Talk:Comparison of instant messaging protocols

More protocols

Should we add T.120 family of ITU standards? There is a protocol specially designed for "text chat" (T.140/T.134). It seems that Microsoft NetMeeting supports these protocols. Also: the protocol is ad hoc (no centralised server). Should we add this feature as an extra section?
There is a protocol defined by WAP Forum & Open Mobile Alliance. I think we should add it also. Name it IMPP (I have seen this term at www.protocols.com for IETF RFCs 2778&2779. But the RFCs pose a problem, and that protocol seems to be solution for it.)

--217.8.94.16 19:50, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Split list by type?

Perhaps this list should be re-arranged "Standard", "Proprietary," and "Obsolete" to help users decide which protocol to choose based on whether or not it's still used, and whether or not there's an IETF standard or something in the standards track for it. --BalooUrsidae 08:46, 21 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The whole listing makes very little sense -- in terms of future editing i suggest we have

Standards Based

Proprietary

Obsolete

in each section (in a table) include

Creator First public release date License Identity (not inc. alias) Asynchronous message relaying Distributed network Offline messaging RFC's

Its always going to be confusing as Bonjour uses OSCAR AND XMPP and as these networks combine this will all change

Merge of Comparison and List completed

I agree with the merge --Davelane 21:36, 26 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I agree as well. Additional columns would be: server<->client encryption. Tadu 22:04, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Merging seems to be a good thing. NaturalBornKiller 18:36, 30 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yep -- I agree with merge too. Is anybody (like me) able to do this, or does it require special permissions? RichMoffitt 14:20, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bulletin to All Friends

stpeter, how does XEP-0033: Extended Stanza Addressing implement a bulletin to all friends ? do you first manually have to define a recipient list containing all friends, then you can send something to it? does any client support such a function? or would it be easier for a client to simply copy the message to each buddy itself? I wouldn't say in the current state of things Jabber provides a Yes there, much more a Soon/RSN/ASAP/One Jolly Day ... --SymlynX 15:32, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Netscape Communicator

Does this belong in this list? Or was it just a front-end for one of these clients? If so, I would like to see someone add that info as a footnote if nothing else. Thanks. JimScott 08:51, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Netscape Communicator was an internet suite (browser/email/news/HTML authoring/calendaring). The discontinued Netscape Conference was more of a VoIP client. Indeed, the closest thing to instant messaging was the bundled AOL Instant Messenger (already in this comparison. --Karnesky 13:44, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was move —Mets501 (talk) 04:01, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move

List of instant messaging protocols → Comparison of instant messaging protocols — This article is no longer a software list & has become a software comparison. Karnesky 16:15, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Survey

Add * '''Support''' or * '''Oppose''' on a new line followed by a brief explanation, then sign your opinion using ~~~~.

Support --Karnesky 16:17, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support --NaturalBornKiller 18:38, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support --lynX 13:39, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

MySpace?

Is the MySpace protocol on here yet? If so, should it be added? Omnipotence407 18:31, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

New columns

So 69.111.164.176 has added Supports groups or channels for members / nonmembers / nobody - I understand groups and chat rooms and channels in IRC terminology, but how is members / nonmembers / nobody intended? Should we call the column simply chat rooms ? --lynX

what about a one that says if you can log in at more then one location like with aol (oscar) you can but msn you cant) 82.24.175.199 11:48, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to see columns for fundamental features such as offline messaging and the ability to do batch transfers of multiple files and folders.Brolin 16:55, 18 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]