Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
OS X Operating Systems The Internet

Next iChat version to include Jabber support 328

Posted by CmdrTaco from the behind-the-firewall dept.
SeaFox writes "A couple of stories about new features in the next version of Mac OS X have revealed that the new iChat 3.0 will include support for Jabber. With businesses able to host their own messaging servers behind the firewall and use it with Apple's included IM client, will this effect Jabber's overall share of the IM market?"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Next iChat version to include Jabber support More

Next iChat version to include Jabber support

Comments Filter:

  • What we really need (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Kokuyo ( 549451 ) on Tuesday September 14, 2004 @08:09AM (#10244986) Journal
    Is one IM client supporting all widely used standards while NOT taking 5 minutes to start up like my ICQ :). I'd be willing to pay money for such a thing.

    Is there an IM client that supports ICQ functions like server hosted friends lists? Preferrably one that is available under linux and windows.

    • Re:What we really need (Score:5, Informative)

      by leonmergen ( 807379 ) * <lmergen@@@gmail...com> on Tuesday September 14, 2004 @08:11AM (#10245009) Homepage
      GAIM ?

      http://gaim.sourceforge.net/ [sourceforge.net]

      • Re:What we really need (Score:5, Informative)

        by AndyElf ( 23331 ) on Tuesday September 14, 2004 @09:21AM (#10245631) Homepage

        While GAIM might have a very good coverage, as far as IM networks are concerned, I can't say that I enjoy running it in the situations when I have to -- e.g. when I am on my BSD box.

        When it comes to MacOS X, there are several worthy contenders: Fire [sf.net], Adium [adiumx.com] to name a few. All of them are Cocoa apps and you do not need to run X11 to use them.

        • Re:What we really need (Score:3, Insightful)

          by j-pimp ( 177072 )
          While GAIM might have a very good coverage, as far as IM networks are concerned, I can't say that I enjoy running it in the situations when I have to -- e.g. when I am on my BSD box.

          Ok and why don't yopu like gaim? Do you not like X? I agree adium kicks its ass on OS X but its great on BSD, Linux and Windows. If your complaint is that X sucks than your issues with BSD and Linux is the whole desktop sucks.

    • Re:What we really need (Score:5, Informative)

      by quigonn ( 80360 ) on Tuesday September 14, 2004 @08:14AM (#10245042) Homepage
      gaim does what you want:
      - it's cross-plattform (Windows, OSX, Linux)
      - it supports server hosted friends list
      - it starts up quickly
      - it supports a lot of different protocols
      - it's free as in speech

      I, for one, run ICQ, Jabber and MSN with gaim, and had no problems with it so far.

    • Re:What we really need (Score:2, Interesting)

      by sigaar ( 733777 )
      With a jabber client you don't really need an IM that supports multiple protocols, because that can be done on the jabber server via transports.

      In other words, you connect to the jabber server, and the server hooks you up to your msn, icq, yahoo, ect. accounts. You can configure your transports with a client like PSI http://psi.affinix.com

      If you don't want to do it that way, gaim http://gaim.sourceforge.net can connect to a host of protocols. Mine starts and connects to six different accounts in about 4
      • its not clear that the ichat client will support registration of transports
    • I use iChat on my mac, because I like the integration with Address Book. Trillian is good -- support for AIM, Yahoo, ICQ, IRC, MSN and when you add a contact from any of these, it adds it to the server list. Uses its own collapsable groups, so you can mix contacts from different messaging systems/IRC. The only problem with it is that it's heavily skinnable, so the interface is balls slow.

      ATTN ALL UTILITY SOFTWARE AUTHORS: Microsoft/Apple/X.org is much, much better than you are at writing fast, responsiv

  • Old news... (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Quite some old news.

    This was very well covered in the first documentation released on MacOS X Server 10.4...

  • Makes sense... (Score:5, Informative)

    by rgraham ( 199829 ) on Tuesday September 14, 2004 @08:10AM (#10245001) Homepage
    Seeing has how the next version of Server [apple.com] is going to have a built-in Jabber/iChat/XMPP server (scroll down to the "Your Very Own iChat and Blog Servers" section).

  • This is good news (Score:5, Interesting)

    by grasshoppa ( 657393 ) on Tuesday September 14, 2004 @08:11AM (#10245011) Homepage
    Because the jabber specs ( and clients ) still need quite a bit more work. While we have a spec for file transfer through a nat'd environment, I have yet to play with a client that can do it effectively and seemlessly. Namely, because the protocol itself could use a little work.

    For example, instead of having some random, and unknown, jabber file proxy to enter in, why can't the server offer hints? Someone sets up a jabber server, they are likely to understand how to setup the file proxy needed for it, so have that in the config file as a hint of which proxy to use.

    Don't get me wrong, I love jabber, it's just not ready for "prime time", as it were. Although it's more than adequate for local lans where you dont want chat data going out over the internet.

    • Re:This is good news (Score:2, Interesting)

      by agby ( 303294 )

      For example, instead of having some random, and unknown, jabber file proxy to enter in, why can't the server offer hints? Someone sets up a jabber server, they are likely to understand how to setup the file proxy needed for it, so have that in the config file as a hint of which proxy to use.

      What I suspect Apple will do is leverage the Rendezvous technology to provide a local list of iChat servers that you can join. Makes sense to have one server or instance per department, probably with OpenDirectory

    • I agree that clients don't do Jabber file transfer nicely but I disagree on what you said about the standard. Its fine. Look at JEP-0095: Stream Initiation [jabber.org]. Here, the entities negotiate the best way to transfer a file. If they are on the same LAN... then just open up a port and listen like ftp. As a last resort do in in-band.

    • Re:This is good news (Score:3, Insightful)

      by imroy ( 755 )

      Yes, hopefully Apple will help bring some polish and increased credibility to the Jabber world. I'd also like to see them working with the existing Jabber community to build future applications/protocols on top of Jabber. Jabber at its heart is just an XML messaging system. So get some creative minds together and we will see some really interesting new applications of the Jabber framework.

      Personally, I like the idea of using Jabber for communicating with and between software agents. People have already

  • ah yes well (Score:3, Informative)

    by Ravagin ( 100668 ) on Tuesday September 14, 2004 @08:12AM (#10245019)
    will this effect Jabber's overall share of the IM market?

    more importantly, will it a ffect Jabber's overall share of the IM market?

    • Re:ah yes well (Score:2, Insightful)

      by dema ( 103780 )
      Oh wow that's so important thanks for pointing it out! I had NO idea what was meant by that sentence until I read your comment. Hah, effect, those silly editors! Man, you are a life saver, I missed the WHOLE point of the submission until you pointed that out. And it's SO great you got modded up so I wouldn't miss your post!
    • will this effect Jabber's overall share of the IM market?

      more importantly, will it affect Jabber's overall share of the IM market?

      No, I think the original poster was speculating that this may bring about Jabber's dominance in the IM market (by efecting its overall share...)

    • Re:ah yes well (Score:2, Insightful)

      by 7-Vodka ( 195504 )
      This could be the most common error online.
      Come on people get it right. EFFECT is a NOUN.

    • Re:ah yes well (Score:5, Funny)

      by ceeam ( 39911 ) on Tuesday September 14, 2004 @08:31AM (#10245209)
      Apple: spell different.

  • Mind you... (Score:2, Insightful)

    by zaren ( 204877 )
    those "couple of stories" both come from a rumor site. Grain of salt, and all that... of course, if those stories suddenly go away after a Cupertino landshark sees them, they might be a bit more believable.

  • Jabber server as well (Score:5, Informative)

    by daveschroeder ( 516195 ) * on Tuesday September 14, 2004 @08:14AM (#10245041)
    Mac OS X Server 10.4 (Tiger Server) [apple.com] will also include an iChat/Jabber server.

    For those unaware, iChat has always used the Jabber protocols for its local (Rendezvous-initiated) messaging. This just dusts off and reveals full-fledged support for Jabber.

    Why Jabber [jabber.org]? Because Jabber is a completely open IM standard. The IETF has accepted the core Jabber protocols and has standardized them as XMPP [xmpp.org], an open IM protocol [jabber.org].

    • Connectivity to other IM services, too (Score:5, Informative)

      by daveschroeder ( 516195 ) * on Tuesday September 14, 2004 @08:20AM (#10245104)
      I forgot one of the neat things about the Jabber server:

      While an open IM application can be useful in a defined group or organization for messaging, obviously, a standalone IM application is of limited utility on its own if you're already communicating with people on other IM networks.

      This is why Jabber supports "transports" [jabber.org], server components that allow seamless connectivity with AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, MSN, SMS services, and even IRC..

    • Re:Jabber server as well (Score:5, Insightful)

      by mitchell_pgh ( 536538 ) on Tuesday September 14, 2004 @08:30AM (#10245193)
      This is another example of Apple using open standards to leverage their platform, and for that, one must applaud their efforts. Apple looks more like a friend of Linux and the Open Source community more and more as time goes on. Ways Apple Supports Open Standards: iCal (open file format), Safari (built on Open Source code), iTunes (uses open standards MP3 and AAC*), OS X (foundation is open), iChat (jabber support)... * - OK, not 100%, but better then others.

      • Re:Jabber server as well (Score:5, Interesting)

        by Durandal64 ( 658649 ) on Tuesday September 14, 2004 @10:50AM (#10246653)
        Apple is a good example of how businesses can maintain a proprietary business model, make money and still use open source software while not violating the spirit of open source. They integrate open source into their products and give their changes back to the community, and they make money from those products. So everyone ends up happy. It's worked out really well for them so far.

  • jabber (Score:5, Informative)

    by minus_273 ( 174041 ) <aaaaa@NOspam.SPAM.yahoo.com> on Tuesday September 14, 2004 @08:15AM (#10245057) Journal
    i chat already uses jabber in the local im feature using rendezevous (sp?). that also removes the need for a central server since it uses rendezevous for discovery of other hosts.

  • Yet another reason I love Apple... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by keiferb ( 267153 ) on Tuesday September 14, 2004 @08:17AM (#10245074) Homepage
    Jabber's slowly been infiltrating the office, and has proven itself to be really handy. It's nice to be able to keep your IM server on the friendly side of your firewall. iChat/OS X Server publicly and proudly supporting Jabber is a great step forward!

  • The question would be... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by adzoox ( 615327 ) on Tuesday September 14, 2004 @08:18AM (#10245081) Journal
    The question answered would be has iChat had any noticeable effect by AOL on AOL Instant Messenger membership.

    I would say it might have an effect on Jabber. Eventhough Apple has a small marketshare, it has a higher percent of that marketshare that are online.

    • Probably a bit, that's for sure... For example, shortly after I got my Mac, my friend got an internet connection at his house. We wanted to be able to chat with each other, and since iChat supports AIM I suggested he install AIM on his PC.

      Otherwise we most likely would have gone with something else other than AIM.

  • But.... Mac to PC? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by leeet ( 543121 ) on Tuesday September 14, 2004 @08:20AM (#10245101) Homepage
    Is there a way to do videoconference (or just audio conference) between a Mac and a PC? I haven't found a way yet....

  • This was annouced at WWDC 2004... (Score:5, Informative)

    by Xenex ( 97062 ) <`xenex' `at' `opinionstick.com'> on Tuesday September 14, 2004 @08:20AM (#10245102) Journal
    And is mentioned on the Mac OS X Server 10.4 Tiger Preview page [apple.com]:
    New Services

    iChat Server. Host your own private and secure inside-the-firewall iChat server that uses your own namespace and works with both Tiger's iChat AV and popular Jabber clients available on Windows, Linux and PDAs.

    Additionally:
    Your Very Own iChat and Blog Servers

    You can now host your own iChat server. Instant Messaging serves as a vital means of communication for organizations of all sizes, so it's useful to deploy and run your own private and secure IM server. Based on the open source Jabber project, the new iChat server in Tiger Server lets your company protect its internal communications by defining its own namespace, and use SSL/TLS encryption to ensure privacy. The iChat server works with both the iChat client in Mac OS X Tiger and popular open source clients available for Windows, Linux and even PDAs.

    So, yes, we've known since WWDC that iChat will be able to speak to standard Jabber servers, mostly because Apple will be shipping a Jabber server with Tiger Server.

    There's a lot of cool stuff in Tiger Server, and that page is with checking out.

  • Video/audio chat? (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Will this include support for video and audio chat?

  • GPG support (Score:5, Insightful)

    by 0x0d0a ( 568518 ) on Tuesday September 14, 2004 @08:23AM (#10245137) Journal
    Please, please, please include GPG support (a la gabber), Apple. Business have been wanting secure instant messaging for a long time -- I'd like it too.

    • Well... (Score:3, Informative)

      by Xenex ( 97062 )
      From the Mac OS X Server 10.4 Tiger preview page [apple.com]
      Based on the open source Jabber project, the new iChat server in Tiger Server lets your company protect its internal communications by defining its own namespace, and use SSL/TLS encryption to ensure privacy.
      So, you're going to get secure messaging, but it's not going to be GPG.

      • Re:Well... (Score:4, Interesting)

        by Eythian ( 552130 ) <robin.kallisti@net@nz> on Tuesday September 14, 2004 @08:58AM (#10245438) Homepage
        Not quite the same thing. Many (most?) Jabber clients already support SSL connections, but having GPG on top of that provides a different level of protection.

        SSL gives you client-server privacy, but the owner of the server can still see what is going on, and if the other party isn't using SSL then the messages will be going to them over plain text anyway. However, with GPG, then you have security between clients. The server owner can't read your messages.

        So SSL is good, but only half way there, adding GPG support is necessary for more complete privacy.
        • But doesn't Jabber allow P2P connections where you have an SSL connection directly between you and the person you are chatting with?
        • here's some secure end-to-end SSL encryption for jabber/gaim:

          http://gaim-encryption.sourceforge.net/
          http:// sourceforge.net/projects/gaim-encryption/
    • GPG support would indeed be nice, but it looks like they're going to be using SSL, so it's six of one and half a dozen of the other.

      Personally, I love iChat, but it does a few things I find very annoying.
      1) There's no ability to log to an open format. No txt, html, or rtf support. iChat logs to a format you can only open with iChat. This is a PITA.
      2) Poorly chosen naming convention. One thing I like about gaim is it's logging. Logs are stored in folders based on the name of the person you are talking to fo
    • Apple has created a Kerberized Jabber Client/Server... The Linux/Windows clients will quickly add support because they can and its cool... They are having a secure IM environment, which is very cool

  • mmm, Open goodness (Score:5, Informative)

    by gobbo ( 567674 ) on Tuesday September 14, 2004 @08:26AM (#10245159) Journal
    Apple continues to incorporate open software and strike that fine balance between the usefully proprietary (hardware, GUI) and interoperable standards. The MS dweebs that run the IT where I work keep frowning and scratching their heads when I explain that this or that new Apple implementations of free (beer/speech) software (zeroconf, LDAP, Apache, SSH, etc.) makes their lives easier and more secure. This just helps my arguments.

    Nice thing about Jabber is that it's decentralized and has so much room to be elaborated into some nifty applications that go way beyond text messaging. I was annoyed at Apple for nailing iChat so firmly to AIM, and now it looks like they're fulfilling some of the promise behind having a default chat client that isn't tied to an Apple network.

  • Jabber market share (Score:3, Interesting)

    by IGnatius T Foobar ( 4328 ) on Tuesday September 14, 2004 @08:26AM (#10245161) Homepage Journal
    This will certainly help with Jabber's market share and installed base.

    What I'd like to see, though, is a Google branded instant messenger service -- based on Jabber. This would really kick IM up to the next level, and maybe even pressure the other big three to make their systems interoperable, like Internet technologies are supposed to be.
    • I believe their services should be *more* open than they are, but *not* interoperable.

      Why should people running Microsoft's service have some right to connect to a service owned by another company?

      There's no reason except that tech people are a bunch of hippies.

      I *do* believe people should be free to use other client software...and with the right client software, you'll have the illusion of transparency. Trillian gives the illusion of transparency through the ability to connect to multiple services at on

      • Network effect (Score:3, Insightful)

        by SuperKendall ( 25149 ) *
        Why should people running Microsoft's service have some right to connect to a service owned by another company?

        There's no reason except that tech people are a bunch of hippies.

        Well, actually, there are a number of other pretty solid business reasons as it turns out.

        The main one is the network effect - if you combine two huge pools of IM customers, then the total becomes more useful than the sum of its parts. If you have five different companies all with different IM's, then you'll get fewer users than

    • Jabber's model is excellent. It's very similar to the email distribution model where there is a network of servers and then each server has a bunch of clients hanging off it. Although email has a few security issues, the general model is sound: it's decentralised, and yet it still makes efficient use of the network unlike the current "peer-to-peer" apps which generate an extra network over the network usually with little regard to the underlying topology and proceed to shove redundant data everywhere.

      The d

  • Maybe Apple can make the damn thing configurable. (Score:5, Interesting)

    by DrHogie ( 8093 ) on Tuesday September 14, 2004 @08:28AM (#10245175) Homepage Journal
    I've spent the last 3 days at my office attempting to install a Jabber server for internal use. What I want to do is very simple: I merely want to setup IM clients for 20-30 employees, and have their buddy lists controlled by the server itself, so when a new employee is added, all 20-30 existing employees don't have to add them.

    Sounds easy right? Obviously you've never used Jabber!

    The obvious place for support would appear to be http://jabber.org. But there's no support on that site. Well, maybe jabber.com! Nope, that's a corporate commercial Jabber site. Hmmm, maybe jabberstudio.org! After all, that's where the server software is hosted! Nope, not there either. They have a mailing list where 4-6 different people have asked for help on the same problem . . . and in true Open Source fashion, no one helped them, other than to say, "Well, I've setup a nifty Perl hack to fix that problem . . you just need these 4 libraries and then write your own XML commands.".

    Hopefully Apple will put their spit and polish on it and make it usable. In it's current state, Jabber's a pain in the ass to try and configure with absolutely zero documentation to help.

  • Planned for some time? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Swedentom ( 670978 ) on Tuesday September 14, 2004 @08:30AM (#10245197) Homepage
    I noticed, a while ago, that the iChat Agent (2.x) executable contains the string 'Jabbler' on a few places, so maybe this has been planned for some time?

    Nonetheless, this sounds great, and is probably going to give Jabber a significant usage boost. It's sure nice to see Apple support more open technologies.
  • It probably will not until all the major players allow for their clients to talk to other providers.
    Average computer user's will still use whatever client is installed on their desktop (AOL/MSN).

  • Helix (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Albanach ( 527650 ) on Tuesday September 14, 2004 @08:32AM (#10245212) Homepage
    Does anyone know what the current state of play is with the Real / Helix funded extensions to Jabber that were supposed to be bringing voice / video to our favourite Instant messanger. I thought it was supposed to be released by now?

    • Re:Helix (Score:3, Informative)

      by infiniti99 ( 219973 )
      This is a joint effort with Psi [affinix.com], and has a projected release for September (this month).

      The actual protocol specifications are ready, and available on the Delta project page [affinix.com], as jep-rtsp and jep-media. I have not yet submitted them to the JSF to be accepted as formal JEPs, as I already have some other protocol specs in their queue that I want to resolve first (particularly a patch to JEP-0065 to incorporate UDP support).

      On the software side of things, we'll likely be late. This is somewhat related to a

  • Mac + Business = share? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by ziegast ( 168305 ) on Tuesday September 14, 2004 @08:33AM (#10245217) Homepage
    With businesses able to host their own messaging servers behind the firewall and use it with Apple's included IM client, will this effect Jabber's overall share of the IM market?

    You assume that ther are enough "mac" computers in business to affect market share? Some companies are hip enough to use Macs in business. Many many many are not.

    If MozillaFireFoxBird had built-in support [mozillazine.org] for Jabber instead of having to download a special client, Jabber might find its way into more homes and businesses. Like the US economy, Mozilla is starting to gain some traction [slashdot.org].
    • Actually, it's been historically proven that the adoption of a format or technology by Apple is the first step to towards its success. I won't list them, because you know them, but they're numerous. It doesn't matter that Apple only has X% of the market (where X= a single digit number between 3 and 7 that changes depending how much the speaker hates Apple) -- the fact that they say "This format is pretty cool" gets PC and Linux authors who are fans of Apple to take another look at it, in an attempt to moo

  • No Effect (Score:4, Informative)

    by shking ( 125052 ) <{babulicm} {at} {cuug.ab.ca}> on Tuesday September 14, 2004 @08:46AM (#10245319) Homepage
    "...will this effect Jabber's overall share of the IM market?"

    Since Jabber already has market share, this move by Apple will not Effect (verb: to create) a share for Jabber. However, including Jabber in iChat may Affect (verb: to influence) the market that already exists.

    OTOH - The Effect (noun: influence) of the ignorant substitution of inappropriate words Affects (verb: to influence) your ability to write clearly. Learn to the difference between english vowels, or you'll be condemned to confuse a cat with a cot (or Al with an eel)

  • Okay, it's a minor snark: it should be "affect [m-w.com]," not "effect [m-w.com]," in the story writeup.

    Minor niggle. Keep up the otherwise good work.
  • At the moment we can't be certain what impact on Jabber's market share this will have. Hopefully help increase it and get people talking about it. If you have a friend who does not have a Jabber server then they can still use the central jabber.org server.

    If Apple's move has any impact, I wonder how long it would be before ISPs start providing Jabber servers.

    The only thing I have to wonder is if the jabber account being the same address as your e-mail address would increase e-mail spam?

  • Encrypted memory! (Score:5, Interesting)

    by teridon ( 139550 ) on Tuesday September 14, 2004 @11:01AM (#10246781) Homepage
    Meanwhile, additions to Tiger's [...] "Security" preference panes have unveiled [...] an option to encrypt memory when its being swapped to disk.

    Wow, that's paranoia! :) I guess Apple is taking pointers from Linux users. I found this script [spinics.net] to encrypt swap -- what other options are there under Linux? Windows?

  • IIRC kerberos as well. (Score:3, Interesting)

    by jerkyjunkmail ( 590408 ) <jerkyjunkmail@@@yahoo...com> on Tuesday September 14, 2004 @11:51AM (#10247341)
    I vaguely remember when Tiger was anounced that they were also kerberizing it. so iChat and their server will be kerberized. It's pretty cool they have kerberized a lot of the stock services on OS X Server. I use OS X Server to host my personal mail and use Mail.app as the client. I really liked the no fuss procedure to get up and running with kerberized mail service. I've come to REALLY like and respect Kerberos. I never really took the time to set Kerberos up using a Linux or Solaris or BSD before but it motivated me to really learn how it works. I'ved added in some non mac hosts to the kerberos keytab(via the CLI. there's no GUI that I know of) now so I can ssh with no passwords entry to, at least so far, a linux, an OpenBSD, and a FreeBSD host. OpenBSD's lack of nss support is a bit of a bummera and damn Solaris is a bugger. I was thinking it might be cool to have OpenLDAP export a NIS map for the OpenBSD host but I haven't looked into it very closely yet.
    ok now that getting I'm off on a tangent I'll stop.

    jerky

Slashdot Top Deals

You know you've landed gear-up when it takes full power to taxi.

Close