[jdev] a vision

[Pedro Melo]

On Mar 12, 2009, at 5:48 PM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:

> On 3/12/09 11:24 AM, Pedro Melo wrote:
>>
>> On Mar 11, 2009, at 8:05 PM, Justin Karneges wrote:
>>
>>> The big question of all is whether it is the job of jabber.org to
>>> compete with
>>> Skype.  Aren't there others in this space already trying to do
>>> that?  If
>>> jabber.org is truly competitive, and no longer a self-defeating
>>> reference
>>> service, is it still fair to use the "Jabber" name?  Peter, you may
>>> remember,
>>> one of the options we discussed was to actually get rid of  
>>> jabber.org
>>> entirely. ;-)
>>
>> I don't think its the role of jabber.org to compete direcly with  
>> Skype.
>>
>> But there are certain services that would make the network better
>> (like a network of sock5 proxys, and all the NAT-busting stuff) that
>> require some form of central coordination, and that fits perfectly  
>> for
>> jabber.org.
>>
>> As for the IM service, I would keep it running and continue to accept
>> new users as the "backup route for new jabber users": if they are not
>> introduced to a more local jabber service then you can always have
>> Jabber.org.
>
> Look, if we don't do it nobody will. Much as I like the folks who work
> on services like Google Talk and Nimbuzz and SAPO (etc.), they need to
> justify their services to people at their companies. That means they  
> try
> to funnel users to their domains. It's not in their interest to run an
> open infrastructure for IM / file transfer / voice / video. Whether we
> call it "Jabber" or "FreeTalk" or something else doesn't matter. (I
> rather like "FreeTalk", myself.) The point is that we have the  
> chance to
> federate with all those other services but also offer something more  
> open.

I missed something. I think we are agreeing, right?

I do agree that the IM service should continue.

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