM client with no advertisements. (Except if you enable the "MSN Add-in" but I never turn that thing on, since I don't use Hotmail)

  • User profile image
    Sven Groot

    I wouldn't mind paying a few bucks to get an ad-free MSN Messenger.

  • User profile image
    W3bbo

    Sven Groot wrote:
    I wouldn't mind paying a few bucks to get an ad-free MSN Messenger.


    Define "advertisement"

    MSN Messenger is like a "hub" of all MSN-Related consumer services. There's the "MSN Today" link, the "My Spaces" link, the link to the "enhancement shop", the adverts for MSN Music, and so on.

    there's a fine line between "useful link to an integrated service" and "advert for another division of the parent company"

    I'd prefer it if MSN Messenger had an option to turn these links off instead.

  • User profile image
    Michael Griffiths

    W3bbo wrote:

    I'd prefer it if MSN Messenger had an option to turn these links off instead.


    Yeah, it does.

    "This is a shared computer so don't display my tabs".

  • User profile image
    W3bbo

    Michael Griffiths wrote:
    W3bbo wrote:
    I'd prefer it if MSN Messenger had an option to turn these links off instead.


    Yeah, it does.

    "This is a shared computer so don't display my tabs".


    There isn't a:

    "This is a computer used by someone who can see behind your shallow, stereotyping advertisements, so don't display any 'buy buy buy more features you can get for free on other IM clients anyway" links

    Nor

    "This computer is used by someone with an attention span longer than half a second, so don't give me an oversimplified UI nor buttons to services I don't use"

  • User profile image
    Stebet

    tobias wrote:
    Microsoft should buy Trillian and incorporate the client into Windows!
    MSN, ICQ, Yahoo, AIM, all in one software which works great by the way!


    Uhh no thanks. Trillian might be ok for english users but since i'm Icelandic i use characters such as "þ" "æ" "ð" and "ö" a lot. Trilliand wreaks havoc with usernames that have non-english letters in them and there is NO WAY i'm renaming every single user on my contact list.

  • User profile image
    BHpaddock

    Have you tried it recently?  I was under the impression that they fixed those problems in 3.0.  But I could be wrong about that.

  • User profile image
    Alexm

    I was under the impression that MS would ship three products; MSN Messenger for consumers, Office Communicator for corporates and Windows Messenger as the cutdown featured IM for Windows.

    As to cross service compatibility as stated before MS tried to incorporate th AOL network but where continually blocked. Now they have a license from Yahoo and AOL for there Office Communicator platform - this license does not cover the Messengers (MSN and Windows) so it is unlikely that we'll see it soon for those clients. I assume Tillian is still working by reverse engineering the AOL protocols and providing updates as AOL breaks compatibility (this used to be quite common I  don't know if this is still the case).

  • User profile image
    Tyler Brown

    If Microsoft has a license from AOL for Office Communicator, and AOL is continually making changes to break Trillian's compatibility, isn't this going to be a real pain for IT departments in corporations using Office Communicator? A new update each month to deploy to thousands of workstations, just so that Trillian won't be able to contact AIM contacts? Seems unacceptable to me.

Conversation locked

This conversation has been locked by the site admins. No new comments can be made.