Yahoo Messenger Blocks Outside IM Clients 367
jj00 writes "CNET News is reporting that Yahoo has started blocking 3rd party Messenger clients from their service. The article is about Trillian, but I have noticed that my gaim client hasn't been working for the past few days." As reported earlier.
nah (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:nah (Score:4, Informative)
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)
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."
Which article did you read? (Score:4, Informative)
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)
Re:nah (Score:2)
Re:nah (Score:3, Informative)
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)
Re:nah (Score:2)
Re:nah (Score:2, Informative)
Re:nah (Score:2, Insightful)
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)
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.
Re:nah (Score:3, Funny)
Windows Messenger has update also (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Windows Messenger has update also (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Windows Messenger has update also (Score:3, Interesting)
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
Re:Windows Messenger has update also (Score:3, Interesting)
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
Please find a backdoor for Y! and MSN! (Score:4, Insightful)
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!
Re:Please find a backdoor for Y! and MSN! (Score:2)
Gaim from CVS works just fine (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Gaim from CVS works just fine (Score:3, Informative)
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)
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?
Re:Their Network (Score:2)
Then again, it wouldn't be ALL bad. No more AOLers anyways.
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Their Network (Score:2, Flamebait)
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.
Re:Their Network (Score:2)
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
Re:Their Network (Score:5, Funny)
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)
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.
Re:Their Network (Score:2)
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)
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
Re:Their Network (Score:2)
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:2)
Not in England. The roads are open to all, as long as you follow the highway code. There's no nonsense about people using "unofficial cars".
IM isn't exactly like your God-given right.
Neither is driving to work, but most people would get pretty annoyed if random car models started getting banned from the roa
Re:Their Network (Score:5, Insightful)
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)
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.
Re:Their Network (Score:2, Funny)
Wow! That's amazing!
Do you think that someday it will be even more popular than Gopher?
Or -- maybe even -- more popular than Fingerd?
Re:Their Network (Score:2)
Well, if you accept the JSFs estimate of 10 million Jabber users that is. I find that figure slightly optimistic.
Re:Their Network (Score:2)
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)
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)
Re:Lies (Score:2)
Re:Lies (Score:2)
The Filthy Critic?! I thought you were dead! Good to have you back. : )
Re:Lies (Score:4, Informative)
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)
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.
Re:Lies (Score:2)
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)
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.
They're cutting their own throats (Score:5, Insightful)
In a related story, NBC has decided to make their broadcast signal only work on a G.E. television. Brilliant move boys!
Re:They're cutting their own throats (Score:3, Informative)
We'll have to wait and see if ICQ will do the same thing eventually
Re:They're cutting their own throats (Score:2)
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
The lesson to be learned here (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
Re:The lesson to be learned here (Score:3, Interesting)
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
Re:The lesson to be learned here (Score:2)
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.
Re:The lesson to be learned here (Score:2)
Re:The lesson to be learned here (Score:2)
Jabber on people!
Well.. (Score:3, Insightful)
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.
Re:Well.. (Score:2)
Taskbar space is just as limited however. Nothing worse than having 101 icons in your systray.
Re:Well.. (Score:2, Insightful)
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
Beta Patch already released (Score:5, Informative)
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?
Re:Beta Patch already released (Score:2)
Re:Beta Patch already released (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Beta Patch already released (Score:3, Informative)
Trillian (Score:2)
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..
Trillian beta still works (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Trillian beta still works (Score:2, Informative)
I don't think it's meant as a block. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:I don't think it's meant as a block. (Score:2)
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.
Gaim (Score:2)
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
Good for everyone else. (Score:2)
Time for an open IM network.
Yahoo say they're open to talking to 3rd parties (Score:2, Insightful)
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.
Jabber accounts must be more accessible (Score:2)
Re:Jabber accounts must be more accessible (Score:2)
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
It's only a matter of time... (Score:2)
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]!
Solution: ISPs hosting IM services (Score:2)
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
Trillian wasn't merely blocked - (Score:3, Informative)
Thanks Re:Trillian wasn't merely blocked - (Score:2)
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 ...
Stupid (Score:2)
"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.
Re:Stupid (Score:2)
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.
Making money with open IMs (Score:3, Interesting)
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)
Here's an idea (Score:2)
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
Alternatives? (Score:2)
Jabber (Score:3, Interesting)
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
Re:Jabber (Score:2)
(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.
When your rivals are better, block them (Score:2, Interesting)
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
This is soo goood (Score:2)
Keep up the good work Yahoo!
uh, just use jabber (Score:2, Offtopic)
Ad Revenue? (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
Trillan 2.0 Supports Jabber (Score:2)
"By Product" my ass (Score:3, Insightful)
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
AIM started it (Score:3, Informative)
Re:AIM Next? (Score:2, Informative)
Re:why is this even an issue? (Score:3, Insightful)
Why is this ? The regular user wouldn't recognize code if I hit him in the head with it. To him it doesn't matter if his chatting protocol is open source or not, he just wants to reach his those on his buddy list.
Re:why is this even an issue? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Patience (Score:2)
Not exactly (Score:2)
Re:GAIM, jabber too? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:GAIM, jabber too? (Score:2)
Re:GAIM, jabber too? (Score:2)
Re:ohh yeh... (Score:4, Insightful)
Why the hell do you expect that everything should be free?
Re:jabber is the way to go (Score:2)
Jabber IS a uniform way of sending messages on a network, not to mention open source and unencumbered by one company controlling it. I have never understood what people see in instant messaging that we didn't already have in a more open format with IRC, but hey, I'm open for improvement.
Jabber seems to satisfy their "instant messaging" definition, but people still try to jury-rig a client to connect into AOL, Yahoo
Re:Trillian patch for yahoo now available (paid on (Score:2)