Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Yahoo Messenger Blocks Outside IM Clients

Comments Filter:
  • nah (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 27, 2003 @03:38AM (#7070642)
    More like "great way to stop giving the service away for free to freeloaders who generate no ad revenue" am i rite?
    • Re:nah (Score:4, Informative)

      by Xuli (98764) on Saturday September 27, 2003 @04:34AM (#7070820) Homepage
      Was Yahoo not one of the founding members of the IMUnified group, whose sole purpose was to unify with goliaths such as MSFT [yahoo.com] to fight the tyranny of AOL? Aforementioned tyranny being comprised of AOL blocking [com.com] outise clients from accessing their users.

      What goes around comes around. Out of protest I am planning to use my AOL IM exclusively indefinitely unitil this is solved.

      Starting with a work-related mandate to use Yahoo's IM service, I've since become quite a "Sticky" Yahoo visitor. My calendar is linked with their service, I forward a number of mail addresses there - I generate them money!

      How, you ask? I am given, at the least (counting calendar, email, and news) three opportunities per visit to interact with Yahoo's advertisers and sponsors. This is a direct result of being a Yahoo IM user, and discovering how their other services integrated with their messaging client. While I cannot comment on MSN, and I don't dream of endorsing AOL for myriad reasons, I feel that Yahoo's services were robust enough to keep a technically demanding user such as myself attracted to the brand. In interacting with memebers of Yahoo's chat community, it seems to be the case that moderate to heavy users of it's chat/IM service also quickly adopt other Yahoo services. This equates to more unique pageviews per day from IM/chat users than off-the-street users and perusers. Yahoo IM users, on average, tend to be loyal out of necessity - not necessity becasue they are in any way indentured to format, design or interoperability to Yahoo, but becasue things "just work."

      This move, to isolate IM users who may be using a different client (is it even reasonable to assume users will be happy with just one?) services is tragic. Yahoo has clearly missed the point that IM users are not IM users alone, but rather comprise some of the best audiences for exposure to their ads, and therefore, a direct path to revenues.

      This move, to block users who've already made a conscious choice to use other Yahoo services is a faux pas, to say the least.
      • Re:nah (Score:5, Informative)

        by Peyna (14792) on Saturday September 27, 2003 @06:02AM (#7071034) Homepage
        If you read the news.com article cited further up you'll realize that Yahoo states they have every intent with working with 3rd-party clients, and that they fully support a standards initiative.

        They're basically just saying "Hey, we're putting this upgrade out there, and it's probably gonna break your client. You might want to talk to us and we'll tell you how to fix it."

        • by artemis67 (93453) on Saturday September 27, 2003 @08:41AM (#7071406)
          Coinciding with the upgrade, Yahoo said it would likely disable access to outside IM services such as Trillian. Yahoo set a deadline of Wednesday for its forced upgrade and its intention to disconnect Trillian.

          This is most definitely an attempt on Yahoo's part to block third-party IM clients.

          Nowhere in the article does it state that Yahoo still supports a standards initiative, or that it has any intent to work with third parties.
        • Re:nah (Score:2, Funny)

          by Grumpendorfer (22994)
          Right, and OJ is hard at work looking for the real killer(s)...
          • OJ is a private citizen, why should he be out finding the "real killers" (if any exist), isn't that a job for the LAPD?
            • Re:nah (Score:3, Informative)

              by aminorex (141494)
              Methinks you've been watching too much TV.
              The function of the police is not to protect
              you. That is your responsibility. The function
              of the police is to whack people down.
      • Re:nah (Score:2, Informative)

        by Mattb90 (666532)
        Well, I would say that IMunified has fallen by the wayside a bit. Try heading to IMunified.org (where its official website once was) and you'll get this: - a symbol that MS, Yahoo and the others have probably lost interest in the scheme. [registerapi.com]
    • by CGP314 (672613)
      Yes Dad.
    • Re:nah (Score:2, Informative)

      by hetta (414084)
      Actually, the linux client doesn't have any ads. Here: YIM for *nix [yahoo.com]
    • Re:nah (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Macgruder (127971)
      You have a point.

      But the question I have is this:

      Is Yahoo! (and other IM servers) cutting off their own feet but blocking access to Trillian?

      I use Trillian extensively, and have been doing so for two year. So do all of my friends. 55-60 people.

      But if Yahoo! blocks Trillian, we'll just switch to another service. Most often I use MSN, but I can easily switch to ICQ or AOL if MSN starts blocking Trillian.

      So, there's 50 users that Yahoo! lost, how many more times will this scenario be duplicated across
      • Re:nah (Score:5, Insightful)

        by darien (180561) <darien AT gmail DOT com> on Saturday September 27, 2003 @09:53AM (#7071658)
        So, there's 50 users that Yahoo! lost, how many more times will this scenario be duplicated across the planet?

        Yes, but if these people are using Trillian, they weren't the sort of users Yahoo! wants anyway. They were using the service, but not generating any revenue to pay for it (principally by not looking at ads). Of course, Trillian users boosted Y!'s market share, and their presence made it a more attractive choice to new users, some of whom would use the official client, see the ads and generate revenue. But Y! seems to have concluded that letting Trillian users use their network for free doesn't attract enough new users of the official client to be cost-effective; so why would they encourage it?

        I think Y! know exactly what they're doing. Depending on your long-term strategy, it can be better to have forty thousand customers making you a tiny profit than forty million who cost you money.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 27, 2003 @03:39AM (#7070649)
    I use Microsloths IM as well and it required me to download an update when I logged on tonight, and it wouldn't let me on without updating... and it probably sent back the illegal CD key I use for my copy of XP. OOPS did I say that!?
    • by Anonymous Coward
      The CD key isn't breaking copyright law. The copy of XP might be. Using a non-original key with a legitimate copy of XP may still be illegal due to the DMCA (circumvention of copyprotection), but in many countries using a fake key to activate a legitimate copy of a program is perfectly legal.
    • You and millions of others are probably half the reasons worms spread so fast. Microsoft thought they were being clever by having a real serial checker built into sp1 but sp1 fixed alot of holes. Without sp1 other patches don't want to install from Microsoft's update site (not to say that they WON'T but the site doesn't like you skipping it first).

      So basically Microsoft helps prevent piracy (sorta, any keygen and serial changer can work miracles) while at the same time ensuring the spread of 0wn3d machin
      • Yep - that's why I put a lock on my front door- to help prevent crime. A lot of people say that I'm just worried about my stuff being ripped off, but that's not true! I am passionately committed to whole crime prevetion thing.

        Trouble is, Microsoft want to be the ones that put the lock on my house. For my protection, obviously. And they'll keep a copy just in case. And so they can let themselves whenever they want to. Just to check my security. And make sure I've not pinched anything. And maybe redecorate

  • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 27, 2003 @03:41AM (#7070658)
    Yup, I hope they find a backdoor, because I can't use either my trillian on windows and gaim on linux with yahoo anymore.
    I wouldn't mind using the original Yahoo! client, however, I also have ICQ, MSN and AIM accounts that I run at the same time, so having four different big apps running at the same time is just not nice, takes space, cpu, memory and their interfaces are bloated and irrelevant for the thing I want to do: simple IM.
    This is why, I have to use Trillian or Gaim: simplicty, small interfaces, easy to have all contacts in the same place.
    If Yahoo or anyone else made their client to support all 4 protocols, I wouldn't have a problem using one of them instead of trillian or gaim. But until they do, I really need an integrated solution, not a mess on my desktop!
    • Hrmmm just checked trillian and notice I wasn't connected to Yahoo. Oddly enough it appears that my Yahoo configuration is suddenly missing, as in my user name and password are gone from the connection manager. I'm going to lose countless minutes of sleep on this one, the last time I sent/received amessage using my yahoo messenger account was months ago.
    • I grabbed the latest Gaim files from CVS [sourceforge.net] after the 24th, and I was back up and running with no problem at all. Thank you to all the Gaim developers for their hard work!
      • How can this be?

        From the site:
        You may have noticed that Yahoo has ceased working. The fix in 0.69 (of which (slightly broken) source packages are currently available) was not adaquate. We're working on the new authentication method now; hopefully it will be cracked soon.

        Dated: September 26th, 2003 - 1:55PM EDT
  • Their Network (Score:5, Insightful)

    by ultrabot (200914) on Saturday September 27, 2003 @03:42AM (#7070662)
    Well, it's their network so they can block anyone they want.

    If you don't like their rules (I don't), why don't create a free/open/documented IM network? Make it better than the commercial offerings, and people will come.

    How's Jabber doing these days, anyway?
    • People will come, but only the usual open source Slashdot lurkers. Most people use the other networks because those companies have the money to spend to spend on advertising.

      Then again, it wouldn't be ALL bad. No more AOLers anyways.

      • Re:Their Network (Score:5, Insightful)

        by DrEldarion (114072) on Saturday September 27, 2003 @04:59AM (#7070872)
        Most people are on those networks because one person initially went on. Then his friends went on because he was on. Then their frends went on because they were on, etc... and now nobody wants to change because all their friends use that network.

        -- Dr. Eldarion --
        • " Most people are on those networks because one person initially went on."

          I propose we hunt that guy down and kill him.

          What you've said is painfully true, coupled with the fact that you cant get most people to care about anything that doesnt have a noticable effect on them, and you have a bunch of mindless drones that are impossible to talk sense into.
        • However, stupid moves like this will only kill off Yahoo's service. I know very few people who used it as their primary messenger service - most used it through something like Trillian or Jabber because they knew one or two people on it, and didn't want to bother with the official YIM client. Now that they've blocked Trillian and Jabber and such, these people have no reason to stay - they can't talk with their friends on YIM anymore, so they might as well move to AIM.

          One of the main principles of the inte

    • by AftanGustur (7715) on Saturday September 27, 2003 @03:59AM (#7070716) Homepage


      Make it better than the commercial offerings, and people will come

      Welcome stranger, we hope your space travel to our planet has ben a pleasant one.

      Unfortunately, on our planet, things are not as simple as on yours. Here on Earth, companies don't hesitade to abuse their market position or enourmous wealth to block normal competition.

      It doesn't matter if you create the best mousetrap, as long as Micro$traps controls the market you will get nowhere. You can't even advertise your new trap, since Micro$traps will threaten the magazines to stop advertising in their paper if yours will get printed.

      Welcome to earth, we hope you will have a pleasant visit.

      • Re:Their Network (Score:5, Insightful)

        by ultrabot (200914) on Saturday September 27, 2003 @04:32AM (#7070814)
        Here on Earth, companies don't hesitade to abuse their market position or enourmous wealth to block normal competition.

        So we should just crawl into a hole and die?

        IM is not owned by any company yet, let alone MSFT. An Open alternative has a good position to beat the proprietary opposition, especially as it is quite divided already. Open Standards are the "in" thing right now.

        Wouldn't it be fabulous if various Corporate platforms (Notes, etc.) chose to use the Jabber protocol as the IM solution? Then everyone would be running Jabber clients already, and communicating with friends would be a natural extension of that activity. I took a look at the Jabber page, inspired by this article, and saw that they are co-operating with IETF to standardize the protocol... and therein lies the future.
        • So we should just crawl into a hole and die?

          No, but claiming that you will be sucessful simply by having the best product is total BS in today's environment.

          An Open alternative has a good position to beat the proprietary opposition, especially as it is quite divided already. Open Standards are the "in" thing right now.

          Tell that to the 600 pound gorilla who controlls the market by proprietary standards. The whole corporate world can't switch to a different system, risking that tomorrow they will no

        • Re:Their Network (Score:2, Insightful)

          IM is not owned by any company yet, let alone MSFT. An Open alternative has a good position to beat the proprietary opposition, especially as it is quite divided already. Open Standards are the "in" thing right now.

          Unfortunately, here on Earth, many people use IM to talk to non-geek friends who probably don't understand why you can't just use the "official client" anyway.

          Really, posts saying "it's their network, they can do as they please" piss me off. It's like saying, "hey, this company owns the roa

          • . I'd love to abandon MSN, but I can't without all my friends wondering why I don't talk to them anymore.

            Well, you might want to say that you can be reached in Jabber network. Then they should just add Jabber to trilian (why hasn't this been done already?) and voila, they could talk to you.

            I myself don't use Jabber, because my friends don't have accounts there (most use ICQ). But once people get burned enough times, they realize that an open standards based system that can't be taken away from them by a
      • Re:Their Network (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Motherfucking Shit (636021) on Saturday September 27, 2003 @05:52AM (#7070999) Journal
        It doesn't matter if you create the best mousetrap, as long as Micro$traps controls the market you will get nowhere. You can't even advertise your new trap, since Micro$traps will threaten the magazines to stop advertising in their paper if yours will get printed.
        ::cough:: bullshit [wired.com] ::cough::

        Wired plugged two independent IM apps, Trillian included, giving both of them positive reviews. Doth not Microsoft advertise in Wired? I don't have the print copy of that issue but I'd be seriously surprised if there was not a Microsoft advert in it.

        Where does KaZaA advertise? That's right, nowhere; they created a product that people like (as junky as it may be), so people use it, and tell their friends. When was the last time you were browsing a trade magazine and saw a full-page color ad for Apache? That's what I thought. Yet Apache is everywhere, even on Windows, even with numerous competitors.

        Open source/free/alternative software doesn't need to advertise. When it's good, its user base will take care of promotion and evangelizing.

        All that said, I don't really see any sort of open source IM initiative taking over. When it comes to IM, the fact is that people want to be on the same network as most or all of their friends. That means a centralized network (or at least a 100% interoperable collection of smaller networks), and that means a lot of bandwidth. Unless IBM, or Sun, or Redhat, or Google decide to pour a few spare millions into operating the infrastructure to power an open IM network, I don't see any "OSS friendly" company ever dominating the IM space.
    • Re:Their Network (Score:4, Informative)

      by slux (632202) on Saturday September 27, 2003 @04:43AM (#7070842)
      Jabber's doing great. The Jabber software foundation recently issued a press release [jabber.org] stating that Jabber has now passed ICQ in popularity.

      Also, they're on their way to becoming an actual internet standard.

      The last obstacles are file transfer (should be addressed soon) and actually getting people to migrate. When all your friends are on Yahoo for example, it's not that easy to switch. The gateways are supposed to help the problem, but of course right now the Jabber Yahoo gateway is not functioning either.
      • by Anonymous Coward
        Jabber has now passed ICQ in popularity

        Wow! That's amazing!

        Do you think that someday it will be even more popular than Gopher?

        Or -- maybe even -- more popular than Fingerd?
      • Jabber's doing great. The Jabber software foundation recently issued a press release stating that Jabber has now passed ICQ in popularity.

        Well, if you accept the JSFs estimate of 10 million Jabber users that is. I find that figure slightly optimistic.

    • Well, it's their network so they can block anyone they want.

      Does there exist an IM client which operates over P2P (peer to peer)? I think sending everything through a central corporate network is unnecessary. Why let them have all the control? And for what?
      • Re:Their Network (Score:2, Informative)

        The biggest problem with decentralized instant messenging is implementing buddy lists.
        Almost every peer2peer program uses some degree of centralization, excepting freenet and the original gnutella 0.4 (0.6 and later added ultrapeer support). Those networks which are completely decentralized are characterized by slow, unreliable searches, due to having to check every peer on the network for bootleg.mp3 (for example).
        Now, this problem can conceivably be worked around as long as you're searching for boot
  • Lies (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Henry V .009 (518000) on Saturday September 27, 2003 @03:42AM (#7070666) Journal
    This may or may not be a reasonable business decision, but do they really have to flat out lie to their customers?
    "If this has affected the way in which third parties interact with our service, it is merely a byproduct of our efforts to implement preventative measures to protect our users from potential spammers," Yahoo spokeswoman Mary Osako said.
    Who the hell decided that it was okay to to treat all your customers like I treat my retarded cousin Larry? I hope that they understand that a lot of us know and resent it when we are being lied to.
    • I don't think Larry appreciates how you treat him. Just think of this as payback on a cosmic level. Retards have feelings too!
    • Who the hell decided that it was okay to to treat all your customers like I treat my retarded cousin Larry?

      The Filthy Critic?! I thought you were dead! Good to have you back. : )
    • Re:Lies (Score:4, Informative)

      by yRabbit (625397) on Saturday September 27, 2003 @04:05AM (#7070741)
      Many "potential spammers" can, of course, just use their official clients. They could, if they wanted, take the time to send identical messages to people one at a time.

      If they're only concerned about spammers, and third-party clients allow you to spam, they just need to implement some anti-spam measures on the server side of things (read: Block users from sending too many messages out in some intelligent manner or another), not block out many people who'd like to talk to others on their network but use a client they might trust or like more.
      It sounds to me like they must not care about third party clients.. Why not simply tell the truth in their statement?
    • Re:Lies (Score:4, Funny)

      by Concerned Onlooker (473481) on Saturday September 27, 2003 @04:24AM (#7070797) Homepage Journal
      "If this has affected the way in which third parties interact with our service, it is merely a byproduct of our efforts to implement preventative measures to protect our users from potential spammers," Yahoo spokeswoman Mary Osako said.

      Well, irregardless she shouldn't have used the word "preventative." Don't misunderestimate me, I'm sure it gives the sentence an impactful feeling but it seemed unnecessary.

    • I dunno about you but I actually have a retarded cousin Larry (Lawrence) and we treat him like we treat anyone else in our family.

      Anyway, to get back on topic, it's Yahoo's service isn't it? And I'm pretty sure it's free (I could be wrong.) So what's wrong with them blocking other clients. Maybe their is a huge spam problem from third party clients (anyone can write a third party client that automates sending messages, it's very hard to use yahoo's own client to do that.) That's like being mad at AOL
    • Re:Lies (Score:4, Informative)

      by Awptimus Prime (695459) on Saturday September 27, 2003 @06:38AM (#7071123)
      Apparently you don't use the Yahoo! IM service. It's to the point I keep the client on a hidden virtual desktop since I don't like my boss walking by and seeing an IM from S3XXEEmama69 inviting me to view her webcam for $3.99/minute.

      Spam and abuse on Yahoo! chat has been out of control for years. Plus, it's not like any corporate entity can tell the full truth about anything these days. Instead of a few people going "OH HEEEEY! What about them ads you want me to see??", they simply address the most beneficial points to the public. That's because the masses can be a whiney, time consuming waste of time and resource if you give them too much information.

      Personally, I'd rather see Yahoo! make revenue off their small ads and keep their email and IM services free.

      As I read this thread, I find no end to my disappointment in people's attitude towards a free service trying to get back a little of what they've given you. I think this model should be praised for even existing. Think about it. Don't you remember the days before you broadband connections? You know, back when people silently got nickeled and dimed to death over any little perk or service for analog phone service (think $5.95/mo for CallerID!). Now you get the world at your finger tips, for free, but yet whine endlessly when they would like to show you and advertisement in an attempt to run their business.

      If half the people on this website got outside on occasion, they'd find there's a lot more to get upset about in the marketing industry than small non-popping up ads in an IM.

      Chew on these:

      - Gas stations that you can't even see in the windows because they are completely covered with beer, cigarette, and drink ads.

      - Billboards with ~1100 watts worth of lights blanket our cities and dot our countryside.

      - 6-10 minutes of TV commercials every 30 minutes. The same obnoxious commercials every break.

      - MTV

      - Spam

      - Advertising in public school campuses.

      - Companies scheming to put billboards in space.

      It's not like the people complaining are even being forced into using a service at all. Everyone can go back to IRC and deal with the service level of a free realtime chat network. You know, smurfers, script kiddies, etc.

      I got nothing, so I'll be quiet now. ;-)
  • by vaylen (566986) on Saturday September 27, 2003 @03:44AM (#7070669) Journal
    Most people have been using Trillian for so long that they will simply ask their friends to use ICQ or MSN so they can stay on their contact lists. In the end this will just result in fewer people using Yahoo messenger.

    In a related story, NBC has decided to make their broadcast signal only work on a G.E. television. Brilliant move boys!

    • After October 15 MSN access will also be restricted [slashdot.org]
      We'll have to wait and see if ICQ will do the same thing eventually
      • Well, ICQ was bought out by AOL. Also, AOL and ICQ communicate using the same protocalls (look at the AIM/ICQ button in Gaim), I doubt that ICQ will be something to worry about by itself. If ICQ goes down, then so will AOL.

        I don't really give a rip either way. If you've got a bunch of friends, just set up your own Jabber server (or join the main Jabber server). Tell your friends to use a real IM client instead of these crappy, ad-filled ones. Your close friends should at least listen, then probably will ge
  • by lateralus (582425) <yoni-r AT actcom DOT com> on Saturday September 27, 2003 @03:46AM (#7070674) Journal

    Never trust a corporation with anything you value or at least with proper constraints over that corporation.

    If you want to feel safe that you can use your service tomorrow too then run jabber [jabber.org] or any other service that you can run a server for if your main server stops.

    Serves people right for trusting closed systems.

    • Never trust a corporation with anything you value or at least with proper constraints over that corporation.

      I use Yahoo! Messenger and haven't experienced any problems whatsoever related to this. In fact there are a couple of new features with this newest version that I'm eager to try out. Why should I be concerned if some unendorsed 3rd party application no longer works because Yahoo decided to change the way their network or protocol functions? My client still works fine; it's just too bad if Trillian

      • You are of course very welcome to use someone else's infrastructure.

        Just don't be surprised if one day they decide to stop giving you the service.

        My main point is that if it is their network then 3rd party clients really can't complain.

      • So just because Yahoo's official client is the most horrible, crashy, CPU-sucking, ugly chat client I have ever used (and, by the way, the Mac version which I use contains absolutely no advertising whatsoever, so they gain nothing from my use), and I want to use a third-party program that doesn't actually suck, that makes me a leech? Please explain further.
    • Couldn't agree more. Jabber is the future. We need open standards and freedom to deploy our own servers for open protocols. Just like wth e-mail. Imagine what a sucky world it would be if there were so many incompatible and propriatery e-mail standards owned by companies. Just scarry.

      Jabber on people!
  • Well.. (Score:3, Insightful)

    by methangel (191461) on Saturday September 27, 2003 @03:47AM (#7070679)
    I actually prefer the official Windows clients to the all-services-in-one packages. Memory is really not an issue these days either, considering how cheap it is.

    But yeah, it's their service that they freely offer, they are logically allowed to control who accesses it. I do not disagree at all.
    • Memory is really not an issue these days either

      Taskbar space is just as limited however. Nothing worse than having 101 icons in your systray.
    • Re:Well.. (Score:2, Insightful)

      by deinol (210478)
      Post a:

      Memory is really not an issue these days either, considering how cheap it is.

      I work at a store that also repairs computers. I can tell you that while memory is cheap, there are a lot of people who are still running older machines. People bring in Pentium I's and II's all the time. Even the occasional 486 shows up. Besides, once you have ICQ, AIM, MSN, Yahoo, Kazaa, Weatherbug, Gator, Comet Cursors, Norton Anti-Virus, Mcaffee, Office quick start, Cox quick connect, etc, etc, etc, running, I've se
  • by M3wThr33 (310489) on Saturday September 27, 2003 @03:49AM (#7070683) Homepage
    Cerulean Studios already fought AOL and won.
    If you hoof it on over to Trillian's website [trillian.cc] and logging into the member's section, you can get the beta Yahoo-patch.

    How's that for response time?
  • Sitting here, and wondering why Yahoo wasnt working in trillian. Then I see it on slashdot.

    Really, I dont use Yahoo for IM, but I know people that do. And I'd rather not run 4 IM programs, one for everyone. Trade out on advanced features, but I can use 1 program. Also been testing Gaim and consoleicq on my linux box. Both nice multi-im clients..
  • by koreth (409849) * on Saturday September 27, 2003 @03:53AM (#7070699)
    If you're a paying Trillian customer, you can download the beta of their next major release, which works just fine with the Yahoo! Messenger network even after this change. I believe they've said they'll port the protocol change back to the free version as well. I'm running the beta and haven't noticed any disruption of service.
    • Whoa. The beta still works?! Here's a bit of background info... some you might know, some you might not. Trillian 2.0 was released back on September 10th. Trillian 2.0 RC3 had come out within the last 48 hours (can't remember exactly when). After RC3 came out, Yahoo started sending the YahooMessengerTeam upgrade notices that you might have seen. Because of this, the Trillian development team made a quick change in the final version just before they were going to release it. This pushed back the relea
  • by typobox43 (677545) <typobox43@gmail.com> on Saturday September 27, 2003 @03:54AM (#7070702) Homepage
    I've been watching this situation as it developed... I'm a very.. avid Trillian user. I highly doubt that the sole purpose of this was to block alternative clients. Why would they give a two weeks' warning, when the Trillian developers especially are known for releasing connectivity patches right when the problem occurs? (Remember back when AIM blocked Trillian... February 2002? There were five patched versions of Trillian released within a three-week period. That seems to say that there's not much chance in keeping alternative clients out by simply changing the protocol. I consider the MSN deal a completely different one from the Yahoo issue. MSN has publicly announced that there will be licensing for their protocol - which is great by me. That ensurance that I'm using completely legal software is always a plus. Yahoo, on the other hand, is a different story. They've not really made much comment about alternative IM aside from the "byproduct" comment. They seem to really be avoiding the issue. My theory here is that they decided it was time to upgrade everything... maybe spammers were the driving force, maybe not. Then, someone noticed that it was causing these alternative clients to have fits. Was it a byproduct of their changes? Yes. Was it unwanted? No. I think this was simply a case of "accidental genius."
    • MSN has publicly announced that there will be licensing for their protocol - which is great by me. That ensurance that I'm using completely legal software is always a plus.

      Hmm, wait. Since when do Microsoft licenses have any relation whatsoever to the law? They can claim only people with red hair can connect to MSN if they like, it alters the legal status of other people connecting to their network not one bit.

      Remember. EULAs are not the law.

  • by rf0 (159958)
    Gaim people are trying and with the latest CVS 0.69 things have improved from not being able to connect to just getting incorrect password. They are getting there and I know there are lots of bug reports open on it and they are hopeful.

    What is going to be more intersting is what happens with MSN + license. Yahoo isn't charging people to access their network (and yes it is their network so they can do this). Fun times ahead. Prehaps everyone should just move over to Jabber

    Rus
  • Not that I ever used it, and not that I know a single person who does, but if I did use it, I would stop, which would cause people who use Yahoo IM to switch to whatever I use in order to maintain contact with me.

    Time for an open IM network.
  • Check this story [com.com] out from new.com.com.

    Jumping to the conclusion that their intent is to block 3rd party clients is just wrong, according to this.

    It sounds reasonable to occasionally force an upgrade, particularly in the interest of protecting privacy.

  • The obvious replacement for the proprietary systems is Jabber, must aunt Caroline must be able to create a Jabber account much easier - as it is today, Jabber requires knowledge of Jabber, which is a major obstacle.
    • From having plaayed with several different jabber clients on windows, BeOS and Linux, I don't see the same issue that you claim is a problem. The only thing that I have seen that requires anything like Jabber knowledge is finding a server to connect to. So far as I know, every client uses a wizard of some sort to walk a user through creating an ID, setting up a password, etc.

      Then again, having set up my own jabber server, and so forth, perhaps I am too much of a geek to understand what you are concerned wi
  • Before you have to use the official clients or pay for a multi-protocol client (like Trillian Pro) to be able to use several networks. Or maybe Yahoo will themselves support other protocols for a certain price, they have already hinted at that.

    Yet another reason to switch to an open network like Jabber [jabber.org]!

  • Why aren't ISPs jumping on the IM bandwagon?

    The bandwidth can't be that bad especially compared to say binary newsgroups or IRC, it could be a selling point for potential customers (connecting to im.comcast.com), it would simplify and enhance file transfers and video (assuming they route intranet traffic different than internet traffic), etc.

    It seems to me that they have the resources to implement an open and free protocol for their customers (or use an existing one) and provide the servers.

    I guess the
  • by nuckfuts (690967) on Saturday September 27, 2003 @04:46AM (#7070851)
    it caused the program to crash. In many cases Trillian could not even start until automatic login to Yahoo! was edited out of an ini file.
    • Thanks for pointing out how to avoid these Trillian crashes ....

      It happened to my laptop at work, and my home computer did the same. And because i have generally thought Yahoo! was less "commercial" than MS (i.e. no auto deleting your inbox .. no pain-in-the-**** things like "activation" etc etc etc) I never never suspected that it was the Yahoo autologin that was causing this trouble ...

      But now I am back on IM using Trillina ... thanks ...

      God, I just love slashdot for all these timely tips ...

  • MS and Yahoo are going all corporate cuthroat on IM. This is a product that will never generate real revenue. This is smallhead corporate thinking.

    "We have the largest market share in the widget market! Too bad no one BUYS this particular type of widget."

    All they are doing is inconviencing (or dare I say nerfing) an added feature of their offering that will only piss off their own clients. They can't talk to Auntie Cybersalot, who uses a different IM, anymore.

    • "We have the largest market share in the widget market! Too bad no one BUYS this particular type of widget."

      The MS client is installed with Windows XP, and is arguably one of its most sellable features. Before you say "but you don't need to buy Windows to use IM", remember that AOL's been suckering people for years with email and chat, which are readily available without having to buy thier service.
  • by ShadowDrake (588020) on Saturday September 27, 2003 @05:08AM (#7070889)
    The obvious excuse for locking out third-party clients is to prevent getting by without seeing downloaded ads.

    Why not merely develop a system that sends ads as messages-- like spammers do, but officially. Send one every x +/- y minutes of connect time, make up source accounts (or even force the account name to a friends-list member) to make filtering difficult.

  • Old news ? (Score:2, Informative)

    by Krunch (704330)
    I've noticed that my Jabber client can't connect to Y! for some weeks now. Well, we still have AIM, ICQ and of course Jabber.
  • How about, instead of yahoo blocking outside clients like trillian and gaim, they work with them to incorporate the ads?

    Many people use outside clients so they can connect to all of these services with one program. I'd wager many people are trained now to ignore the ads they see on the internet anyway. Or have ad blocking software that blocks the ads regardless of what client is used :)
  • Given that email is full of spam and IM is full of, well, this crap, is there a nicer way for people to communicate on the Interweb?
  • Jabber (Score:3, Interesting)

    by WindBourne (631190) on Saturday September 27, 2003 @06:09AM (#7071056) Journal
    I currently use kopete (and occaisionly gaim which has much better protocols) due to hating to use so many different programs.
    Worse, teh MS version of yahoo is awesome while the linux version is at best the mistreated stepchild.
    Due to all the hassle that is going on, it is time to move away from so many protocols and server. I am re-establishing jabber at home and at work. It is time to move away from being tied into politics amongst the monsters and simply take back control
    • I upgraded Yahoo Messenger on my Linux system, and it's significantly better than previous versions. There may still be problems with file transfers, but according to the Yahoo developers they're looking into it.

      (Then again, if you want to "move away from being tied into politics" you might want to avoid Free Software too -- I hear that some of the leaders are quite opinionated. ;)
  • Yahoo may think this will cause 3rd party users to download the official client. I believe they are incorrect. People will just wait on Trillian to get back onto the network or they'll tell their other Trillian friends to switch to one of the other 3 networks it accesses.

    I suppose since their software can't compete with their rivals' software on features and functionality, they're trying to compete on number of users. That's pretty stupid however, since AOL and MSN have that locked up.

    Why not just frigg

  • Gaim does not work anymore! Finally, those of us developing under Linux have an excuse for not being disturbed every 10 minutes by marketing types. They forced us to use IM - while we really don't want to.

    Keep up the good work Yahoo!
  • by treat (84622)
    I don't understand, why are people complaining? Just use jabber.
  • Ad Revenue? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by tarnin (639523) on Saturday September 27, 2003 @08:40AM (#7071400)
    What ads? I use Yim at work and there are zero ads. The only ad that there is is a pop up screen when it starts that can be turned off in the options. No ads on the client itself like aim either. No hacking needed (eg. I'm not running DeadYim).

    All this is is an update to their protocal that happened to break third party messengers. I looked for a license that you could purchace ala msn and couldnt find one. I believe that they will continue to allow third party messengers into their network.

    Why is it just because they upgrade something and it breaks other programs that they didn't code people call out the wolves on them? Not all companies are M$ here. On the other side, not all companies are Opensource based and fully backwards compaible. In this case, Yahoo upgraded their core protocal and in doing that broke all backwards comptability. This, in my eyes, isn't some evil plot to get people to look at ads or get license money, it's just the way they do things.
  • I dont know how many people actually have paid for Trillan (I have) and god I wish I can get it to work on Linux (Kopete/Gaim are just not as good) but it does support Jabber as a downloadable plugin.
  • by nurb432 (527695) on Saturday September 27, 2003 @12:21PM (#7072331) Homepage Journal
    Its not a by product of their 'upgrading services'.

    This IS an effort to block all 'non revenue' clients.

    While it IS their network, and they can block whom ever they choose, I can also can choose to boycott all of yahoo! services due to them being a prick, and get everyone i know to also do so.

    If they publish the new protocol, then they still get my business. Unlike another IM network who's parent wont be publishing and will work hard to force out all non native clients

All programmers are playwrights and all computers are lousy actors.

Working...