Live. Messenger. 2011.



  • Seriously, what's going on Microsoft? Ok, so here's what you can do:

    1) Facebook integration - kind of nice
    2) LinkedIn integration - I can't imagine using IMs to job hunt, but I can see how some people might like it
    3) Tabbed message windows - take it or leave it

    Here's what you can no longer do:

    1) Set a nickname. It's your full name, or nothing. You can, for example, set your first name to a nickname (like Blakeyrat) and then leave the last name blank, but then your Live.com emails use that name! So suddenly you can't be "Blakeyrat" to your fun forum video gaming friends, and "John Realname" to your serious business contacts. Lame.
    2) Block users. I hope you're good friends with everybody on your list, because you can no longer block them. (You can "appear offline" to them, but they can still send you offline messages! Hah.)
    3) Visit links without a idiotic "are you sure?" screen. The "are you sure?" screen does nothing but-- oh look, it's in a browser! Because it's in a browser, Microsoft can associate your LiveID cookie to the sites you visit, leading to valuable demographic data! And all the while, this screen pretends to be some sort of "security" protection. Yeah, right, Microsoft-- we're not that dumb, we know information farming when we see it!
    4) Install version 2009 of Live Messenger and version 2011 of Live Mail. Nope, even though these are completely different products, you can't have different versions on your computer at the same time, as they all get installed through one gargantuan installer program. If you want Live Mesh? Well, you need Live Messenger 2011. You can't have Live Mesh with Messenger 2009, you crazy fool!
    5) Write your own Live Messenger app. They've deprecated (and will soon deactivate) the old API which any desktop app could use, and introduced a new one which requires OAuth. Meaning, web apps only. So to add insult to injury, you can't even make your own Live Messenger clone anymore!

    And to cap this all off: Microsoft posted the thing as an IMPORTANT update! (Fixed now.) What a scam.

    All in all, a huge step back. I uninstalled the whole she-bang and went back to Live Messenger 2009, at least for as long as it keeps working. What do you guys think?



  • @blakeyrat said:

    3) Visit links without a idiotic "are you sure?" screen. The "are you sure?" screen does nothing but-- oh look, it's in a browser! Because it's in a browser, Microsoft can associate your LiveID cookie to the sites you visit, leading to valuable demographic data! And all the while, this screen pretends to be some sort of "security" protection. Yeah, right, Microsoft-- we're not that dumb, we know information farming when we see it!

    I'm not seeing that myself. Link protection is vital, given the number of idiots out there. If Microsoft wanted the data, it would be just as easy to send it anywhere they want, or edit the cookie direct from Messenger.

    That said, I have been thinking about a bot to randomly search and surf the web for me when I'm not using the computer - really screw up all Google's tracking.



  • Don't use Messenger.

     

    I use Miranda, but most of my peeps are on gmail.



  •  You can add to that that it no longer allows webcam only, and won't let you do video calls to people running 2009 - they just crash.

    There's a freeware (if you see what I mean) program (works on windows and linux and I've forgotten the name) which gives you tabbed windows but the UI is a bit on the chunky side, and the webcam is in a separate window which I don't like much.



  • One of the advantages of not having a social life, online or otherwise is that I could care less about this.  Just letting you know.



  • @davedavenotdavemaybedave said:

    @blakeyrat said:
    3) Visit links without a idiotic "are you sure?" screen. The "are you sure?" screen does nothing but-- oh look, it's in a browser! Because it's in a browser, Microsoft can associate your LiveID cookie to the sites you visit, leading to valuable demographic data! And all the while, this screen pretends to be some sort of "security" protection. Yeah, right, Microsoft-- we're not that dumb, we know information farming when we see it!

    I'm not seeing that myself. Link protection is vital, given the number of idiots out there. If Microsoft wanted the data, it would be just as easy to send it anywhere they want, or edit the cookie direct from Messenger.

    That said, I have been thinking about a bot to randomly search and surf the web for me when I'm not using the computer - really screw up all Google's tracking.

    I have a friend who also reported not seeing this. He uses IE as his default browser, I use Chrome. Or maybe it depends on the link's domain?

    The reason I don't use a third-party client is that they all have lousy UIs, none of them support handwriting on my tablet PC, most of them use ugly and broken Linux UI libraries. Miranda isn't terrible. I might switch to Raptr, which has a decent UI, but I have friends I don't want to know I play WOW.



  • @thosrtanner said:

    There's a freeware (if you see what I mean) program (works on windows and linux and I've forgotten the name) which gives you tabbed windows but the UI is a bit on the chunky side, and the webcam is in a separate window which I don't like much.

    I assume you're referring to Pidgin... its UI is indeed on the chunky side. I've been looking for a decent replacement. At first I thought Ubuntu 10.04's Empathy chat client (at least I think that's what it's called) would work, but it has a lot of annoying issues (like, there's no option to actually open a chat window when you get a message, all you get is a little star in the notification area, so if you happen to notice it you still have to open it manually). Anyone have any suggestions? Preferably something cross-platform...



  • @Heron said:

    I assume you're referring to Pidgin... its UI is indeed on the chunky side. I've been looking for a decent replacement. At first I thought Ubuntu 10.04's Empathy chat client (at least I think that's what it's called) would work, but it has a lot of annoying issues (like, there's no option to actually open a chat window when you get a message, all you get is a little star in the notification area, so if you happen to notice it you still have to open it manually). Anyone have any suggestions? Preferably something cross-platform...
    I'm a fan of Kopete; it's slim and trim (once configured to be so) and suits my needs perfectly and I love all the KDE integration, but I know it doesn't have all the features everyone wants.  It is not cross-platform.



  • I use Yahoo Messenger. It works well, except it keeps enticing me to "celebrate Earth Day with Yahoo" even in the middle of September...

    Of course, I also use Trillian on most of my other PCs, which works fine for me. I don't see why anybody would use official IM clients. (Except for when I thought that third-party clients were all buggy monstrosities due to my experience with Pidgin.)



  • I don't suppose while they're adding all this great new stuff they'll take some time to make it actually work? It's more or less unusable when it randomly decides to stop sending because "an error occurred" (gee how helpful) or "the user is offline" (lies), and never actually show people as online.



  • Live Messenger, Live.com, Live products in general... sigh

    I have a theory as by which the 'Live' development team (whoever they are and whether or not they're actually a single team) must be the Microsoft equivalent of hell or at least limbo. I imagine the 'Live working place' as a very long, but only 5 m wide cubicle room with 2 m² cubicles and 1m walkway. In between cubicles, there are doors. Every third door is a clueless PM's door. Every other third the door to some PHB's office. And the third thereafter will be the door of some restroom.



    Seriously. Live products must be among the worst software I've ever seen.



  • @Shortjob said:

    Live Messenger, Live.com, Live products in general... sigh

    I have a theory as by which the 'Live' development team (whoever they are and whether or not they're actually a single team) must be the Microsoft equivalent of hell or at least limbo. I imagine the 'Live working place' as a very long, but only 5 m wide cubicle room with 2 m² cubicles and 1m walkway. In between cubicles, there are doors. Every third door is a clueless PM's door. Every other third the door to some PHB's office. And the third thereafter will be the door of some restroom.



    Seriously. Live products must be among the worst software I've ever seen.

    Live - just read it backwards.



  • @davedavenotdavemaybedave said:

    [quote user="Shortjob"]Live Messenger, Live.com, Live products in general... sigh

    I have a theory as by which the 'Live' development team (whoever they are and whether or not they're actually a single team) must be the Microsoft equivalent of hell or at least limbo. I imagine the 'Live working place' as a very long, but only 5 m wide cubicle room with 2 m² cubicles and 1m walkway. In between cubicles, there are doors. Every third door is a clueless PM's door. Every other third the door to some PHB's office. And the third thereafter will be the door of some restroom.



    Seriously. Live products must be among the worst software I've ever seen.

    Live - just read it backwards.[/quote]

    Live! It's goblin spelled backwards! This is their kingdom!



  • Ti?



  • @MiffTheFox said:

    @davedavenotdavemaybedave said:
    @Shortjob said:
    Live Messenger, Live.com, Live products in general... sigh

    I have a theory as by which the 'Live' development team (whoever they are and whether or not they're actually a single team) must be the Microsoft equivalent of hell or at least limbo. I imagine the 'Live working place' as a very long, but only 5 m wide cubicle room with 2 m² cubicles and 1m walkway. In between cubicles, there are doors. Every third door is a clueless PM's door. Every other third the door to some PHB's office. And the third thereafter will be the door of some restroom.



    Seriously. Live products must be among the worst software I've ever seen.

    Live - just read it backwards.

    Live! It's goblin spelled backwards! This is their kingdom!

    OOOH MYYY GOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOD.



  • @blakeyrat said:

    5) Write your own Live Messenger app. They've deprecated (and will soon deactivate) the old API which any desktop app could use, and introduced a new one which requires OAuth. Meaning, web apps only. So to add insult to injury, you can't even make your own Live Messenger clone anymore!

    Awesome. Then I can finally delete that stupid Live account from Kopete. Hell, I can delete my Live account (if Microsoft allows that (even Google does!))!

    Most my contacts are ICQ ones anyway. But will this be a win for ICQ? Probably not, judging from the amount of ads they need to sponsor their own client with which no one wants to use any more because of the adds.

    Will this mean victory for Jabber? (Or "Google Talk"?)



  • Just use emesene :) (for windows and linux)



  • Nobody has mentioned that IM windows now have a flash ad in them by default which you have to minimize back down to its old text based form. Also the annoying integration with Bing where certain words are treated as links is anniying too. This can be turned off though. All in all Messenger and Live in general (part of the Office team i believe) has become so irritating that I just can't use them anymore. With MS being hostile toward third party client implementors, I'd like to migrate away from the platform entirely. Google Talk and a Messenger gateway is looking like a good option for now.



  • @MrMartijn said:

    Just use emesene :) (for windows and linux)

    Uh, yeah. From their own website:


    Wrong. They can't even get the window title bar right. The widgets aren't Windows' style. The menu headers have visible underlines (hint to GTK+ team: Microsoft got rid of that in Windows 2000!) What's the little up-arrow thing next to the close box? Is that supposed to mean maximize? Fonts are wrong. Highlight colors are wrong. Checkboxes are wrong. Connect button has an underlined hotkey (again: concept that went away with Windows 2000.) If I was a professor and this were a project, I've give this UI maybe a C-.


    Wrong. (Flip.) Wrong. (Flip.) Wrong. (Flip.) Wrong. (Flip.) Wrong. (Flip.) Wrong. (Flip.) Wrong. (Flip.) Wrong. (Flip.) Wrong, and amusingly half-drawn control. (Flip.) Wrong. (Flip.)

    The Windows UI really isn't that hard. In fact it's almost trivially easy. Well, unless you're using a mutant UI library like GTK+ which, simply put, is almost entirely wrong in every way. (If I wanted to use a GTK+ app, I'd use GAIM/Pidgin.) At the most fundamental level (meaning: one I mentioned in this thread already), GTK+ apps don't support handwriting on tablet PCs.

    Sorry for my UI rage, and I'm not trying to put you down MrMartjin because I know you're not personally responsible for the thing, but man! Don't say it has a Windows port if it's not ported to Windows! Drawing fake-windows with fake-controls that don't support any accessibility features, that's not a port. That's a "it runs on" at best. It's like saying your X11 app is "ported to OS X." Completely wrong and misleading. Anybody who thinks this is an acceptable Windows app clearly has never actually used Windows*.

    And the funny thing is that Live Messenger uses funky custom controls too, but at least they subclass the proper Windows controls, and so you get the proper Windows functionality. And at least they don't use UI concepts from freakin' Windows 98.

    *) I was going to say "is clearly blind" but then I realized, since GTK+ doesn't support any accessibility features, the blind person's screen-reader almost certainly wouldn't work. So a blind person would realize this app was trash significantly quicker than a seeing person.



  • @crippledsmurf said:

    All in all Messenger and Live in general (part of the Office team i believe) has become so irritating that I just can't use them anymore. With MS being hostile toward third party client implementors, I'd like to migrate away from the platform entirely. Google Talk and a Messenger gateway is looking like a good option for now.

    What do you suggest for Live Mesh?

    Something like DropBox combined with Remote Desktop (with the appropriate ports on my router opened, and with a DynDNS account) is getting there. But RDS doesn't share the existing desktop the way Live Mesh does, it creates a new virtual desktop-- close but no cigar. Opening router ports seems like asking for trouble security-wise. DropBox I don't have enough experience with...



  • @blakeyrat said:

    5) Write your own Live Messenger app. They've deprecated (and will soon deactivate) the old API which any desktop app could use, and introduced a new one which requires OAuth. Meaning, web apps only. So to add insult to injury, you can't even make your own Live Messenger clone anymore!

    Ah, oAuth, one of the many examples of the "if some big company uses it, it probably means we can apply it to everything" mentality.

    Seriously, what can you even do by hooking an instant messenger up to a web app?



  • I like the fact that emesene doesn't try to minic the windows UI. (i'm also running linux i don't like the windows UI in general)



  • @blakeyrat said:

    The menu headers have visible underlines (hint to GTK+ team: Microsoft got rid of that in Windows 2000!)

    What? My XP has underlines like File, Edit, View.

    @blakeyrat said:

    Connect button has an underlined hotkey

    That's a fail because of Options vs Connect.



  • @MrMartijn said:

    I like the fact that emesene doesn't try to minic the windows UI. (i'm also running linux i don't like the windows UI in general)
     

    What do you mean "try to mimic" ? It doesn't have to try and mimic anything. It should just use the existing widgets.



  • @Zemm said:

    @blakeyrat said:
    The menu headers have visible underlines (hint to GTK+ team: Microsoft got rid of that in Windows 2000!)

    What? My XP has underlines like File, Edit, View.

    @blakeyrat said:

    Connect button has an underlined hotkey

    That's a fail because of Options vs Connect.

    Then you either changed the theme (to one that shows underlines), or have recently pressed the Alt key.

    I'll put it a slightly different way: those screenshots don't match any Windows theme I'm familiar with. So, either the screenshots were taken with some weird third-party theme installed, or GTK+ is utterly failing to draw native controls. The odds of it being the former and not the latter are like 1:100000.

    @dhromed said:

    What do you mean "try to mimic" ? It doesn't have to try and mimic anything. It should just use the existing widgets.

    QFT. Instead of (properly) writing a translation layer between GTK+ widgets and native Windows widgets, what the GTK+ people decided to do is write their own widgets from scratch. That can be done well: Firefox does that, and their widgets are probably 90% there, to the point where a casual observer probably couldn't tell Firefox used non-native widgets. Hell, Firefox even supports all those accessibility features I've been griping about. But GTK+? They haven't done it well, they've done it shitty. At best.

    This is fine, as far as it goes. What bugs me is when people call these programs "ported to Windows." This is not "ported to Windows." A program ported to Windows would use Windows-native controls (or get really, really close in approximating them, FF again), it would use OS-native file dialogs, it would store its files in the OS-standard file locations, it would support all the Windows-native accessibility features, etc, etc.

    And if you think the widgets are fun, wait until you see what a GTK+ Open or Save dialog looks like.

    Off-topic, but are GTK apps accessible on GNOME? Or is the GNOME philosophy, "if you're handicapped, screw you!" Sadly, I suspect it's the latter.



  • @blakeyrat said:

    Off-topic, but are GTK apps accessible on GNOME? Or is the GNOME philosophy, "if you're handicapped, screw you!" Sadly, I suspect it's the latter.

    My best bet is that, according to the GNOME philosophy, the options exist, but are buried away so deep in GConf that casual users have no hope of finding them. Showing only options that no less then 99% percent of users seem interested in seems to be the GNOME way.



  • @Zemm said:

    @blakeyrat said:
    The menu headers have visible underlines (hint to GTK+ team: Microsoft got rid of that in Windows 2000!)

    What? My XP has underlines like File, Edit, View.



  • @PJH said:

    pic
     

     

    At first I thought your text had a dropshadow. Then I realized the image's been resized by a tiny amount, like 99.5% or something.



  • @dhromed said:

    @PJH said:

    pic
     

    At first I thought your text had a dropshadow. Then I realized the image's been resized by a tiny amount, like 99.5% or something.

    Not deliberately - it was, however, a Linux screenshot of Windows running under VirtualBox.



  • @PJH said:

    Not deliberately - it was, however, a Linux screenshot of Windows running under VirtualBox.
     

    Rather odd.

    Alternatively, it may be resizing by photoimagebucketshack, though.



  •  @Shortjob said:

    Seriously. Live products must be among the worst software I've ever seen.
    It's the natural course for every nice little program out there. Programs initially created by large companies get there faster, granted, but even the non-commercial programs go through it.

     

    1) Some program emerges and is very, very good at its inteded purpose, and that at a staggeringly small download of only 732 KiB

    2)  People start to take notice, download it, use it

    3) The program gets some more active development, a few features are added, some bugs fixed

    4) Either the marketing department starts to take notice, or fast forward 2 years

    5) It's trying to have everything and the kitchensink, its initial inteded purpose has been shoved aside, and you now need to download 1.5 GiB and an addon pack of another 3 GiB.

     

    Nero (undoubtedly the number one example), Winamp, Norton, AVG, ATi video driver, MSN Messenger, Hamachi...



  • @derula said:

    Most my contacts are ICQ ones anyway

    Wow that's a blast from the past, i'm surprised how many people seem to be using services like yahoo messenger, ICQ and MS Live they seem like very 90's IM apps to me, i honestly didn't think anyone even used them anymore, in the west at least, i have noticed yahoo and MS Live are popular in Asia though. Just out of interest why wouldn't you just use google talk? seeing as basically everyone(at least everyone i know) uses gmail for both work and personal + it integrates contacts with android allows you to call real phone numbers, works on your browser or desktop or mobile, etc.

    Are there some crazy awesome features of ICQ, Yahoo and Live that i'm missing out on? or is it just a matter of personal taste?



  • @JesusChrist said:

    @derula said:
    Most my contacts are ICQ ones anyway

    Wow that's a blast from the past, i'm surprised how many people seem to be using services like yahoo messenger, ICQ and MS Live they seem like very 90's IM apps to me, i honestly didn't think anyone even used them anymore, in the west at least, i have noticed yahoo and MS Live are popular in Asia though. Just out of interest why wouldn't you just use google talk? seeing as basically everyone(at least everyone i know) uses gmail for both work and personal + it integrates contacts with android allows you to call real phone numbers, works on your browser or desktop or mobile, etc.

    Are there some crazy awesome features of ICQ, Yahoo and Live that i'm missing out on? or is it just a matter of personal taste?

    Well some of us hate Google, I know I'm one of those, and would never install anything on my system that came from them, nor use their online services, because we dont want God and everyone knowing our information. Google is crap with users data, it's been proven time and time again. In fact, I dont know of a single person I associate with that uses Google Talk (Hell I dont even know what Google Talk is), and I definitely dont know anyone who uses a @gmail account for anything even remotely professional



  • An @gmail account is not the only way to use Google for e-mail. You very well could have friends or associates who use Google Apps for their personal or business domain e-mail services, and it's not something you'd notice unless you check their domain's MX records.



  •  @PsychoCoder said:

    Well some of us hate Google, I know I'm one of those, and would never install anything on my system that came from them, nor use their online services, because we dont want God and everyone knowing our information. Google is crap with users data, it's been proven time and time again. In fact, I dont know of a single person I associate with that uses Google Talk (Hell I dont even know what Google Talk is), and I definitely dont know anyone who uses a @gmail account for anything even remotely professional


    hmmmm.... interesting, i'd never really considered it, i don't do anything online i would care if anyone new about so the privacy thing is a total non-issue for me, you are a little paranoid methinks.

    Most of the companies i've worked for use google mail(not gmail addresses) but rather where you need to pay a fee etc. and use your someone@companyname.com but via the gmail interface.  Save's a ton of time and effort in terms of maintaining email server etc and comes with data privacy and backup guarantees. 

    I literally know 1 person that does not have a gmail account maybe it's a country/cultural thing.  But in the end the service is free, if i was super concerned about privacy i would run my own server or pay for hosting but i just don't care enough.

    So what do you use?  would you rather give your data to Yahoo, AOL or MS?  

    I tend to follow this simple chart:

    http://theoatmeal.com/comics/email_address


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @JesusChrist said:

    @derula said:
    Most my contacts are ICQ ones anyway

    Wow that's a blast from the past, i'm surprised how many people seem to be using services like yahoo messenger, ICQ and MS Live they seem like very 90's IM apps to me, i honestly didn't think anyone even used them anymore, in the west at least, i have noticed yahoo and MS Live are popular in Asia though. Just out of interest why wouldn't you just use google talk? seeing as basically everyone(at least everyone i know) uses gmail for both work and personal + it integrates contacts with android allows you to call real phone numbers, works on your browser or desktop or mobile, etc.

    Are there some crazy awesome features of ICQ, Yahoo and Live that i'm missing out on? or is it just a matter of personal taste?

    I'm also surprised people still use ICQ - though I still use AIM (via Pidgin). To talk to two people. Everyone else uses fucking Facebook's "IM" and I won't touch that with a ten foot pole.

    Seriously guys, you're throwing around text. There's no need to change fashionable systems every two years. When AOL finally dissapears, I'll hack up my own system in 10 minutes and hand it to the two people with whom I need IM communication with. Everyone else? SMS or a voice phone call will do nicely.

     

    I have an @gmail address because my .edu address is gone and I consider ISP addresses to be temporary. Junk (newsletters, automated signups, whatever) correspondance goes to gmail, personal to my own domain, professional goes to wherever I'm working at the time (or if I'm on contract, I have it land on my own domain). And no, I don't trust Google as far as I could throw it and as such don't use "Google for my domain! LULZ!" to handle the mind-numbingly simple task of operating SMTP, IMAP and a webmail client.



  • @Weng said:

    There's no need to change fashionable systems every two years.

    That's why is till use Netscape

    @Weng said:

    When AOL finally dissapears, I'll hack up my own system in 10 minutes and hand it to the two people with whom I need IM communication with. Everyone else? SMS or a voice phone call will do nicely.

    I sense a WTF coming out of that, some wheel reinvention FTW.


     

     



  • @JesusChrist said:

     @PsychoCoder said:

    Well some of us hate Google, I know I'm one of those, and would never install anything on my system that came from them, nor use their online services, because we dont want God and everyone knowing our information. Google is crap with users data, it's been proven time and time again. In fact, I dont know of a single person I associate with that uses Google Talk (Hell I dont even know what Google Talk is), and I definitely dont know anyone who uses a @gmail account for anything even remotely professional


    hmmmm.... interesting, i'd never really considered it, i don't do anything online i would care if anyone new about so the privacy thing is a total non-issue for me, you are a little paranoid methinks.

    Most of the companies i've worked for use google mail(not gmail addresses) but rather where you need to pay a fee etc. and use your someone@companyname.com but via the gmail interface.  Save's a ton of time and effort in terms of maintaining email server etc and comes with data privacy and backup guarantees. 

    I literally know 1 person that does not have a gmail account maybe it's a country/cultural thing.  But in the end the service is free, if i was super concerned about privacy i would run my own server or pay for hosting but i just don't care enough.

    So what do you use?  would you rather give your data to Yahoo, AOL or MS?  

    I tend to follow this simple chart:

    http://theoatmeal.com/comics/email_address

    It also depends on when you adopted IM.

    If you're an early adopter, you use ICQ or AIM.

    If you're a second-generation adopter, you use MSN or perhaps Yahoo Messenger. (Although I don't know anybody who's ever used Yahoo IM ever.)

    If you're third-generation, you're either using Google IM, or some service-specific IM-- for example, Steam's IM functionality, or Xbox Live's, or Facebook's.

    I've used all of those in the past, but I stuck with MSN as my AIM-using friends gradually dwindled to nothing. And MSN lets you create your own smileys, so.



  • @Weng said:

    I'm also surprised people still use ICQ - though I still use AIM (via Pidgin). To talk to two people. Everyone else uses fucking Facebook's "IM" and I won't touch that with a ten foot pole.

    Seriously guys, you're throwing around text. There's no need to change fashionable systems every two years. When AOL finally dissapears, I'll hack up my own system in 10 minutes and hand it to the two people with whom I need IM communication with. Everyone else? SMS or a voice phone call will do nicely.

     

    I have an @gmail address because my .edu address is gone and I consider ISP addresses to be temporary. Junk (newsletters, automated signups, whatever) correspondance goes to gmail, personal to my own domain, professional goes to wherever I'm working at the time (or if I'm on contract, I have it land on my own domain). And no, I don't trust Google as far as I could throw it and as such don't use "Google for my domain! LULZ!" to handle the mind-numbingly simple task of operating SMTP, IMAP and a webmail client.

    Jesus, you're a Slashdot wet-dream. Simultaneously high-tech, extreme luddite, anti-social, condescending, willing to create a brand-new project even though there are hundreds that already meet your needs-- you got it all, buddy!



  • @PJH said:

    @Zemm said:
    @blakeyrat said:
    The menu headers have visible underlines (hint to GTK+ team: Microsoft got rid of that in Windows 2000!)

    What? My XP has underlines like File, Edit, View.

    (screen shot of Control Panel > Display Properties > Effects)
     

    Both XP machines I use (one at work, one at home) have that enabled by default. I don't remember ever changing it (I actually thought I'd had to install TweakUI to get that option).



  • @blakeyrat said:

    It also depends on when you adopted IM.

    If you're an early adopter, you use ICQ or AIM.

    If you're a second-generation adopter, you use MSN or perhaps Yahoo Messenger. (Although I don't know anybody who's ever used Yahoo IM ever.)

    If you're third-generation, you're either using Google IM, or some service-specific IM-- for example, Steam's IM functionality, or Xbox Live's, or Facebook's.

    I've used all of those in the past, but I stuck with MSN as my AIM-using friends gradually dwindled to nothing. And MSN lets you create your own smileys, so.

    Yeah i used all of those too but way back in the day, until gtalk came out.

    I just use whatever the best service is at the time, i have no particular allegience for any particular company or product but at the moment google talk has more and better features than the competitors so that's what i'll use till something better comes out, I'm not so lazy that i just use software because "that's what i've always used" I actually go out of my way to find stuff that is better than what i am currently using.



  • @blakeyrat said:

    Jesus, you're a Slashdot wet-dream. Simultaneously high-tech, extreme luddite, anti-social, condescending, willing to create a brand-new project even though there are hundreds that already meet your needs-- you got it all, buddy!
     

    +1

    @blakeyrat said:

    When AOL finally dissapears, I'll hack up my own system in 10 minutes and hand it to the two people with whom I need IM communication with

    If it integrated with Spectate Swamp's Desktop Search i'd definitely use it.

     


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @blakeyrat said:

    Jesus, you're a Slashdot wet-dream. Simultaneously high-tech, extreme luddite, anti-social, condescending, willing to create a brand-new project even though there are hundreds that already meet your needs-- you got it all, buddy!
    I hate Slashdot fools but I see where you're coming from. On the other hand, I've never met an IM service that actually ticked ALL the 'shit I'd like to have' boxes. Or, more appropriately, I've met neither an IM client nor an IM server that isn't fucking obnoxious - the XMPP protocol is actually fairly reasonable, but seriously - the people that make IM clients and servers are all functionally retarded.

     Seriously, can you name an IM client that does all of the following seamlessly, properly AND reliably:

    - Inline images
    - Out-of-band file transfers
    - Webcam
    - Live audio
    - Is made with a standard GUI framework with reasonable design standards
    - Doesn't mangle text (especially pasted HTML - most clients seem to have not heard of escaping)
    - Doesn't pretend to be some sort of social networking tool and spam statistics about your usage of the program to your FaceSpaceBook page.

    Because, really, I can't. Those last five are hard for modern clients. The first four are hard for older ones.

    Ten minutes of keyboard banging will handle 99% of the functionality I actually need (the ability to send fucking text from one client to another) and will require much less effort than setting up any existing XMPP server software. (And no just using Google's isn't a fucking option. At all.) I know because I've tried to set up XMPP packages before.

     


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @blakeyrat said:

    It also depends on when you adopted IM.

    If you're an early adopter, you use ICQ or AIM.

    If you're a second-generation adopter, you use MSN or perhaps Yahoo Messenger. (Although I don't know anybody who's ever used Yahoo IM ever.)

    If you're third-generation, you're either using Google IM, or some service-specific IM-- for example, Steam's IM functionality, or Xbox Live's, or Facebook's.

    You know, I'd never thought about that. I [i]did[/i] start using the shit in 199{6,7} and all the Facebookfools I know seem to have been the type that said (in the early Web 2.0 days) "I want to go to college for computers because then I'll make lots of money at a startup!"



  • @Weng said:

    199{6,7}
     

    oh my god! /199199199199199199|199199199199199199199/ ??!?!

    I find Miranda rather nice. It's not as obnoxiously large and skinned and blinkenden lightz as most others, uses the Windows shell without fucking it up (really! it looks good, like a real Windows app!), and just has most useful features without feature creep. Like Weng said; you throw text around, and Miranda does it well.

    It does have option creep though, but apparently that part of the design. :</p>

    Unfortunately, some of my buds went to gmail/gtalk so now I have to have gmail open a lot.

    ... so actually I'm now going to research putting gtalk into Miranda because I am sick of having gmail open all the time. Apparently gtalk = Jabber. This is promising. Yeessss.



  • Sweet!

    Gtalk in Miranda!

    It works, bitches!

    I am probably happier than I should be!

    But then again anything that lets you ditch gmail's chat "client" is a net positive!



  • @blakeyrat said:

    I'll put it a slightly different way: those screenshots don't match any Windows theme I'm familiar with.
    Have you considered that the screenshots were made on Linux?@blakeyrat said:
    This is fine, as far as it goes. What bugs me is when people call these programs "ported to Windows." This is not "ported to Windows." A program ported to Windows would use Windows-native controls (or get really, really close in approximating them, FF again), it would use OS-native file dialogs, it would store its files in the OS-standard file locations, it would support all the Windows-native accessibility features, etc, etc.
    You do realize that there's only around 1 active developer working on the Windows port of GTK+, so it's more of a miracle that GTK+ programs work on Windows at all?@blakeyrat said:
    Off-topic, but are GTK apps accessible on GNOME? Or is the GNOME philosophy, "if you're handicapped, screw you!" Sadly, I suspect it's the latter.
    GTK+ has accessibility support, but on Windows ATK is just a stub.



  • @Weng said:

     Seriously, can you name an IM client that does all of the following seamlessly, properly AND reliably:

    Most IM clients already do what you want "seamlessly, properly AND reliably". Lemme guess, you use Linux where all software sucks?

    @Weng said:

    - Inline images

    Do not want. IM windows are small; images should open in new, larger windows. (Note: Live Messenger 2009 does do this, which I find a step back from the old version that would just run your system's image viewer app.)

    @Weng said:

    - Out-of-band file transfers

    I have no idea what "out-of-band" means in this context. Pretty much every IM ever supports file transfers.

    @Weng said:

    - Is made with a standard GUI framework with reasonable design standards

    That's the tricky one.

    @Weng said:

    - Doesn't mangle text (especially pasted HTML - most clients seem to have not heard of escaping)

    Live Messenger has that taken care of, but it doesn't allow different styles in a single IM which is kind of lame. (AIM had that in like 1998.)

    @Weng said:

    - Doesn't pretend to be some sort of social networking tool and spam statistics about your usage of the program to your FaceSpaceBook page.

    Yeah, well, that's the new trend everybody's complaining about in this thread.

    @Weng said:

    Ten minutes of keyboard banging will handle 99% of the functionality I actually need (the ability to send fucking text from one client to another)

    Do you estimate development time for your work? Because holy shit you're bad at it.

    @Weng said:

    and will require much less effort than setting up any existing XMPP server software. (And no just using Google's isn't a fucking option. At all.) I know because I've tried to set up XMPP packages before.

    Well, that may be true, but will it require less effort than just installing fucking Live Messenger? Or AIM? Or Yahoo Messenger? Or any of the dozen software packages that already does everything you need?



  • @Weng said:

    You know, I'd never thought about that. I did start using the shit in 199{6,7} and all the Facebookfools I know seem to have been the type that said (in the early Web 2.0 days) "I want to go to college for computers because then I'll make lots of money at a startup!"

    Wha... I... just... wha...

    How do you say in one post that you hate Slashdot types, then the next post is like copied RIGHT FROM A SLASHDOT POST! Seriously, WTF man.



  • @dhromed said:

    I find Miranda rather nice. It's not as obnoxiously large and skinned and blinkenden lightz as most others, uses the Windows shell without fucking it up (really! it looks good, like a real Windows app!),

    Noooo. Not even close. I already tried that one; threw it out. Also the options screen is a crime against humanity... ugh. (At least it uses native widgets, though. But it BADLY needs a UI designer.)


Log in to reply
 

Looks like your connection to What the Daily WTF? was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.