On Wed, 11 Jun 2003, Mattias Campe wrote: > -) Multiprotocol: > *client-side* support for AIM, Yahoo, MSN, ICQ, Jabber
Certainly users don't care whether the legacy protocols are implemented server or client side. There have been several attempts in creating Jabber clients that focus on legacy systems and hiding the "complicated Jabber stuff", for example the webmessenger(.sf.net) and the "Integrity" Messenger (I should have mentioned those two in separate sentences, sorry ;-). > -) Good looking: > -) Localized: No one stops Jabber server administrators to package a client of their choice with skins and language resources. The point is that almost no server administrator does this. > -) Basic features: [...] > file sharing. AFAIK this feature should be standardized and available soon. > What I don't think they (="most of the users", not all the users) are > interested in is an icq.com-style portal I don't think this is necessary, either. > What needs an Instant Messaging system for you alone (multiple answers > possible): > 1) file sharing > 2) icq.com-style portal site > 3) skinnable client > 4) avatars > 5) lots of emoticons > 6) file sharing > 7) ... I fear such a poll is pointless since if asked most people want everything. Plus, the problem is not that the Jabber community does not know what to do to make Jabber more attractive, the problem is that nobody actually starts to set up such a community site. As with the whole Jabber philosophy, we don't need a "big jabber.org community site", we need several smaller sites with good setups - I think of a *good* WWW presentation of the major Jabber servers with some extras such as customized client downloads or WWW integration of the persistent chat rooms or something. This is rather easy to set up but no-one does it... Regards _______________________________________________ jdev mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mailman.jabber.org/listinfo/jdev
