[jdev] a vision

[Pedro Melo]

On Mar 11, 2009, at 4:08 PM, Sylvain Hellegouarch wrote:

>
>>
>> I think we all agree on the need for web-based registration.
>>
>> Web-based chatrooms are also great because they enable you to
>> participate and learn (e.g., join help at muc.pt.jabber.org and get
>> assistance in your native language)
>
> But why? Why would someone go to jabber.org in the first place?

http://www.google.com/search?q=jabber

If someone hears about Jabber, thats the query they will use to know  
more, right?


> Before you
> even need help to move forward you need a reason to get there in the  
> first
> place. MSN didn't win over because it was better (I mean we all know  
> how
> dreadful it is at every level) but people had a reason to use it  
> because
> their relatives, loved ones, friends were using it. Regular people  
> don't
> care about making jabber.org a better place. They want to  
> communicate but
> they need a good reason to do so through it.

I don't disagree, but if/when they ear the 'jabber' name for instant  
messaging, don't you think that the first hit on google should  
actually be helpful and have them talking in the least amount of time  
possible?


>> without downloding a client.
>
> Considering the term "client" means nothing for most common users  
> it's a
> good idea to avoid such term altogether. People use MSN or Skype...  
> they
> have no idea they use the "MSN client application that connects to  
> the MSN
> servere". Jabber.org should probably have a webchat but I believe it
> should also consider having its own client named just that  
> "Jabber" (or
> whatever foxy name that could trademark it). Even if it's just one  
> of the
> existing OSS one with a nice looking skin. Even if you talk about
> browsers, people don't use a browser client, quite often they don't  
> even
> use Firefox, IE or Opera... they use the Internet.

The usual text applies I think: "Start talking now with our web-based  
chat, or download one of this applications for your PC/Mac".


> "client" is a dev. term that has no concrete meaning for regular end  
> user
> IMO. Well perhaps we should experiment by asking our relatives. If I  
> ask
> my parents about "client", they'll probably stare at me even though  
> they
> use many on a daily basis.

Try "Application".

Best regards,
-- 
Pedro Melo
Blog: http://www.simplicidade.org/notes/
XMPP ID: melo at simplicidade.org
Use XMPP!